Ground Zero Imam: ‘I Don’t Believe in Religious Dialogue’

Of course not. “War is deceit”, said Muhammad, and Abdul Rauf is religiously obliged to wage  war on the kafirs, until Islam dominates. The 9/11 mosque is a symbol of Islamic conquest. Feisal Abdul Rauf is a diehard Muslim Brotherhood headbanger, who’s mission is clearly stated here:

The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. (Muslim Brotherhood / 1991.)

Newsflash: Hamas-linked Terror Front Group, CAIR, Calls Geller a Cancer

by Walid Shoebat/Pajamas Media

Exclusive new translations from Arabic websites reveal Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf seriously misleads New Yorkers about his intention to infiltrate Sharia law through his Ground Zero mosque. (Don’t miss PJTV’s coverage of the Ground Zero mosque story.)

Is Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf — founder of the hugely controversial Ground Zero mosque — lying to the American public and his fellow New Yorkers?

Pajamas Media has uncovered extraordinary contradictions between what he says in English and what he says in Arabic that raise serious questions about his true intentions in the construction of the mosque.

On May 25, 2010, Abdul Rauf wrote an article for the New York Daily News insisting:

My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. Our purpose is to interweave America’s Muslim population into the mainstream society. [emphasis added]

Oh, really?

Only two months before, on March 24, 2010, Abdul Rauf is quoted in an article in Arabic for the website Rights4All entitled “The Most Prominent Imam in New York: ‘I Do Not Believe in Religious Dialogue.’”

Yes, you read that correctly and, yes, that is an accurate translation of Abdul Rauf. And Right4All is not an obscure blog, but the website of the media department of Cairo University, the leading educational institution of the Arabic-speaking world.

In the article, the imam said the following of the “religious dialogue” and “interweaving into the mainstream society” that he so solemnly seems to advocate in the Daily News and elsewhere:

This phrase is inaccurate. Religious dialogue as customarily understood is a set of events with discussions in large hotels that result in nothing. Religions do not dialogue and dialogue is not present in the attitudes of the followers, regardless of being Muslim or Christian. The image of Muslims in the West is complex which needs to be remedied.

But that was two months ago. More recently — in fact on May 26, one day after his Daily News column –  Abdul Rauf appeared on the popular Islamic website Hadiyul-Islam with even more disturbing opinions. That’s the same website where, ironically enough, a fatwa was simultaneously being issued forbidding a Muslim to sell land to a Christian, because the Christian wanted to build a church on it.

In his interview on Hadiyul-Islam by Sa’da Abdul Maksoud, Abdul Rauf was asked his views on Sharia (Islamic religious law) and the Islamic state. He responded:

Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more than just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Sharia that are required to govern. It is known that there are sets of standards that are accepted by [Muslim] scholars to organize the relationships between government and the governed. [emphasis added]

When questioned about this, Abdul Rauf continued: “Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.” He added:

New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad … so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Sharia. [emphasis in translation]

In yet plainer English, forget the separation of church and state.  Abdul Rauf’s goal is the imposition of Shariah law — in every country, even democratic ones like the U.S.

But these attitudes are nothing new for the (alas, few) people who have been paying attention.  Way back on September 30, 2001, Feisal Abdul Rauf was interviewed on 60 Minutes by host Ed Bradley.  Their verbatim  dialogue from this CBS News transcript concluded:

BRADLEY: Are — are — are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened?

Imam ABDUL RAUF: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.

BRADLEY: OK. You say that we’re an accessory?



Imam ABDUL RAUF: Because we have been an accessory to a lot of — of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it — in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.

This is the “anti-terrorist” of the Daily News article?

The Feisal Abdul Rauf who spoke to 60 Minutes in 2001 is the same Abdul Rauf who, in the last couple of months, espoused the spread of Sharia law on Arabic websites and said the opposite in the pages of the Daily News.  He is the man New York City authorities are about to allow to build a mosque on Ground Zero.

Caveat emptor. Meanwhile, perhaps some enterprising reporter should ask Abdul Rauf his opinion of that fatwa forbidding Muslims from selling land to Christians who intend to build a church on it.

(Don’t miss PJTV’s coverage of the Ground Zero mosque story.)

Walid Shoebat is the author of God’s War on Terror: Islam, Prophecy and the Bible.


Inside the Push for Ground Zero-Area Mosque


SEAN HANNITY, HOST: There has been great outrage following plans for a mosque set to be built just blocks from the site of 9/11’s Ground Zero. And now the imam spearheading the building of this 13-story structure is defending his plans. Let’s take a look:


IMAM FEISAL ABDUL RAUF, BEHIND GROUND ZERO MOSQUE: We have the right to build this building as a right. We don’t need any zoning variations. We can just go ahead and build it without permissions or expressions of support from anybody.


HANNITY: But he may be much more radical than most Americans know.

Now in a book published back in 2004, “What Is Right With Islam,” Feisal Abdul Rauf, he wrote of his fondness for Sharia Law and his belief that the U.S. can accommodate it. He argued, quote, that “the American political structure is Sharia compliant,” continuing, quote, “For America to score even higher on the ‘Islamic’ or ‘Sharia’ compliance scale, America would need to do two things: invite the voices of all religions to join the dialogue in shaping the nation’s practical life, and allow religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws.”

I suppose that would mean allowing Muslims to have their own Sharia courts, Jewish people to have their own courts, Christians their own courts and so on and so on.

How very American? Constitutional?

Joining me now with reaction is the director of, Robert Spencer, and the cofounder for 9/11 Families for a Safe and Strong America, Deborah Burlingame. Our friend is back with us.

Good to see you. Thanks for being here.


HANNITY: Good to see you. Thanks for being here.

All right. Sharia Law compliant?

ROBERT SPENCER, DIRECTOR, JIHADWATCH.ORG: What he’s saying is that America has put no roadblocks in the place of the implementation of Sharia. And this is why we’re having a rally on June 6 against this mosque. Pamela Geller and I and Stop the Islamization of America, we’re having a rally to protest against this mosque. Because Sharia is at variance with the American law in numerous ways and with American freedoms — the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, the equality of rights of women with men, the equality of rights of all people before the law.

Sharia denies all that. Feisal Abdul Rauf is for all that.

HANNITY: What he’s saying here is that — and look, this is the guy — this is right next to nine — you know, Ground Zero.


HANNITY: All right. So they’re going to build a 13-story mosque. But what he’s saying here is religious communities in America, forget the U.S. Constitution, you know, equal justice under the law and constitutional principles. He’s saying that they ought to be allowed to judge themselves and use Sharia Law here in America. Is that your take, Deborah?

BURLINGAME: It is. It’s my take, it’s his take.

HANNITY: That’s a great point.

BURLINGAME: And in fact he’s really trying to get Sharia, sneak it in, hoping that Americans aren’t familiar with their own Constitution. Americans do understand the concept of the separation of church and state. And Muslims here in this country understand — who have embraced the American way of life, have embraced the concept of separation of mosque and state.

But look what he’s doing when he goes abroad. This book…

HANNITY: You — I wanted to point this out. You brought this — this is in this book. This is the imam that is — is spearheading the effort to build the mosque. These are his words. He’s the one that has argued that Sharia Law could be used in the U.S., because they can have their own courts and religious leaders, correct?

BURLINGAME: Yes. But — but when he published this in 2007 in the Muslim world, he didn’t call it “What’s Right With Islam” and a later title, “What’s Right with America.” He called it “A Call to Prayer From the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Da’wah From the Heart of America…”

HANNITY: Meaning?

BURLINGAME: “… Post-9/11.” Robert, tell him what da’wah means.

SPENCER: Da’wah is Islamic proselytizing. And in the Islamic law, da’wah precedes jihad. You call the nonbelievers to Islam. And if they refuse to accept it, then you initiate the jihad against them. But the whole goal of both da’wah and jihad is to impose Islamic law or Sharia upon the nonbelievers as a political system, not as a religious one.

HANNITY: What about the controversy — controversy involving his father?

SPENCER: The controversy involving his father involves the Muslim Brotherhood and the fact that this guy has ties to this group that is, in its own words, “dedicated to eliminating and destroying western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house.”

HANNITY: So you both believe — and as I read this, this is becoming more and more alarming to me. And you have been very nice to give me a copy of the book and tell me about the translation when it was first published, you know, in other countries — that he would want to impose or at least allow for Muslims to have the ability to transcend the American court system.

SPENCER: Oh, yes.

HANNITY: Explain Sharia Law. Why don’t we go into in just a little detail in the short time we have?

SPENCER: Well, Sharia Law denies equality of rights…

HANNITY: To women.

SPENCER: … to non-Muslims, to women.

HANNITY: Right, right.

SPENCER: And it does not allow for them to operate in an equal system.

See, the thing about Sharia is unlike — you mentioned Jewish courts in the beginning, Sean. The thing, the difference is, is that no other religious system makes rules for people who are outside the religion. But Islamic law does. And it mandates, institutionalizes the subjugation of non-Muslims. And so that’s what Feisal Abdul Rauf is actually calling for.

BURLINGAME: And let me also add, this man has close ties to the Malaysian government. The Cordova Initiative, his — his operation that’s going to build this mosque, is funded by the Malaysian government. He has offices in Malaysia. That’s where he published this book.

And in Malaysia, in the Sharia courts, Sharia courts are mandated. No Muslim can go into a civil court. They have to have their things adjudicated in these courts. There are penalties for converting to Christianity there.

HANNITY: You lost your brother. Your brother was the pilot of the American Airlines flight that hit the — the Pentagon.


HANNITY: All right. Mayor Bloomberg just raced out there, at least through a spokesman and others. And all of this is fine, these people that are opposing this, this is outrageous.

BURLINGAME: I don’t think that’s what he said, Sean. To give him credit, his — his remark was very neutral. What he said was…

HANNITY: They have a right to…

BURLINGAME: They — they have lawfully purchased this property. And they have a right to build. In other words, he wasn’t endorsing the project. Imam Rauf and his wife are saying that. But he has uttered no such thing.

HANNITY: Listen, if all of this is true and with the relationship of his father, should he even be in the U.S.? I’ll ask both of you quick.

SPENCER: Feisal Abdul Rauf needs to be questioned with his followers as to whether his loyalty is really with the U.S. Constitution or not.

HANNITY: Do you think — what do you suspect?

SPENCER: Oh, I don’t think he is at all. I think he wants to impose Islamic law here. He’s very explicit about that, in fact.

BURLINGAME: I believe he does embrace the Constitution, and he knows if he gets enough Muslims voting in the voting booth he can change the Constitution to accept Sharia and create Sharia courts right here. That’s what da’wah will do.

HANNITY: We’ll continue to follow the story. Guys, thanks very much. We appreciate it.

3 thoughts on “Ground Zero Imam: ‘I Don’t Believe in Religious Dialogue’”

  1. Straight from the horses mouth. Now what are the people of New York going to do about this miserable islamic headbanger.

  2. You hear these statements from Imams again, and again…
    “We don’t dictate other people’s behavior,” “We believe in non-judging and tolerance.”
    These are outright lies.

    Kaw, it is unfortunate but the majority of New Yorkers will never read or hear what we read and hear because the blinders and ear plugs are worn in the mainstream media in the U.S.
    They’ll never report the truth.
    The U.S. is being lied to on every level from the government on down through the media that supports this propaganda machine.
    What has happened in the UK and in Europe is happening in the U.S. and it will only get worse.
    Once the U.S. goes Islam then all peoples of the world can kiss their asses goodbye and start bowing to Allah or perish.

  3. Hugh Fitzgerald:

    These demands ought to be made of Feisal Abdul Rauf:

    1. Focus their indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.

    2. Renounce definitively not just “terrorism,” but any intention to replace the U.S. Constitution (or the constitutions of any non-Muslim state) with Sharia even by peaceful means. In line with this, clarify what is meant by their condemnations of the killing of innocent people by stating unequivocally that American and Israeli civilians are innocent people.

    3. Teach Muslims the imperative of coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis.

    4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism.

    5. Actively work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities.

    And one final question of Feisal Abdul Rauf: do you belief that 9.29 and 9.5 are the immutable words of Allah, and that it is incumbent on all Muslims, as that learned theologian the Ayatollah Khomeini has said, to make war on Infidels?

Comments are closed.