Media Pigs slandering an innocent man to get readers. They should be ashamed. Im sure Dream isnt the only one that was innocently taken advantage of by these organizations. If I remember correctly they also proved John Kerrys wife was guilty of such donations. Hakeem got fruaded, yet the headline makes it look as if he supports terrorist activity. The Chronicle should be ASHAMED of slandering a innocent man who has done so many great things for this city and humanity!!! This is the last straw! I will no longer buy it!!!
Because the intelligence comittie in the U.S. is very reliable, the war on Terrorism is going great, hey if you guys in the intelligence comittie are interested i got some names of "suspected terrorists". Here they are: M'Balz ES-HARI HAID D'SALAAMI I-BIN PHARTEEN Don't forget the notorious GRAABIR BOUBI /that's all, hope this information helps.
Although I agree with you that they could do a little work on the headline, I think this was hardly anything close to slander. You said yourself that they proved John Kerry's wife had similar donations. They are going to report on stuff like this when it comes out. Nowhere did I read anything in there that suggests Hakeem knowingly donated money to terrorist organizations. I wouldn't be surprised if many of us had donated money to an organization that unwittingly donated to some "fake charity" or something that funnelled money to Al Qaeda. If we were rich, famous, and made large donations that somehow ended up in the hands of a terrorist organization, I'd expect that it would make the news too. But nowhere have I seen anything that suggests he knowingly gave money to terrorist organizations. If they made any such allegations, they'd have to have some pretty strong evidence.
So let me understand this: 1. I spent money to watch Hakeem play basketball 2. This money went to help pay his salary 3. He uses this money to set up a Mosque 4. This Mosque contributed to terrorist activities. So in effect, my money is going to terrorist activities thanks to Hakeem's investments. This pisses the hell out of me. He should have researched where the money was going better than he did.
He, grinding his teeth: "Round up the usual suspects." Laura, passionately: "Say it again, dear, say 'Dream goes by'."
Let's put things in perspective here. An analogy and example would be great. I have been to and some of my friends go to the First Presbyterian Church off of Main street (Medical Center Area). There are different groups that hold fundraisers at this church, one of them being One International (a fabulous organization btw). Many people at the church give money to One International as well. -One International does different types of reconciliation and interfaith activities worldwide. -If in one of the dozens of activities that One International participated in, there was ONE individual that came as a participant AND -this same individual gave money to an orphan who had a father in Palestine that died in a suicide attack. THEN all of a sudden and overnight First Presbyterian Church has become affiliated with terrorism and the pastor their is a terrorist sympathizer. This is exactly what we are talking about. These charities that the government has accused of being terrorist related are either indirectly related or at the very most, the management and bulk of the organization is UNAWARE of any wrong doing. One or two people in the organization may have done something wrong. Does that give us good reason to close down the charity or EVEN WORST accuse anyone who donated to that charity of being a supporter of terrorism? UTTERLY RIDICULOUS!
What a completely irrelevant analogy. Completely not applicable in this situation. $80,000 was allegedly sent to fronts for terrorists. Somebody needs to be accountable for not researching this properly. That didn't happen. The charity should be shut down. It cannot be trusted to not make this same "mistake" (was it a "mistake"?) again. Remember, these charities were suspected as having terrorist ties before the donations, according to the article.
So I take it you know for a fact that every cent you've ever donated didn't go to some suspect action.
Yea, I didn't come up with this names dude. I saw them on an SNL skit feauturing non other than Robert DeNiro. I got it from Kazaa i think, it's really funny. See it and then you'll probably agree. It's a classic.
of course all of our money one way or another has gone to something illegal... Casino's and mobsters .. who knows maybe some of the restaurants you go to are fronts for the owners who do something else..i mean seriously you can't say that everything you paid for was completly legit after you got it.
this ap article is so pointless. if hakeem was not involved with this mosque there would be no article. so hakeem seemingly had done something wrong, even though the article points out that he didn't. so why was this article even written? what is its point, to second guess someone they already said was innocent??? typical example of the media dragging someone's name through mud to grind out a story...
Guys, If I see a homeless/needy man/family on the road somewhere, and I am able to help them out with a small donation, but they were playing me for dumb since they really want the money for drugs and not food, should I be held responsible for not "researching" the person/family before I donated? This is utterly rediculous! The problem is Hakeem was, and still is, an extremely charitable person in the community, not just in Houston, but everywhere else he went. The man really wanted to ue his wealth/power to help the less fortunate. Is he really to be blamed for this? Should all charitable people who are trying to do good just give up and stop donating money for the fear it might go in the wrong place? You bet some of the money you donate/pay in any form does/has gone to some places/people you disapprove of, that does NOT mean that you are guilty of it. In fact, in this case, the Mosque itself is not guilty of anything, unless it had individuals in it that knew what was going on and were complicit in the illegal funding. But do you know how much money charities like the Holy Land Foundation and others have gotten worldwide? They used to advertise to help the poor and displaced, and out of the goodness of their hearts thousands of people donated that money thinking it was for a good cause. You can't indict someone for for what others do. I give my money to the homeless guy with good intentions, how he uses it is up to him. Plus, if the government did not have the goodies on these charities (with all the law enforcement capabilities available to them) until very recently, then how the hell did you want a simple individual to find out those charities' real intentions? Let's get things in perspective here...
Next time when you pay to watch a game, please take a research of who are playing ball and how they spend their money. You should have researched where the money was going better than you did.
