It’s lame to want the connection to the Commmunity Center to be suspicious and the one to NewsCorp to be unavoidable and innocent. It’s lame when we have pictures of Rupert and Bush with this same man looking very chummy.
It was the DS moment of zen. Wish I had a shorter clip but here’s their whole show Moment of zen at 21:18 which you should be able to forward to. In January with Cavuto.
The other interesting thing is that Prince Alwaleed is very well known globally so why would they neglect to mention his name while they make the inference?
This clip lists some of his other holdings, Apple, Pepsi, Citigroup, so, he seems to have no good reason to destroy the west, but maybe threaten it enough to increase profits.
OK, so anyone can buy up shares of a publicly-traded company. But you know what else? I’ll bet the Cordoba folks will accept donations from anyone, too. What, are they supposed to turn this guy aside when he offers them several million? Why, just because he’s a Muslim? News flash: Most of the money to build any mosque or Islamic cultural center is going to come from Muslims.
I think you may have missed the point: Fox implied that the Park51 project is being controlled by an evil investor – but it’s their investor too. If it’s wrong for liberals to do it, it was wrong for Fox to have done it first.
Here’s a clip of a NYC construction worker.
He seems like a very decent quiet sincere guy who somehow thinks building this Community Center is a slap in the face to people who are still hurting.
I just don’t get how this building is in any way shape or form , a slap in the face to anyone, simply because they are American Muslims. It seems to me you can’t do that unless you are falsely associating American Muslims with terrorists, but that doesn’t seem to matter.
I think they just don’t give a crap whether it hurts or not or whther it’s true or not. We can make more money by distorting the truth so let’s distort.
It doesn’t matter if people knew the name or not. Most people don’t when a something is “new information” It’s conspicuous in it’s absense that they don’t show his picture or mention a name.
Fox used the term the Kingdom Foundation and it seems the term is acceptable for the Holding company here refered to as the Kingdon Foundation in the first section.
Yes, anyone can buy shares, but when you buy a stake as large as 7%, you have to file with the SEC, which means you have to publicly announce. And at that point, there are any number of things which a company can do to thwart the acquisition, and with the stake the Murdoch family has they could have done any number of things, such as poison-pilling, outbidding for shares, getting in an investor group to thwart the acquisition (the way Disney did with the Bass brothers). Hell, all they had to do was start bleating that a “Saudi” was trying to buy them up, and that might have created enough public opposition to derail the deal (the way the Dubai ports deal was derailed).
Aren’t you or Jon Stewart leaving out a considerable portion of this story?
This prince did offer $10 million to rebuild, but then suggested that the United States should reexamine its policies in the Middle East and address the issues that led to an attack.
Rudolph Giuliani stated that this was drawing a moral equivalence between liberal democracies and those that condoned terrorism, and turned down the $10 million. This was quite newsworthy at the time, and mentioning the donation without the attendant controversy is irresponsible.
I can’t watch the video right now - so forgive me if Jon Stewart raised the issue. You should have also mentioned it in your OP.
The guy is embraced by Murdoch , Bush and world leaders all over. Fox chose to suggest he funds radical Madrasahs all over only to make his money for the Manhatten Community Center seem tainted with terrorism. Then they convieniently left out his name and picture. He also owns part of Pepsi, Apple, and Citigroup. evidently it doesn’t matter if you fund terrorism , your money is still good here Prince. Here shake on it.
Nobody accused them of that. They’re accused of being lying jackasses who are trying to falsely paint Imam Rauf as a bad guy.
Well yeah, they praised Imam Rauf not long ago and now they want to demonize him with every contrived theory they can muster.
Their pattern is pretty obvious. Whatever narrative serves thier purpose with little regard for the truth.
It’s plenty relevant - this individual has been involved in some controversy in the past, in which his statements have indicated a certain worldview.
Now that he is involved in another controversy, people are going to be looking at those earlier statements. Now, while overreacting and using that incident as a sole basis for interpreting the prince’s actions wouldn’t be smart, neither would dismissing, ignoring or concealing them.
The business arrangements Rupert Murdock has with the prince has little to do with whether he is newsworthy - he earns that on his own. He earned it when he made the comments in 2001, he earned it when he donated money to Palestinians in 2002 - some of which went to the families of suicide bombers. Again - this is a small portion of the man’s activities as a businessman - but this aspect of his life is present and is remarked upon when his other activities come into prominence.
I note that he has donated generously to Harvard - does this automatically make their Islamic research suspect? I wouldn’t say so - though I would note extensive Saudi funding when talking about the Harvard Islamic Studies Department. Seems fair.
Not if you watch the whole thing. As I said above, he was only mentioned at the end, and it was very quick. This was not a segment about Alaweed. It was a segment about the Imam’s wife and what she said-- and they did name her and show a video clip of her.
OK. Looks like that is an acceptable term. When you Google “Kingdom Foundation”, you get the Christian organization. Nothing on wikipedia, either.
True. But he did specifically say the guy funds radical Madrasahs all over the world which seemed to purposely suggest some negative.
Didn’t offer one example or mention the guys name but lets just leave it at that negative impression.
Which in itself seems incredibly weak. What’s his definition of community? A few block radius? I went to the JCC in Bangor Maine for some functions. It didn’t just serve people who could easily walk there. He mentions a JCC in upper Manhatten. So, people wouldn’t possibly take a subway ride to a new multi million dollar community center? It seemed like streaching for something negative to me.
He also talks about the location vs the price. Was it a good deal or was it the location? It can’t be both? They got a great deal on a building that had been abandoned for years and thought the location would aide in the spirit of reconciliation. Oh those bastards.
All in all it seemed like typical Fox dishonest BS to serve an agenda regardless of who gets hurt. The connection to a major invester is just extra frosting to highlight there BS.
Part of the stated goal of Alaweed’s Foundation is the same as Rauf. To promote reconciliation and cross cultural understanding and harmony. can’t speak for his sincereity but I haven’t seen any evidence of radical Madrasahs. Just the accusation.
I believe in evidence more than inneuendo. People are complex and even decent people have thier bad side if you want to focus on it. So far the actual evidence shows Rauf to be a moderate Muslim working hard to promote peace and crosscultural harmony and understanding. I won’t accept vague innuendo from Fox.
Oddly enough, when I google it, I get a picture of Obama in a turban with concentric circles emanating from his eye with the legend “Jihad Ugly Radio!” I’m wearing a vest, and suddenly want to stuff all the pockets with road flares. Weird.
Just kidding. I get the Princes foundation, etc. about third down the list. Apparently it is referred to as the Kingdom Foundation for “short”.
Fox didn’t explain that either. They merely mentioned he was the same guy with the obvious implication that this was art of his badness.
I don’t remember the details of the offer. I don’t see anything wrong with his suggestion that we examine our policies although I can understand that at the time it seemed like salt in a wound.
working toward peace and reconciliation doesn’t mean they will agree with us at every turn.