Dr. Faiz Khan is a former board member of  the American Society for Muslim Advancement, along with Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan, better known as the founders of the Cordoba Intiative, the ones trying to build the Ground Zero Mosque.   

Khan was listed as one of three directors of the American Society for the Advancement of Muslims in its 1997 incorporation papers, when it went by the name of the American Sufi Muslim Association.

He has preached at least twice at the former Burlington Coat Factory building, the site of the proposed mosque.   He is a 9/11 Truther and is a founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, known as MUJCA.  Here is his biography according to their website:

Dr. Faiz Kahn is a Muslim scholar and educator as well as an M.D. with a dual specialty in emergency and internal medicine. He has been living and working in New York City since 1969. A 9/11 first responder, he has been in the forefront of post-9/11 peace and education efforts in New York and elsewhere.  He is well-known as a staunchly outspoken opponent of terror in all its guises, and has participated in two memorial services for the victims of 9/11, as well as the New York group Muslims Against Terrorism. Dr. Khan is the author of “9/11: An Islamic Perspective” published by Belief Net in their selection of essays on religion and 9/11. An Assistant Imam at two New York area mosques, Dr. Kahn has treated subjects related to Islam, politics, and 9/11 at numerous speaking engagements and publications. He also served as assistant producer to the film Becoming Muslim – Submitting to Allah in America.

Here’s is an excerpt from an article he wrote for the website.  This is a “Moderate” Muslim?

Most American Muslims, both lay, and “educated’ had lost their way from the very start.  However, for a few American minds of various religious persuasions, or no religious persuasion – as of September 12th, 2001 onward, the widely displayed “good Muslim – bad Muslim” dialectic just didn’t cut it as an explanation of why the attacks of 9/11 occurred and succeeded.  Their instincts served them correctly. 

The surest sign of intellectual incompetence within the mass of 9/11 discourse is blindly accepting the limits that are constructed in discussing the phenomenon, especially when this blind acceptance occurs in the face of clear and compelling evidence that the limits of discourse must be expanded if some sort of explanation of the attacks of 9/11 is to surface.  In effect, what occurred from September 12th onward was the emergence of a sustained yet unbelievably ludicrous mainstream explanation as to the factors that produced 9/11, followed by this mainstream’s frantic inquiry to “American Islam” asking how could such a thing emerge from ‘the nebulously frightful geographic and ideological Islamic World’ – as if the main cause of the assaults and their success on 9/11 came from this quarter. Naively, yet predictably, the American Muslim scene performed its role by reeling onto the defensive, and sucking the bait. Prominent Muslims busied themselves trying to explain “real Islam”, distracted by and then swallowing the “mainstream thesis.” Most completely neglected the grotesque inconsistencies and outright lies which suggest that the success of the attacks had less to do with “militant Islam” and more to do with the inescapable fact that 9/11 was an inside job.

The ‘9/11 Truth’ thesis categorically rejects the mainstream thesis and asserts that the prime factor for the success of the criminal mission known as 9/11 did not come from the quarter known as ‘militant Islam’ although the phenomenon known as ‘militant Islamic networks’ may have played a partial role, or even a less than  partial role – perhaps the role of patsy and scapegoat.

Moreover, the rise and popularization of so called militant Islamic networks, from these networks’ ideology to actual empowerment, and the linking of this to western corporate driven government covert operations – this relationship is one that needs to be explicitly and loudly proclaimed by Islamic voices.

In an e-mail exchange with The New York Post, Khan claimed that he ended his affiliation with the ASMA in “2002 and 2003,” although there is a record of him speaking at a 2006 ASMA conference in Copenhagen, where his bio listed him as a board member.

When The Post asked Khan who he thought was responsible for 9/11, he initially declined comment, but later said in an e-mail:

I am certain of a few things . . . The towers and WTC 7 could not have collapsed without controlled demolition place from the ‘inside.’

Ray Locker, managing director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, said:

For someone who claims he wants the mosque project near Ground Zero to help build bridges and heal the wounds from 9/11, it’s odd that one of Feisal Rauf’s fellow bridge builders is someone who thinks the attacks that killed more than 3,000 people were an ‘inside job’ by the US government.

Khan told a group of 9/11 deniers at a 2006 Chicago summit called “Revealing the Truth/Reclaiming Our Future” that

…the most logical explanation” for 9/11 is that the hijackers were working for corporate America and that the heroin trade creates “billions of dollars” that are laundered by “Citicorp and Procter & Gamble”.

Imam Rauf has refused to comment about the situation.  Now, this is the same guy who was recently sent, using our money, on a Middle Eastern “Goodwill” (fundraising) Tour and is supposedly a “Moderate” Muslim cleric.  Where are the funds for the Ground Zero Mosque going to come from?  And how about all their political support, including that of President Barack Hussein Obama (peace be unto him)? 

Like Lucy Ricardo, they’ve all got lots of ‘splainin’ to do.