The Rockefeller Mosque

[parocks]

Has anyone picked up on how the Rockefellers are the ones funding the Ground Zero Mosque? Has anyone noticed that the Imam involved in this is a member of CFR.

We're being led to believe that it's crazy muslims who are wanting this mosque.
It's the globalist / NWO elites, or whatever they're being called these days.

I recommend that Ron Paul investigate this, and if he finds that this information is accurate, he start calling it the Rockefeller mosque.

I recommend that people here start calling it the Rockefeller mosque.

I recommend that people start calling the Imam the CFR Imam or the Imam CFR.

Here's the link to the contributors to the Imam's organization
http://www.asmasociety.org/about/p_support.html

Here's the link to the CFL membership list
http://www.cfr.org/about/outreach/religioninitiative/advisory_board.html

[Mini-Me]

Good find! The best possible motive I can think of is the age-old "divide and conquer," because that's certainly how the whole issue has played out. There could be other motives too, though. Either way, this is quite interesting.

[Vessol]

The best possible motive I can think of is the age-old "divide and conquer," because that's certainly how the whole issue has played out. There could be other motives too, though.

Most definitely.

[parocks]

This is clearly an orchestrated stunt. There are a decent number of weird things going on. Conservatives talking about using the Kelo decision to use eminent domain. Things like that. I think it would be best to make it all just go away by shining the light on the Rockefellers and the CFR. The CFR Imam and the Rockefeller mosque.

We nail this one down, we prove this stuff, and it pretty much is proven right there, we can start talking about other things more openly. It almost proves how they do things, I would think that 9/11 truthers would be interested in these issues.



Good find! The best possible motive I can think of is the age-old "divide and conquer," because that's certainly how the whole issue has played out. There could be other motives too, though. Either way, this is quite interesting.

[parocks]

It really could be beneficial to Ron Paul if this information gets out.

The one thing that Freepers disagree with RP on is Islam and the Middle East.

If the facts are clearly established that it's the global elite and not muslims who want to build the mosque, the people will think differently about the global elite and muslims. They will start to think Ron Paul's way. Ron Paul has attacked the global elite. The people will be pissed at the global elite. When the people hear that it was all a glozi stunt, people won't be as mad at the muslims.

Just go to freerepublic, camp out, and post

The CFR Imam
http://www.cfr.org/about/outreach/religioninitiative/advisory_board.html

The Rockefeller mosque
http://www.asmasociety.org/about/p_support.html

On all the new threads somewhat related to the Rockefeller mosque stunt.

[BlackTerrel]

How many non-profits does the Rockefeller foundation support?

[Mini-Me]

This is clearly an orchestrated stunt. There are a decent number of weird things going on. Conservatives talking about using the Kelo decision to use eminent domain. Things like that. I think it would be best to make it all just go away by shining the light on the Rockefellers and the CFR. The CFR Imam and the Rockefeller mosque.

We nail this one down, we prove this stuff, and it pretty much is proven right there, we can start talking about other things more openly. It almost proves how they do things, I would think that 9/11 truthers would be interested in these issues.

Damn, I knew I was missing something...it came to mind, but it slipped away before I posted. It makes even more sense if an expansion of eminent domain is in the cards. The smoking gun is there, but I imagine the only people capable of seeing it are the ones who already understand dialectics and how elite interests use them to manipulate people and politics. It's still worth pursuing this and raising awareness about it, though...


How many non-profits does the Rockefeller foundation support?
A lot, but I doubt many, if any of them are out of pure humanitarian charity without regard to a broader agenda. If I were a Rockefeller (and amoral ;)), and I had an agenda, this is exactly the kind of stuff I'd do to further it. I'd spend all day, every day, coming up with manipulative little stunts like this. The existence of the CFR and Trilateral Commission are unconcealed evidence of an agenda in global politics, so there's really no denying that part. The only remaining question is, "As an online scrub, am I really that much smarter and more strategic than people like the Rockefellers, who have had generations of experience shaping politics?" I seriously doubt it!

[parocks]

Well, it's not that complicated

The Rockefellers are funding the mosque. Not muslims. So, if you don't like the mosque, don't blame the muslims, blame the Rockefellers, blame the CFR.

The CFR is the establishment. And a lot of people know this already. They're the ones pushing for the mosque, not the muslims. Blame the CFR for the mosque.

It's not too difficult to understand, and understanding the differences in conception of dialectics from Hegel to Marx is not at all necessary.

The bad guys are Rockefeller. The bad guys are the CFR. People can understand that.


Damn, I knew I was missing something...it makes even more sense if an expansion of eminent domain is in the cards. The smoking gun is there, but I imagine the only people capable of seeing it are the ones who already understand dialectics and how elite interests use them to manipulate people and politics. It's still worth pursuing this and raising awareness about it, though...


A lot, but I doubt many, if any of them are out of pure humanitarian charity without regard to a broader agenda.

[Mini-Me]

Well, it's not that complicated

The Rockefellers are funding the mosque. Not muslims. So, if you don't like the mosque, don't blame the muslims, blame the Rockefellers, blame the CFR.

The CFR is the establishment. And a lot of people know this already. They're the ones pushing for the mosque, not the muslims. Blame the CFR for the mosque.

It's not too difficult to understand, and understanding the differences in conception of dialectics from Hegel to Marx is not at all necessary.

The bad guys are Rockefeller. The bad guys are the CFR. People can understand that.

The problem is, I don't think most people are at the point where they can recognize the CFR and/or Rockefellers as purposeful shakers and movers at all, let alone the bad guys. It can't hurt to let conservatives know about Rockefeller and the CFR being behind the mosque, since it will put them on the radar as opponents, but it would be a lot harder to show conservatives how they're being manipulated into the very reaction the CFR and Rockefellers are pushing for.

When did CFR and Rockefeller involvement in this start? I think conservative support for property rights has been growing for a number of years, but the Rand Paul media firestorm sparked a more open dialogue than we've seen in a long, long time. It would be interesting to see whether (and how long) the CFR and Rockefeller's involvement predates all of this. It probably started long before Rand Paul's impetus, and the motive is valid regardless, but if it's more recent, that would be very telling.

[parocks]

I think that "they can recognize the CFR and/or Rockefellers as purposeful shakers and movers at all, let alone the bad guys." if you provide them the proof. The proof is right there. This isn't a hard sell.

We don't need to "show conservatives how they're being manipulated" We really need to tell the conservatives who are anti muslim that the CFR is pushing the mosque. They need to know that fact. They can read that fact and understand that fact. They need to know that it's not the muslims pushing the mosque.
And don't start talking about Ron Paul. They will process the new CFR information appropriately.


The problem is, I don't think most people are at the point where they can recognize the CFR and/or Rockefellers as purposeful shakers and movers at all, let alone the bad guys. It can't hurt to let conservatives know about Rockefeller and the CFR being behind the mosque, since it will put them on the radar as opponents, but it would be a lot harder to show conservatives how they're being manipulated into the very reaction the CFR and Rockefellers are pushing for.

When did CFR and Rockefeller involvement in this start? I think conservative support for property rights has been growing for a number of years, but the Rand Paul media firestorm sparked a more open dialogue than we've seen in a long, long time. It would be interesting to see whether (and how long) the CFR and Rockefeller's mosque involvement predates all of this.

[BlackTerrel]

A lot, but I doubt many, if any of them are out of pure humanitarian charity without regard to a broader agenda. If I were a Rockefeller (and amoral ;)), and I had an agenda, this is exactly the kind of stuff I'd do to further it. I'd spend all day, every day, coming up with manipulative little stunts like this. The existence of the CFR and Trilateral Commission are unconcealed evidence of an agenda in global politics, so there's really no denying that part. The only remaining question is, "As an online scrub, am I really that much smarter and more strategic than people like the Rockefellers, who have had generations of experience shaping politics?" I seriously doubt it!

Why would you do that? If you were a Rockefeller you'd already be rich as hell - why would you spend all day in a smoky room coming up with plans to kill people and cause mayhem? Seems like a stretch.

I don't know much about the Rockefeller's other than what I read on RPF and the fact that Jay-Z likes them but does every single generation just born into an evil bloodline like Dr. Evil in the Austin Powers movie or at some point do they just enjoy their wealth and stop trying to kill everyone?

Paris Hilton's great-grandfather was probably a brilliant dude. But she just likes to drink a lot and party. Why wouldn't the same thing happen here?

Couldn't it be as simple as these guys invest in 500 different non-profits and they want to invest in a couple Muslim non-profits and this is one of the most well known and prestigious Muslim non-profits? Is that possible?

I generally don't believe in people that are evil just because they enjoy being evil. Even Hitler thought he was doing good:

YouTube - Austin Powers - Sharks with lasers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh7bYNAHXxw)

[BlackTerrel]

Well, it's not that complicated

The Rockefellers are funding the mosque. Not muslims. So, if you don't like the mosque, don't blame the muslims, blame the Rockefellers, blame the CFR.

How much of the $100 million is coming from the Rockefellers? And if this is really part of their nefarious plot wouldn't they conceal it a bit more?

It wouldn't even be hard... just fund it through a dummy/front organization.

I also question why people shouldn't like the Mosque to begin with. Or why funding the Mosque is a bad thing? Muslims have a right just like anyone else.

[parocks]

What is happening here is the CFR is pulling this stunt to get people pissed off at Muslims again.

They knew full well that most americans would be 100% against a ground zero mosque. They would assume that the muslims were behind it, and would blame the muslims. But it's not the muslims who are doing it, it's the globalists.

But it's not the muslims who are doing it, it's the globalists.

We have proven something there. You think that it's the muslims who did that, but it was actually the CFR. Oh, you're talking about the mosque?



How much of the $100 million is coming from the Rockefellers? And if this is really part of their nefarious plot wouldn't they conceal it a bit more?

It wouldn't even be hard... just fund it through a dummy/front organization.

I also question why people shouldn't like the Mosque to begin with. Or why funding the Mosque is a bad thing? Muslims have a right just like anyone else.

[Mini-Me]

I think that "they can recognize the CFR and/or Rockefellers as purposeful shakers and movers at all, let alone the bad guys." if you provide them the proof. The proof is right there. This isn't a hard sell.

We don't need to "show conservatives how they're being manipulated" We really need to tell the conservatives who are anti muslim that the CFR is pushing the mosque. They need to know that fact. They can read that fact and understand that fact. They need to know that it's not the muslims pushing the mosque.
And don't start talking about Ron Paul. They will process the new CFR information appropriately.

Well, it depends on what you're trying to get across: We can get across the idea that the mosque is not some grassroots effort by ordinary Muslims, and we can shift the social conservatives' anger towards the CFR and Rockefellers for it, yes. That will put them on the radar as opponents, and it will be helpful.

Still, they have plausible deniability regarding their motives: To anyone unaware of the Rockefellers' and CFR's agendas, it looks like nothing more than a charitable contribution by liberal-leaning organizations. The idea that they're movers and shakers with a broader agenda is going to be lost on anyone who didn't already know it, so the actual motives (undermine property rights, fuel a cultural war, and embolden neocons) will remain unexposed. EDIT: If you disagree, look at BlackTerrel's viewpoint for confirmation. ;) Most people do not understand, find it difficult to believe, and simply do not want to believe, how and why the elites work.

[Mini-Me]

Why would you do that? If you were a Rockefeller you'd already be rich as hell - why would you spend all day in a smoky room coming up with plans to kill people and cause mayhem? Seems like a stretch.
When have I said their goal is to cause mayhem, for mayhem's sake? It's not.*

Do you seriously think it's about money, either? If it was, why have there been emperors and conquerors throughout history, who would not rest until they had the entire world under their control? They could have sat back, relaxed, and enjoyed the good life instead, but they didn't. Their very existence is prima facie evidence that the motives of the rich and powerful go far beyond accumulating money. Answer this: Have you ever met and recognized a true sociopathic narcissist? Have you really known one well enough to say you understand what drives them, and what kind of manipulative people they are? These people knowingly prey on our reluctance to recognize their existence and complete lack of conscience. As the saying goes, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

Emperors and conquerors of old did not do what they did because they didn't think they were rich enough. They did what they did because world domination is one of the oldest, most recurring, and most trite goals of powerful narcissists. This lust for power has shown itself time and time again since the dawn of civilization. Do you really believe that humanity has transcended this drive, and that it has really disappeared from the psyches of powerful men? I agree that the very idea is so trite nowadays that it sounds silly and ridiculous to ordinary people like you or me, like it came straight out of a Pinky and the Brain cartoon. Depictions like this are hilarious, but they can lead us to forget that the archetypal character Brain represents originated in real life, not literature or entertainment media. There are real people in this world who get off on power. Some settle for petty power and subjugation, but consider this: What if a person like this was are born into a multi-generational billionaire family with extensive political connections, who have already accomplished so much that literally the only egotistical goal they have left is consolidating all global power under themselves? This is something that has never been fully accomplished by any person, family, network of families, or empire, yet there are people being born every generation who see it almost within their grasp. It would be a miracle if every single one of these people ignored this and made their life goal learning the piano or funding cancer research or something else benign like that.

It doesn't help that people born into billionaire families are so far removed from the concerns of ordinary people that they cannot relate to them whatsoever. Could you imagine actually being born with the whole world at your fingertips? It would be all too tempting to believe that the world revolves around you, like it exists only to serve you. Sometimes this breeds complacency, but it can also breed incomprehensible arrogance and a mindset that everyone else needs to be ruled by the enlightened elite, for their own good. (Allowing people to run their own lives would defeat this purpose, which is why the politics of the elite trend towards totalitarianism.) Some may only fool themselves into thinking it's for everyone else's own good to justify their own selfish motives. Some may be so arrogant that they actually believe that shaping the world in their image is their manifest destiny. Putting myself in their shoes, and erasing my real-life ideology and morals, I would be stupid not to actively "strategize," i.e. plot, conspire, and manipulate.

Pretty much everything I've said above comes from historical and personal experience. Here's where it gets more speculative: Does the above narrative actually apply to anyone alive today? Does it apply to the Rockefellers specifically?

*If you're referring to the Georgia Guidestones and the goal of maintaining the world's population below 500 million, I'm honestly not sure whether that's a manipulative red herring, a real goal of the globalist elites in general, or a real goal of a single rich nutcase. Regardless, it's ominous as hell. SOMEONE wrote it, and they put a lot of money and effort into erecting a giant monument with that goal carved in stone in eight modern languages (with a shorter message in four ancient languages). Assuming it's someone's real goal, I assume it more likely comes from a [grossly] misguided savior complex than deliberate evil, but the difference is pretty academic when it means wiping out 93% of the world's population. ;)


I don't know much about the Rockefeller's other than what I read on RPF and the fact that Jay-Z likes them but does every single generation just born into an evil bloodline like Dr. Evil in the Austin Powers movie or at some point do they just enjoy their wealth and stop trying to kill everyone?
If they're just sitting back and enjoying their wealth, why are they so involved in powerful geopolitical organizations like the CFR and Trilateral Commission? Good old David could have called it quits a half century ago, but he didn't. Their actual activities indicate that they are very much NOT just sitting on their laurels, content with their prior achievements.


Paris Hilton's great-grandfather was probably a brilliant dude. But she just likes to drink a lot and party. Why wouldn't the same thing happen here?
It would be great if it did, but if such a thing DID happen here, why is it that people are calling out the Rockefeller family but not the Hilton family? Granted, the Rockefellers don't have celebrity ditzes running amok and making them look like idiots, but not everyone in the Hilton family is a young partier anyway. Nobody's calling out the grody old Hilton men for trying to centralize global power. Maybe it has something to do with differences in their actions?


Couldn't it be as simple as these guys invest in 500 different non-profits and they want to invest in a couple Muslim non-profits and this is one of the most well known and prestigious Muslim non-profits? Is that possible?
It's always possible. It would even be likely a priori, if not for the evidence of a preexisting agenda. However, after accounting for everything they're involved in, the whole "random charitable contribution" thing is really a stretch. There's a reason the Rockefellers have only become more and more powerful and gained a larger and larger representation in powerful NGO's over the past century...and it's not because they act randomly or capriciously. Unlike Paris Hilton, they have demonstrated that they are very politically interested and act purposefully towards goals. I suppose I can hope for all the family heirs to live out their lives fishing and churning out cookbooks, but given their ambitious multi-generational track record, I don't see that happening.


I generally don't believe in people that are evil just because they enjoy being evil. Even Hitler thought he was doing good:
In a lot of cases, you're right: In their arrogance, a lot of the global elites think or want to think that they're doing good. Stalin probably thought he was doing good, and brutally eliminating all opposition was simply a matter of breaking a few eggs to make an omelette. That didn't make him any less a villain or enemy of freedom.

Some people just don't care one way or another. War profiteers who covertly lobby for war may or may not think they're doing good, but one way or another, I gather that moral questions are not exactly their priorities either.

Others actually do defy your belief, in that they are deliberately cruel simply because they enjoy being cruel: Consider Ted Bundy, or maybe the Guantanamo Bay girl. You might recall the rapist from Sin City, who couldn't get off unless the girl screamed? That kind of person is not confined to make-believe movies. There are some seriously evil and psychologically twisted people in this world, whether you want to acknowledge them or not. Maybe you'd rather consider them crazy than evil, and that's fine, but whatever you want to call them, they exist. Furthermore, I think it's foolish and naive to immediately assume that all such people are plebeian nobodies with no real power.

Still, it's hardly necessary for people to consider themselves evil overlords for them to manipulate events in their favor, and real-life historical villains have rarely if ever been so self-aware; all that is necessary is for them to have ambitious goals and a willingness to use sneaky and manipulative methods to achieve them. (Generally speaking, anyone with megalomaniacal goals is going to have a very manipulative personality and few if any scruples about means anyway.)


YouTube - Austin Powers - Sharks with lasers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh7bYNAHXxw)
Never forget that the James Bond megalomaniacs that inspired Dr. Evil were themselves caricatures of the real-life megalomaniac archetype.


How much of the $100 million is coming from the Rockefellers? And if this is really part of their nefarious plot wouldn't they conceal it a bit more?

It wouldn't even be hard... just fund it through a dummy/front organization.
Why would they bother, when they know the majority of people will adopt your viewpoint on the matter? On the surface, they have plausible deniability regarding their motive, after all.


I also question why people shouldn't like the Mosque to begin with. Or why funding the Mosque is a bad thing? Muslims have a right just like anyone else.
To clarify my position here, I would actually have no real problem with anyone funding the mosque in and of itself, assuming they had good faith motives. On one hand, the location is a bit insensitive and can come off looking like a taunt, but on the other hand, putting a mosque there is a great way to avoid terrorist attacks. ;) In and of itself, I consider it a wash, and barring political implications, it's none of my business anyway.

However, there's no question that the mosque has become a divisive hot button issue. It's driving mainstream conservatives, who traditionally favor property rights, to emotionally abandon that stance in favor of eminent domain and other property-violating government intervention as a solution (to impose bigotry). This result is obviously beneficial to statists. The whole issue is also giving demagogues a new opportunity to stir up anti-Muslim sentiment, an attitude which helped enable the wars and police state expansions of the 2000's. Moreover, dividing people into polarized camps for its own sake has always been an effective strategy for preventing people from uniting against the establishment as a whole. Basically, if regular Joe Schmoe's (or Omar Muhammed's) were funding the mosque, I'd consider all of this an unfortunate side effect they made a mistake not to foresee...but when the Rockefellers are involved, that puts it all in a whole new light.

[parocks]

They should have known this would cause trouble - that'll take care of motives.
I'm confident that if people know those 2 facts, it would have great effects, but it wouldn't immediately solve all known problems. We're being told it's the muslims who are doing this, it's actually the CFR. That's a resonant message.



Well, it depends on what you're trying to get across: We can get across the idea that the mosque is not some grassroots effort by ordinary Muslims, and we can shift the social conservatives' anger towards the CFR and Rockefellers for it, yes. That will put them on the radar as opponents, and it will be helpful.

Still, they have plausible deniability regarding their motives: To anyone unaware of the Rockefellers' and CFR's agendas, it looks like nothing more than a charitable contribution by liberal-leaning organizations. The idea that they're movers and shakers with a broader agenda is going to be lost on anyone who didn't already know it, so the actual motives (undermine property rights, fuel a cultural war, and embolden neocons) will remain unexposed.

[Mini-Me]

They should have known this would cause trouble - that'll take care of motives.
I'm confident that if people know those 2 facts, it would have great effects, but it wouldn't immediately solve all known problems. We're being told it's the muslims who are doing this, it's actually the CFR. That's a resonant message.

Good point. :)

[BlackTerrel]

They should have known this would cause trouble - that'll take care of motives.
I'm confident that if people know those 2 facts, it would have great effects, but it wouldn't immediately solve all known problems. We're being told it's the muslims who are doing this, it's actually the CFR. That's a resonant message.

I don't think anyone would buy it. I also don't think 90% of people know what the CFR is. This is the list of the people in the foundation according to your link.


Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf

Founder of ASMA and Chairman of Cordoba Initiative.

Read Bio
Daisy Khan

Executive Director and Co-Founder.

Read Bio
Laila Al-Askari

Director of Administration and Finance at The Brick Presbyterian Church

Read Bio
Ranya Idliby

Author of The Faith Club

Read Bio
Naz Ahmed Georges

Sabeeha Rehman, FACHE

Director, Interfaith Programs.

Read Bio
STAFF MEMBERS

Daisy Khan

Executive Director and Co-Founder.

Read Bio
Sabeeha Rehman, FACHE

Director, Interfaith Programs.

Read Bio

That they receive funding by a bunch of charitable organizations some of them Rockefeller groups won't mean much to non conspiracy oriented types. I also don't think this funding goes to the Mosque itself. They are a prominent Muslim organization that has been around since 1997. How much money did they get from the Rockefellers and the other charities on that list?

I'm also getting from you that you think it is somehow wrong or highly offensive for a Mosque to be built two blocks from Ground Zero where there used to be a Burlington Coat Factory - I disagree.

[BlackTerrel]

Mini-Me,

Thanks for your well thought out reply. I appreciate the time you put into it. I admit I am a novice when it comes to some of this stuff and I know very little about this family.

The one thing you didn't answer: why make it so obvious if this is part of their plan? The information was not hard to find at all and it is right there on the website. Hiding it would be VERY easy. Can't they just have a couple front groups rather than name themselves as Rockefellers?

[Mini-Me]

Mini-Me,

Thanks for your well thought out reply. I appreciate the time you put into it. I admit I am a novice when it comes to some of this stuff and I know very little about this family.

The one thing you didn't answer: why make it so obvious if this is part of their plan? The information was not hard to find at all and it is right there on the website. Hiding it would be VERY easy. Can't they just have a couple front groups rather than name themselves as Rockefellers?

Oops...I was still editing it at my leisure, thinking you probably went to bed and would continue posting in the morning. :o

I tacked on my answer in an edit above, but I'll copy/paste:
"Why would they bother, when they know the majority of people will adopt your viewpoint on the matter? On the surface, they have plausible deniability regarding their motive, after all."

It's worthwhile to return to your point that they fund tons of non-profits. Some actually are even legitimate charities, and I'm not sure whether they're actually trying to do good through this (because they consider themselves good) or whether it's no more than a reputation-boosting smokescreen. It's probably a bit of both. Still, my general conclusion is that most of their funding is less charity and more...investment.

Anyway, powerful philanthropists like the Rockefellers have their hands and money in a lot of different think tanks, NGO's, companies, and causes. Supporting each one "nudges" public sentiment and/or public policy in a desirable direction almost imperceptibly, but the combined impact is much larger. (To give a parallel example, Rupert Murdoch owns an ungodly number of local and regional news companies. Each one makes only a small impact, but taken together, they are a force to be reckoned with in shaping public discourse...otherwise known as propagandizing, in less subtle terms. ;)) If the mosque funding is only one such nudge, it wouldn't really be worth setting up a front organization just to channel this single investment. It probably wouldn't be discovered, but if it were, the attempt at disguising their involvement in such an apparently "innocuous" project might raise more eyebrows than it's worth.

Instead, assuming this was deliberate string-pulling, I imagine the only involvement an actual Rockefeller had would have been briefly mentioning ASMA, etc. as a worthy funding candidate to someone running their organizations. The actual "plot" may have been no more complex than an experimental toy idea in one man's mind over lunch one day. Cut-throat marketers and business strategists do a similar kind of plotting all the time when they try to think of innovative ways to out-maneuver their competition. The basic idea is the same in the Rockefellers' case, but the stakes are higher and more political, and they have broader resources at their disposal, which open up more creative options. Well, that and they're probably a bit better and more experienced at it than the average business strategist. (I definitely don't consider them infallible though; everyone makes mistakes, especially the most prideful, and especially when they're so busy moving so many hands at once. To give just one example, you could say they made the mistake of not letting Ron Paul accidentally die in a completely accidental horrible accident thirty years ago. ;) That said, I couldn't say for certain that they're the assassinating type anyway. It wouldn't surprise me though.)

All that said, they do already control plenty of organizations without the Rockefeller name in the title anyway, and they could have funded the mosque through one of them for slightly better subtlety. Why didn't they? I can't say for certain, but my best guess is to take another look at appearances: On the surface, their mosque support actually boosts their charitable philanthropy record, because it looks like they're just trying to do a good deed and promote tolerance. After all, that's what it looks like to you, correct? (Heck, it might even be what it looks like on its face, and I could be wrong.) It's only when you cross-reference it with their Trilateral Commission efforts and generally statist political agenda that you might suspect ulterior motives. It's still speculative and inconclusive...but it fits well enough that I consider it pretty suspicious. After seeing one speculative and inconclusive bit of circumstantial evidence after another, where they all correlate and pile on top of each other, I can't help but start assuming the worst by default. I mean, someone might be able to prove my guess wrong about this or that specific example, but...even if someone were able to demonstrate that it doesn't always eat like a duck, I'd still think it's awfully suspicious that it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck. ;)

I admit that I've gotten to the point where I basically see a conspiracy in everything, but I'm not sure what that actually means. I know I'm not paranoid in the literal sense, since I don't think anyone's out to get me specifically, but that alone doesn't make me right. I've had personal experience with some very calculating, manipulative people, and that definitely colors my view of how often people act purposely towards goals [whether overtly or covertly]. (I think I'm just naturally cynical, too.) I might be over-analyzing and connecting dots improperly, or maybe my mistrustful and cynical nature helps me recognize subtle but real connections. I probably go overboard with speculation based on "Cui bono?" but sometimes speculation is all we have to work with. One way or another, I actually know much less about the Rockefellers than a lot of other people do, but I've read enough on "teh infallible Internets" that they seriously creep me out and appear to conform to my expectations for arrogant power-seeking types. I'd put nothing past them. I don't think they alone run the world or anything (the "elites" are much more than just the Rockefellers, and even as a whole they aren't anywhere near omnipotent), but I definitely think they're politically interested, not on our side, and have a frighteningly large sphere of influence.

[johngr]

Good find! The best possible motive I can think of is the age-old "divide and conquer," because that's certainly how the whole issue has played out. There could be other motives too, though. Either way, this is quite interesting.

Muslims, anti-Muslims and the rest of Americans were never "united" in the first place. I see it more as a stunt to revive flagging support for the ME wars and to get more mileage out of the 911 psyops.

[PatriotOne]

Why would you do that? If you were a Rockefeller you'd already be rich as hell - why would you spend all day in a smoky room coming up with plans to kill people and cause mayhem? Seems like a stretch.

I don't know much about the Rockefeller's other than what I read on RPF

And yet you post a whole lot of assumptions about a subject you don't know jack about.

[parocks]

I haven't commented at all about whether a mosque should be built there, good or bad.

My point is that the conservatives at Free Republic who don't like Ron Paul because they think he's too friendly with muslims will think differently about muslims (and Ron Paul) when they hear that it's not muslims that are building this mosque, but it's the CFR imam, the Rockefellers, the NWO, the global elite, who are pushing to get the mosque built.

These conservatives on FR do not want there to be a mosque at ground zero.
They think that it's the muslims who want the mosque. Because of that, they're mad at muslims.

When they learn that it's the CFR, the Rockefellers, the NWO, one world government types who want to build the mosque, they will be mad at the CFR, Rockefellers, etc.

This Rockefeller mosque issue is a much bigger story over on Free Republic than it is here. They don't like the mosque and they don't like muslims because of it (or it's reminding people about muslims).


I don't think anyone would buy it. I also don't think 90% of people know what the CFR is. This is the list of the people in the foundation according to your link.



That they receive funding by a bunch of charitable organizations some of them Rockefeller groups won't mean much to non conspiracy oriented types. I also don't think this funding goes to the Mosque itself. They are a prominent Muslim organization that has been around since 1997. How much money did they get from the Rockefellers and the other charities on that list?

I'm also getting from you that you think it is somehow wrong or highly offensive for a Mosque to be built two blocks from Ground Zero where there used to be a Burlington Coat Factory - I disagree.