Mejias Takes Campaign Contributions from Muslim Extremists

This can't be good for Mejias.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/pete_kings_muslim_mess_opedcolumnists_adam_brodsky .htm

What else would we expect from the NY Post?

Mejias should be running for Congress in Manhattan. He is one of the most anti-suburban candidates out there today.

He has no clue what "regular" folks want, only what his bizarro friends on the far left blogosphere want.

By the way, please make sure the many Jewish voters know who Mejias' friends are. Part of the "anti-Jewish" new left aganda.

Mejias loses big this year ... and next year too.

[the truth i guess]

What else would we expect from the NY Post?


NEWSDAY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Today is labor day and the anti-union ny post gave more space to the history of labor than our own left-leaning NEWSDAY. One pitiful little article. This is very telling and proof, as if we really need it, that Newsday is anti-union. Again I ask is newsdays dealings with its own unions the true agenda?

By taking money from the muslim extremists, he has crossed the jewish lobby. His fate is sealed. Even Hillary won't cross that line.

[Tim J]

Being a Muslim does't make you a Muslim Extremist. the attacks by the right are really really sad, and you can tell how scared they are by engaging in such horrific personal attacks because they know King is in real danger

Being a Muslim does't make you a Muslim Extremist. the attacks by the right are really really sad, and you can tell how scared they are by engaging in such horrific personal attacks because they know King is in real danger

The only thing King is in danger of is laughing himself sick at Mejias' mistakes.

You're right, being Muslim doesn't make you an extremist, however, the acts of the leadership of this Islamic Center does. From the NY Post article:

But Ghazi Khankan and Faroque Khan essentially prove King's point about mosque leaders' extremism - right in the middle of hard-core suburban-American (and considerably Jewish) Nassau County.

Khankan, for example, has defended Hamas and even blind cleric Omar Rahman, now in jail for his role in the plot against city landmarks.

In 2001, Khankan questioned whether Muslims were really behind 9/11. "Who benefits from assuming that Muslims are behind this tragedy and who benefits from this tragedy?" he asked.

Khan, meanwhile, has served as a top official in the Islamic Society of North America, co-founded by Sami al-Arian, the Florida prof who pleaded guilty to aiding the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

These leaders have pushed a virulent anti-Israel agenda for years and, along with the Islamic Center, they've backed the likes of recently defeated anti-Israel Rep. Cynthia McKinney. They consistently decry aggressive counter-terrorism efforts as dangerous curbs on civil liberties.


What makes all this worrisome is that the Westbury center is the largest mosque on Long Island, drawing as many as 4,000 worshipers on holidays. And that Khan and the center often mask their extremism - through "benign" interfaith and other programs.

Nice to see the Republican smear machine is working overtime. It wont work, folks. Americans are now hip to the GOP's lies and fearmongering.

Guess since the GOP isnt going to take up immigration they need something else to attack Mejias on. I just wish some of these right wing bigots would say in public the stuff they say on here.

You're right, being Muslim doesn't make you an extremist, however, the acts of the leadership of this Islamic Center does. From the NY Post article:

But Ghazi Khankan and Faroque Khan essentially prove King's point about mosque leaders' extremism - right in the middle of hard-core suburban-American (and considerably Jewish) Nassau County.

Khankan, for example, has defended Hamas and even blind cleric Omar Rahman, now in jail for his role in the plot against city landmarks.

In 2001, Khankan questioned whether Muslims were really behind 9/11. "Who benefits from assuming that Muslims are behind this tragedy and who benefits from this tragedy?" he asked.

Khan, meanwhile, has served as a top official in the Islamic Society of North America, co-founded by Sami al-Arian, the Florida prof who pleaded guilty to aiding the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

These leaders have pushed a virulent anti-Israel agenda for years and, along with the Islamic Center, they've backed the likes of recently defeated anti-Israel Rep. Cynthia McKinney. They consistently decry aggressive counter-terrorism efforts as dangerous curbs on civil liberties.


What makes all this worrisome is that the Westbury center is the largest mosque on Long Island, drawing as many as 4,000 worshipers on holidays. And that Khan and the center often mask their extremism - through "benign" interfaith and other programs.

Khan also contributed to Peter King. King never returned the money.

[KingMan]

King is one of the leaders on immigration reform. And according to all the polls Americans support King's idea of strict border enforcement. Not Mejias' idea of taking campaign contributions from supporters of Muslim extremists.

[KingMan2]

You forgot to mention when Khan's contribution was made. I'm sure King accepted Khan's contribution well before it became known that the group supports Muslim extremists and that money has long been spent. Plus if King paid Khan back now the money would go to support an anti-Israel and Muslim extemist agenda, which Dave Mejias supports. Why else would Mejias accept a contribution from this group. He wouldn't just take a contribution from a group without researching their backgroud.

This is outrageous! How can King accept donations from a Muslim extremist?

[jack-ass party]

I can't believe you dems defending meejias. Other that saying that the jews attacked the world trade center because 'they are the ones who will profit from it'

What about the Mosque in Brooklyn that raised $50M dollars for al-qaida?

WHERE ARE THE IMAMS CONDEMNATION OF THE ATTACKS ON 9-11. WHY AREN'T THEY PUTTING OUT A PRESS RELEASE EVERYDAY CONDEMNING THOSE WHO HAVE 'HIJACKED' THEIR RELIGION, WOULDN'T IT BE IN THEIR BEST INTEREST? NO- BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IN JIHAD

This is outrageous! How can King accept donations from a Muslim extremist?

Once King heard about KhanKhan and Khan's support of extremists and blaming 9/11 on the Jews he immediately criticized them. What is Mejias doing? Accepting their donation. And now if Mejias wins he will obviously support their anti-Israel agenda in Congress.

I can't believe you dems defending meejias... DOWN WITH THE LIB.DEMS. and NEWSDAY

DOWN WITH LYING REPUBLICANS! DEMS WILL TAKE BACK CONGRESS IN NOVEMBER!

[u-r 2faced and ignorant]

Lying Republicans?

What did we lie about? you're saying mejias isn't taking money from terrorist supporters?

Or is this another liberal dem attack on our president during war time?

Didn't the Democratic leadership view the same inteligence reports as the President and VOTE in favor of the Iraq war?

I have revisionists.

[Tim J]

King is one of the leaders on immigration reform. And according to all the polls Americans support King's idea of strict border enforcement. Not Mejias' idea of taking campaign contributions from supporters of Muslim extremists.

For starters King has taken the same $$$, next saying they are extremist supporters and them actually being extremist supporters are wo different things.

next Americans absolutley DO NOT favor King's plan whatsoever. Everyone agrees on more border security (Mejias included), but Americans do favor a pth to citizenship.



.Gallup Poll

"Which comes closest to your view about what government policy should be toward illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States? Should the government deport all illegal immigrants back to their home country, allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States in order to work but only for a limited amount of time, or allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States and become U.S. citizens but only if they meet certain requirements over a period of time?

Dpoert 16%, remian for limited time 17%, remain if meet certain requirments, 66%

Bloomberg/ LA Times Poll

"One proposal would allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"

Support 67%, Oppose 18%

NBC Poll

When it comes to the immigration bill, the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree with one another about what should be done on the issue of illegal immigration.

"Many in the House of Representatives favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a seven-hundred-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor deporting immigrants who are already in the United States illegally.

"Many in the Senate favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a three-hundred-and-seventy-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor a guest worker program to allow illegal immigrants who have jobs and who have been here for more than two years to remain in the United States.

"Which of these approaches would you prefer?"

House approach 33%, Senate approach 50%

CBS Poll
Would you favor or oppose allowing illegal immigrants who have done the following to stay and work in the United States: paid a fine, been in the U.S. for at least five years, paid any back taxes they owe, can speak English, and have no criminal record

Favor 77%, Oppose 19%


CNN poll


"Creating a program that would allow illegal immigrants already living in the United States for a number of years to stay in this country and apply for U.S. citizenship if they had a job and paid back taxes"

favor 79% Oppose 18%

[Tim J]

Lying Republicans?

What did we lie about? you're saying mejias isn't taking money from terrorist supporters?

Or is this another liberal dem attack on our president during war time?

Didn't the Democratic leadership view the same inteligence reports as the President and VOTE in favor of the Iraq war?

I have revisionists.

They aren't terrorist supportrs, and King has also taken $$ from them

The Dems actually did not have access o the same reports the President did. Some of it was the same, but others were not. What the congress got to see were the reports Bushw anted them to see, not tall the reports that were out. Contradictory reports did not make their way to the Congress.

Also their is a differnce between Authorizing the Preisdnt the option to use force as a last resort when everything else has been tried (which was what the Authorization actually was). It was not a straight up or down vote on the War as some try to suggest.

[Tim J = J. Klurfield]

REVISIONIST.

Granted, all dems did not see ALL the reports that the President saw, HOWEVER the dem leadership, including clinton, biden (and others) did, in fact see EXACTLY the same clasified reports that the President saw.

Something tells me you only see what you want to see, which makes you a good dem.

King is one of the leaders on immigration reform. And according to all the polls Americans support King's idea of strict border enforcement. Not Mejias' idea of taking campaign contributions from supporters of Muslim extremists.

For starters King has taken the same $$$, next saying they are extremist supporters and them actually being extremist supporters are wo different things.

next Americans absolutley DO NOT favor King's plan whatsoever. Everyone agrees on more border security (Mejias included), but Americans do favor a pth to citizenship.



.Gallup Poll

"Which comes closest to your view about what government policy should be toward illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States? Should the government deport all illegal immigrants back to their home country, allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States in order to work but only for a limited amount of time, or allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States and become U.S. citizens but only if they meet certain requirements over a period of time?

Dpoert 16%, remian for limited time 17%, remain if meet certain requirments, 66%

Bloomberg/ LA Times Poll

"One proposal would allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"

Support 67%, Oppose 18%

NBC Poll

When it comes to the immigration bill, the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree with one another about what should be done on the issue of illegal immigration.

"Many in the House of Representatives favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a seven-hundred-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor deporting immigrants who are already in the United States illegally.

"Many in the Senate favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a three-hundred-and-seventy-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor a guest worker program to allow illegal immigrants who have jobs and who have been here for more than two years to remain in the United States.

"Which of these approaches would you prefer?"

House approach 33%, Senate approach 50%

CBS Poll
Would you favor or oppose allowing illegal immigrants who have done the following to stay and work in the United States: paid a fine, been in the U.S. for at least five years, paid any back taxes they owe, can speak English, and have no criminal record

Favor 77%, Oppose 19%


CNN poll


"Creating a program that would allow illegal immigrants already living in the United States for a number of years to stay in this country and apply for U.S. citizenship if they had a job and paid back taxes"

favor 79% Oppose 18%


How about a poll of Long Islanders? Not polls from left-wing media outlets.

Dave, however, wants to allow everyone to stay here (and bring even more) with no penalty. He's out of touch with LI.

Levy for Governor! Levy for Senate! Levy for Congress!

[Tim J]

King is one of the leaders on immigration reform. And according to all the polls Americans support King's idea of strict border enforcement. Not Mejias' idea of taking campaign contributions from supporters of Muslim extremists.

For starters King has taken the same $$$, next saying they are extremist supporters and them actually being extremist supporters are wo different things.

next Americans absolutley DO NOT favor King's plan whatsoever. Everyone agrees on more border security (Mejias included), but Americans do favor a pth to citizenship.



.Gallup Poll

"Which comes closest to your view about what government policy should be toward illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States? Should the government deport all illegal immigrants back to their home country, allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States in order to work but only for a limited amount of time, or allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States and become U.S. citizens but only if they meet certain requirements over a period of time?

Dpoert 16%, remian for limited time 17%, remain if meet certain requirments, 66%

Bloomberg/ LA Times Poll

"One proposal would allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"

Support 67%, Oppose 18%

NBC Poll

When it comes to the immigration bill, the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree with one another about what should be done on the issue of illegal immigration.

"Many in the House of Representatives favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a seven-hundred-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor deporting immigrants who are already in the United States illegally.

"Many in the Senate favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a three-hundred-and-seventy-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor a guest worker program to allow illegal immigrants who have jobs and who have been here for more than two years to remain in the United States.

"Which of these approaches would you prefer?"

House approach 33%, Senate approach 50%

CBS Poll
Would you favor or oppose allowing illegal immigrants who have done the following to stay and work in the United States: paid a fine, been in the U.S. for at least five years, paid any back taxes they owe, can speak English, and have no criminal record

Favor 77%, Oppose 19%


CNN poll


"Creating a program that would allow illegal immigrants already living in the United States for a number of years to stay in this country and apply for U.S. citizenship if they had a job and paid back taxes"

favor 79% Oppose 18%


How about a poll of Long Islanders? Not polls from left-wing media outlets.

Ahh yes polls that show results you don't like must be bias......

[mejiass/lavine]

dave takes their money and chuckster defends them, its great to be a democrat

More correctly, it's great to be a winner, especially on election day. Sorry, repugs.

[Tim J Klurfeld]

I WILL EAT PETER KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

Mejias is dangerous! Mejias is a demagogue! It's apparent his behavior, rhetoric, and consistent embracing the mantra of anti-American groupies while flirting with various and off the wall ideologies, makes for a mandate to take Mejias out, permanently, from the political arena.

Mejias accepting political monies, and not returning same, from the Muslim person, recognized as a leader of the Westbury Mosque who has consistently been a defender of Muslim terrorism, should send a wake-up call to every American in Nassau County who loves his country.

Mejias is dangerous! Mejias is a demagogue! It's apparent his behavior, rhetoric, and consistent embracing the mantra of anti-American groupies while flirting with various and off the wall ideologies, makes for a mandate to take Mejias out, permanently, from the political arena.

Mejias accepting political monies, and not returning same, from the Muslim person, recognized as a leader of the Westbury Mosque who has consistently been a defender of Muslim terrorism, should send a wake-up call to every American in Nassau County who loves his country.

Mejias is dangerous! Mejias is a demagogue! It's apparent his behavior, rhetoric, and consistent embracing the mantra of anti-American groupies while flirting with various and off the wall ideologies, makes for a mandate to take Mejias out, permanently, from the political arena.

Mejias accepting political monies, and not returning same, from the Muslim person, recognized as a leader of the Westbury Mosque who has consistently been a defender of Muslim terrorism, should send a wake-up call to every American in Nassau County who loves his country.

[guest 1]

Yes of course King is not a demagogue. He never would take funding or support a terrorist group. There is nothing in his past.

Demagogue: leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power.

Now that wouldn't be King would it?

But try this one
Hypocrite: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion.

Try to find a real issue.

What's David Mejias, the butt-kissing, double-talking, enemy-of-the-people who lucked-in to becoming a Nassau County legislator to do now that his mentor and icon, Tom Suozzi lost the primary big time? As Mejias' mentor, Suozzi no longer has juice. Neither does Suozzi's cheerleader, the dishonest sleazy, Jay Jacobs.

Watch for outrageous and dishonest BS alibis frothing from Mejias as he takes a walk from confronting Peter King.

What's David Mejias, the butt-kissing, double-talking, enemy-of-the-people who lucked-in to becoming a Nassau County legislator to do now that his mentor and icon, Tom Suozzi lost the primary big time? As Mejias' mentor, Suozzi no longer has juice. Neither does Suozzi's cheerleader, the dishonest sleazy, Jay Jacobs.

Watch for outrageous and dishonest BS alibis frothing from Mejias as he takes a walk from confronting Peter King.

Very factual and well tought out post.

[guests]

who cuts peter's lawn?

who cuts peter's lawn?

A landscaper, who, as reported by the New York Times earlier this year, does not hire illegal aliens.

who cuts peter's lawn?

Joe Saladino

[Tim J]

lets see here. Actually the guy in question has condemend the attacks. The questionable and insane comments were made by someone who no longer works there and had nothing to do with the donation to mejias. and here is the kicker, the same guy who King is labeling as an extremist and blasting Mejias for taking a few hundred $$ from, gave even more to King last dec ($500) and headed a luncheon that netted King more than $5,000.

[guest 1]

Mejias is dangerous! Mejias is a demagogue! It's apparent his behavior, rhetoric, and consistent embracing the mantra of anti-American groupies while flirting with various and off the wall ideologies, makes for a mandate to take Mejias out, permanently, from the political arena.

Mejias accepting political monies, and not returning same, from the Muslim person, recognized as a leader of the Westbury Mosque who has consistently been a defender of Muslim terrorism, should send a wake-up call to every American in Nassau County who loves his country.

Clash on cash
In letter, Republican criticizes opponent for taking donations from Muslim leaders - while he does the same
BY MICHAEL ROTHFELD
Newsday Staff Writer

September 20, 2006


Rep. Peter King is attempting to link his political opponent to men he calls "radical" Muslim leaders on Long Island, but federal records show the congressman accepted thousands of dollars last year in campaign contributions from some of the same donors.

In thousands of letters to constituents this month, King (R-Seaford) criticized "American Muslim leaders" for failing to adequately denounce the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. He took specific aim at the Islamic Center of Long Island in Westbury, saying the mosque's leaders "have publicly stated that the CIA or the 'Zionists' may have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks."

"Because I have put aside political correctness and spoken out against these radical leaders, I have been denounced as ... a 'Muslim hater,'" King wrote. "Now they are actively supporting my opponent."

The Westbury mosque's current president, Habeeb Ahmed, wrote a $200 check in June to Nassau Legis. David Mejias, King's Democratic opponent. But on Dec. 10, 2005, Ahmed gave $500 to King at a luncheon in Massapequa with other Muslim leaders. The congressman collected a total of $5,500 that day.

"He is a very influential person," Ahmed said of King. "I wanted to have his ear and tell him painting all Muslims with the same brush is not appropriate. ... We have condemned the 9/11 attack." Last year, King took a total of $3,000 from three Muslim donors who have given $950 to Mejias this year, including Ahmed; Mohammed Saleh, president of the Long Island Muslim Society in East Meadow; and Syed Zaki Hossain, a Hicksville businessman.

"The reality is that he's a big hypocrite," Mejias said. "He's running scared."

King denied any inconsistency.

The 14-year incumbent is still considered a heavy favorite. He had $1.6 million in his war chest as of August, compared to $256,000 for Mejias.

The mailing was paid for by King's campaign, but written on an official-looking letterhead with a sketch of the U.S. Capitol. In an interview, he said he sent it to inform constituents "who are interested in radical Islam ... It may have gone out more to Jews than others, because it was that mosque that said that Jews could have blown up the World Trade Center."

King said he accepted $500 from Ahmed because the mosque's president told him that Ghazi Khankan, the former interfaith director at the Islamic Center, blamed by the congressman for making inflammatory statements, was no longer working there. King said the other donations were from Muslim leaders affiliated with the Bangladeshi community, with whom he has good relations. He said they were stronger in condemning the Sept. 11 attacks.

But Mohammed Saleh, an American citizen who was born in Bangladesh and leads the Long Island Muslim Society, also said the congressman's remarks disturbed him. He has not decided whom to support in the race. "He is stereotyping the Muslims," said Saleh, a pharmacist from Merrick.

King, who enjoyed friendly relations with Long Island Muslims before the Sept. 11 atttacks, said afterward that 85 percent of American mosques had "extremist leadership."

Yesterday, King said his opinions of the Westbury mosque were based on statements by Khankan in newspaper articles in the months after Sept. 11. Khankan, who left the mosque two years ago, repeatedly challenged the idea that Muslims were behind the attacks. The mosque's co-president, Safar Chadda, repeated "a rumor" that the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, was involved.

King said he was most upset with the mosque's president-elect at the time, Faroque Khan - once his friend - for not publicly condemning those statements. "What they did was absolutely disgraceful," King said.

Ghazi Khankan, reached at his home in Long Beach yesterday, said he believed that al-Qaida hijacked the planes used on Sept. 11 to orchestrate a prisoner exchange, but the Israelis controlled them remotely. He has not donated to Mejias.

Faroque Khan, now the mosque's spokesman, gave Mejias $350 in June. He said he has written many letters to King, including with one the text of a speech he gave at a synagogue in October 2001, condemning the attacks. "If he chooses to ignore that, I don't know what other statements he's looking for," Khan said.

Peter King, Sept. 7, 2006, letter to constituents

"I have been critical of American Muslim leaders for failing to unequivocally denounce Islamic terrorism and for their radical and extremist rhetoric. For instance, leaders at the Islamic Center of Long Island in Westbury have publicly stated that the CIA or the 'Zionists' may have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks. They have also contributed to the political campaigns of Rep. Cynthia McKinney, the most anti-Israel Member of Congress.



Because I have put aside political correctness and spoken out against these radical leaders, I have been denounced by Muslim organizations and assailed in the Muslim media as a 'Muslim hater.' Now they are actively supporting my opponent in this year's election."

So I guess now you would have to say that Peter King is a dangerous man also?

This is for all you Mejias supporters who only read the headlines and first paragraph of news stories.

The facts of Newsday's article actually backs up everything King and the Post claimed.

King and The Post criticize Ghazi Khankan and Faroque Khan. No where in Newsday's article does it mention King took money from either of them.

King and the Post say that Ghazi Khankan and Faroque Khan are backing Mejias. Newsday confirms that Khan has contributed $350 to Mejias (not King).

Also Khankan is quoted in the Newsday article as saying "he believed that al-Qaida hijacked the planes used on Sept. 11 to orchestrate a prisoner exchange, but the Israelis controlled them remotely." This guy actually still believes that Israelis controlled the airplanes flown into the WTC and Pentagon. WOW!!!

The contributions King has taken from the Islamic Center are from the new leadership, which he has not criticized. The contributions King criticizes are from Khan who has contributed to Mejias and not King.

Where is the hypocrisy?

Here is the article from about the middle on, leaving out the beginning in which Newsday editorializes.

King said he accepted $500 from Ahmed because the mosque's president told him that Ghazi Khankan, the former interfaith director at the Islamic Center, blamed by the congressman for making inflammatory statements, was no longer working there.

King said the other donations were from Muslim leaders affiliated with the Bangladeshi community, with whom he has good relations. He said they were stronger in condemning the Sept. 11 attacks.

But Mohammed Saleh, an American citizen who was born in Bangladesh and leads the Long Island Muslim Society, also said the congressman's remarks disturbed him. He has not decided whom to support in the race. "He is stereotyping the Muslims," said Saleh, a pharmacist from Merrick.

King, who enjoyed friendly relations with Long Island Muslims before the Sept. 11 atttacks, said afterward that 85 percent of American mosques had "extremist leadership."

Yesterday, King said his opinions of the Westbury mosque were based on statements by Khankan in newspaper articles in the months after Sept. 11. Khankan, who left the mosque two years ago, repeatedly challenged the idea that Muslims were behind the attacks. The mosque's co-president, Safar Chadda, repeated "a rumor" that the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, was involved.

King said he was most upset with the mosque's president-elect at the time, Faroque Khan - once his friend - for not publicly condemning those statements. "What they did was absolutely disgraceful," King said.

Ghazi Khankan, reached at his home in Long Beach yesterday, said he believed that al-Qaida hijacked the planes used on Sept. 11 to orchestrate a prisoner exchange, but the Israelis controlled them remotely. He has not donated to Mejias.

Faroque Khan, now the mosque's spokesman, gave Mejias $350 in June. He said he has written many letters to King, including with one the text of a speech he gave at a synagogue in October 2001, condemning the attacks. "If he chooses to ignore that, I don't know what other statements he's looking for," Khan said.

Khan has denounced the attacks, and he has stated that muslims were involved in the attacks and that it was Al Qaeda. Despite what King has claimed and the post tired to claim, he has denounced it.

Now Khankan has made some very controversial cmments, and hideous comments at that, but despite what the Post & King have tried to portray he has NOT supported Mejias in anyway. Gave no $$ to him, nothing.

Mejias is illegal isn't he?

who cuts jim klurfelds lawn?

Jose Magel Manwell