New Yorkers wondering what the $100-million, fifteen-story mega-mosque at Ground Zero will be like

need only cast their eyes north to Boston. There they'll find the giant mosque of the Islamic Society of
Boston, which, like the newly-approved Ground Zero mosque, was sold to the public by the politicians as
a marvelous, desperately needed home for interfaith healing, and which quickly devolved into a cesspool
of hate speech, terrorist affiliations, a lawsuit to shut down the mosque's critics, and a one-stop shop for
genuflecting politicians to suck up to Muslims and collect their cash.

A Mosque Grows in Boston

. . . but not without multiple lawsuits. The strange
story of the Islamic Society of Boston's new mosque.
BY Dean Barnett
December 14, 2005 12:00 AM

ON NOVEMBER 7, 2002, POLITICIANS AND OTHER LUMINARIES--including Boston Mayor

Thomas P. Menino--gathered at the corner of Tremont Street and Malcolm X Boulevard in
Boston's Roxbury neighborhood. They held shovels and awaited a photo op to celebrate the
ground-breaking of a new mosque for the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB). It was a special
occasion. The design for the $22 million mosque included a125-foot minaret as well as a 75-foot
dome over the prayer hall. Al Jazeera joined the local Boston media on hand to chronicle the
day.
It must have seemed noble and high-minded to offer such public support for the construction of
a prominent mosque, especially since it had been only a little over a year since the 9/11 attacks.
Senator John Kerry, who couldn't attend the event, sent a letter "recogniz[ing] the outstanding
work of the Islamic Society of Boston" and praising the project for coming along at a time "when
the need for cross-cultural understanding and cooperation has never been greater."
But the good feelings didn't last. In the following months, the Boston Herald and Boston's Fox
Channel 25 published reports documenting the ISB's ties with terrorists, terror supporters, and
anti-Semites. The Herald reported that members of the ISB's Board of Trustees had at one time
included one of the Islamic world's most prominent and vocal supporters of terrorism and
another gentleman who would become notorious for his anti-Semitic writing. The media also
reported that one of the ISB's eight founders was a genuine terrorist who had since been
arrested, convicted, and sent to jail.
There followed lawsuits. The ISB sued Fox Channel 25, the Boston Herald, and 14 other private
citizens and organizations for having conspired to defame the organization. Meanwhile, a citizen
of Boston sued the Boston Redevelopment Authority for giving the land for the mosque to the
ISB at a price significantly below market value.
But even though this is a story framed by two lawsuits, it is not a tale of legal intricacies or
lawyerly hairsplitting. It is, instead, a case study in how the leadership of a large American
Islamic group woos and works with politicians, attempts to intimidate its adversaries, and claims
to champion moderation--all while keeping company with prominent proponents of hatred and
violence.
THE LAND TRANSFER AND THE ISB
IN AUGUST OF 2000, the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) conveyed the land for the
mosque to the Islamic Society of Boston. Established in 1957, the BRA is run by appointees of
the mayor; its function is (among other things) to hand out or sell city-owned land for the
betterment of the community.
There were a few curious aspects of the land transfer to the ISB. Both the BRA and the ISB
agreed that the land was worth slightly more than $400,000. But because the land was
conveyed, not sold, this figure was somewhat arbitrary. Indeed, many observers close to the
situation believed that the market value of the land far exceeded $400,000.
Even so, the City of Boston asked that the ISB pay only $175,000 in cash. The theoretical
"balance" of $225,000 would be "paid for" by a variety of services the ISB would provide to the
community in the future. According to the agreement, these "services" included maintaining a
nearby play area, giving a series of lectures at neighboring Roxbury Community College, and
"assist[ing] the Roxbury Community College Foundation in its ongoing fund raising campaign."
It seems an odd arrangement. After all, Mayor Menino is normally adamant about the separation
of church and state. As Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby recently noted, Menino is the kind
of fellow who, in column, wrote "about the lighting of Christmas Trees all over Boston--yet not
once [did] he use the word 'Christmas' to modify the word 'tree.'" It also seemed strange that the
city would extend an apparent financial handout to an organization capable of raising the cash
to complete a $22 million construction project.
And there was another oddity about the conveyance. According to Boston City Councilor Jerry
McDermott, to get the signatures of the ISB trustees, the paper work had to be sent to Saudi
Arabia.
THE LAND TRANSFER AND THE POSSIBLE government subsidy that accompanied it focused
media attention on the Islamic Society of Boston.
Although the ISB widely and often claims to champion a "path of moderation, free of extremism"
and "condemns all forms of bigotry," it has had relationships with some unsavory figures. For
example, one of the Society's founders, Abdurahman Alamoudi, has been languishing in a
federal prison for the past 18 months because of his ties to terrorism; his sentence calls for him
to remain under government supervision for the next three decades. United States Attorney
Paul McNulty called Alamoudi's conviction a "milestone in the war on terrorism."
While Alamoudi had not played an active role in the ISB for several years, the ISB has had more
recent (and repeated) contact with other unpleasant characters. Take Yusuf Abdullah al-
Qaradawi, a prominent Islamic cleric whom Islam scholar John Esposito of Georgetown has
praised as a proponent of a "reformist interpretation of Islam."
He is not, however, as reformist as some might hope. In 1995, al-Qaradawi gave an address at
the Muslim Arab Youth Association's convention in Toledo, Ohio where he vowed that Islam
would "conquer Europe" and "conquer America." Earlier this past year, Al-Qaradawi declared
that women should never lead men in prayers, calling the idea "heresy."
This was a step backward from al-Qaradawi's previously progressive attitude towards women:
In 2003, he became the first prominent cleric to unequivocally support the concept of female
suicide bombers. Al-Qaradawi declared that "women's participation in the martyrdom operations
. . . is one of the most praised acts of worship." He went so far as to say a woman could
participate in such an operation without her husband's consent and even, if necessary, travel
without male chaperones and without wearing a veil. At the time, a spasm of female suicide
bombers emerged. It is a trend which continues today.

Al-Qaradawi may or may not have served as a member of the Board of Trustees for the ISB. His
name has appeared on relevant IRS forms as one of the Society's seven trustees. But the ISB
insists that he was listed because of a clerical oversight; they maintain that IRS documents
notwithstanding, he was not actually a trustee.
The ISB does not dispute the fact that they have repeatedly used al-Qaradawi as a tool to raise
funds for the Boston mosque, printing a brochure that highlighted al-Qaradawi's enthusiastic
support of the mosque and playing a videotaped message of support from him at a 2002
gathering. Today the ISB's website has a page devoted to defending al-Qaradawi and their
relationship with him.
THEN THERE IS WALID FITAIHI, who, all parties agree, is in fact a member of the ISB's Board
of Trustees. Fitaihi was one of the co-signers of the land conveyance between the ISB and the
Boston Redevelopment Authority.
Fitaihi is also the author of an article in an Arabic language newspaper that labeled Jews
"murderers of prophets" and claimed that Jews "would be punished for their oppression, murder
and rape of the worshippers of Allah." Fitaihi also exhibited scorn for the "Zionist lobby in
America . . . which has recruited many of the influential media."
Fitaihi's writings came to the public's attention in October of 2003 in the Boston Herald and
prompted a letter from the local chapter of the Anti-Defamation League requesting that the ISB
take action against Fitaihi.
The ISB initially responded that it was "shocked" by the nature of Fitaihi's writings. Ultimately,
however, it supported Fitaihi, claiming that "the articles were intended to condemn particular
individuals whom he believes were working to destroy one of Islam's holiest sites, killing
innocent children, and thereby blocking the possibility of peace in the Middle East; the articles
were not meant to incite hatred of an entire faith or people." The ISB did not explain how the
"Zionist lobby in America" had any role in the ills on which Fitaihi's writings focused.

THE DEVELOPMENT of the ISB's mega-mosque and the surrounding controversy have, so far,
generated two lawsuits. The first suit began as an action the ISB initiated against the media
outlets who reported on the ties between the ISB and al-Qaradawi, Alamoudi, and Fitaihi and
raised doubts about other ISB board members.
What separated this action from similar suits--such as the Holy Land Foundation's suit against
Dallas Morning News reporter Steve McGonigle (a case that was dismissed within days of the
government shutting down the Holy Land Foundation for terrorist ties)--was that the ISB later
extended the suit to over a dozen private citizens who had spoken to the media about the ISB.
The lynchpin of the ISB's case is that the private citizens and the media outlets named as
defendants had relied on information from a man who, in the words of the ISB's complaint, "is
known . . . to be a widely discredited and self professed 'expert' on radical Islam and Islamic
terrorism."
The "discredited" and "self-professed" expert (who is also one of the defendants) is Steve
Emerson--a semi-permanent resident of cable and network news shows, the head of the
Investigative Project, and the author of 2002's best-seller American Jihad.
Virtually the entire case for showing negligence on the media outlets' part and malice on the
private citizens' part rests on showing that the defendants should have known that, according to
the ISB's complaint, "Emerson's research and findings have been routinely, publicly and
severely criticized as both uninformed and biased against Muslims."

THE FACT that the ISB's suit depends on proving that Steve Emerson is widely known to be
"discredited" is a fair measure of its frivolous nature. The complaint offers only two supporting
sources for this key point. One is a negative review of an Emerson book from the May 19, 1991
edition of the New York Times. (The Times Book Review gave a positive review to Emerson's
American Jihad in 2002.)
The other article the ISB complaint cites comes from a Weekly Planet piece from May of 1998,
which says, "Emerson has no credibility left. He can't get on TV and most publications won't pick
him up."
In the past year, Emerson has appeared on MSNBC 65 times, Fox News 78 times, and NBC 16
times including multiple appearances on The Today Show and The Nightly News.
BUT HANGING THEIR CASE on Emerson's credibility is the ISB's story and they're sticking to
it. Their attorney, Howard Cooper, maintains that using Emerson for source materials
irretrievably damns the defendants.
Cooper also laments that the ISB had been attacked by a cabal distinguished by "its extreme
intolerance of Muslims." Which is a strange accusation.
One of the private citizens named in the suit is Dr. Charles Jacobs, the head of a group called
the David Project (naturally also a defendant), which is dedicated to a "fair and honest
understanding of the Middle East conflict."
But Jacobs is perhaps best known for his ongoing campaign against the human slave trade.
Jacobs is the founder and chairman of the board of the American Anti-Slavery Group. Founded
in 1993, Jacobs's organization is responsible for helping free over 80,000 slaves and receives
support from across the political spectrum from the likes of Jesse Helms, Barney Frank, and Al
Sharpton. He has also been a prominent advocate of calling attention to the genocide in Darfur--
where many Muslims have recently been murdered.
In short, the ISB's lawsuit is nearly as contemptible as it is ludicrous
THE SECOND SUIT has more potential. Filed by Boston resident James Policastro against the
BRA and the City of Boston, it alleges that the city provided an unconstitutional subsidy to the
ISB by conveying the land for the mosque at a price below market value. What may make the
Policastro suit incendiary is that the discovery process could uncover what went into the BRA's
land grant to the ISB.
According to Evan Slavitt, Policastro's attorney, "any government subsidy to a religion is an
implicit violation of the establishment clause." Because part of the purchase "price" for the land
was a lecture series (along with other difficult-to-quantify considerations), the city may have
trouble refuting the notion that the conveyance was unconstitutional.

But the city might face a bigger embarrassment still. Again, according to Slavitt, the details of
how the city signed off on the deal with the ISB are unclear. These details will likely see the light
of day thanks to the Policastro suit.
For this story, repeated inquiries were made to both the mayor's office and the BRA, asking (1)
whether or not the BRA and/or the mayor's office were aware of the connections between the
ISB and Abdurahman Alamoudi, Walid Fitaihi, and Yusaf al-Qaradawi; and (2) what due
diligence went into qualifying the ISB before the land was conveyed to the organization.
The only response given was the following statement issued by the BRA:
In 1957 the BRA was established to carry out the federal government's Urban Renewal
Program. As such, the BRA has certain powers to catalyze development within an urban
renewal area. These powers are essential to government in a city constantly changing in light of
demographic and economic pressures.
In 1997, the BRA Board approved the disposition of land that had been vacant for decades to
the Islamic Society of Boston. This land conveyance, like multiple others before it and since,
was motivated by the agency's core mission--to redevelop and revitalize the city in part by
creating civic, cultural, and religious buildings around which communities thrive.
FORTUNATELY, not every Boston official has been so circumspect. City Councilor Jerry
McDermott represents Boston's Alston and Brighton neighborhoods; the 38-year-old is also
chairman of the City Council's Post Audit and Oversight Committee. In that capacity, McDermott
has been aggressive in pursuing what seems like a waste of city resources in subsidizing the
ISB's land purchase.

While McDermott began working on the issue from a "dollars and cents" perspective, he has
become concerned with the allegations regarding the ISB. He has ordered a hearing to
investigate the matter, to which he invited the ISB to testify. The ISB informed him that, given its
pending litigations, it will not appear.
McDermott finds the BRA's statement dismaying. "It's unbelievable," he says. "Now that these
issues have come to light, you'd think they'd be concerned."
As thanks for his efforts, McDermott says that the ISB has been trying to intimidate him by
threatening legal action. He also says that he has received menacing phone calls at his home
where he lives with his wife and two daughters.
For his part, Steve Emerson sees a larger lesson in the Boston contretemps. Extremists "are
adept at getting a toe-hold" in America, he warns. But what's truly worrisome is that this time
"it's happening at the behest and with the sanction of the government."
Dean Barnett writes about politics and other matters at soxblog.com