Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

News Developing On Faisal Gill

By Greg L | 24 January 2007 | 51st HOD District | 25 Comments

I’m hearing some rumors that the real story about the cancellation of Faisal Gill’s campaign kickoff is not what we’ve been lead to believe. Before I post what I have, I’d like to get some additional confirmation. If any readers out there have the inside story, and I know some of you do, drop me a line so I’m sure I get this right and save myself some headaches down the road.

In related news, Faisal Gill will be opposed in his quest to obtain the Republican nomination, and that is not the only reason the Faisal Gill camp looks a little less impressive and somewhat down-in-the-mouth lately. More on all of this as it develops. In the meantime, I’ve got lots of leads that can use some confirmation.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.

25 Comments

  1. Jonathan Mark said on 24 Jan 2007 at 9:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    That’s great news. I hope to be able to drive down some weekends and volunteer for whoever opposes Gill in the primary. Please be sure to post the URL for making online donations to whoever is running, hopefully Mrs. Lucas.

    Faisal still has $51,000. He should be considered armed (with cash) and dangerous.

  2. Loudoun Insider said on 24 Jan 2007 at 10:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, I’m glad we found this guy! I’m still absolutely amazed that Jim Moran continues to be elected, and I’ll be in just as much disbelief if Gill wins the republican nomination.

  3. Anonymous said on 24 Jan 2007 at 10:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    One question, is Faisal Gill a Muslim? If so, there’s no way he’ll ever in a hundred years get the GOP nomination.

  4. Greg L said on 24 Jan 2007 at 11:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    Yes he is, and no, it doesn’t by itself make an ounce of difference.

  5. Anonymous said on 24 Jan 2007 at 11:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    I suspect that the stunning silence of the GOP in the face of Virgil Goode’s recent anti-Muslim diatribe indicates that most Republicans secretly (or openly) share Goode’s xenophobic/ bigoted convictions and will never in a hundred years nominate a Muslim like Gill for office. Hopefully I’m wrong but the fact that Virgil was not roundly censured by his GOP brethren suggests otherwise.

  6. charles said on 25 Jan 2007 at 12:06 am:
    Flag comment

    Don’t know, Greg. I originally heard the meeting was being cancelled NOT from Faisal, and it was for the reasons I stated. The only information I received directly from Gill was the confirmation of cancellation. I trust my source, but that doesn’t mean I have the entire story.

    All the other rumors I have heard are good for Gill, but as you know I don’t do rumors so I won’t talk about them unless they are actually announced.

  7. Spank That Donkey said on 25 Jan 2007 at 12:11 am:
    Flag comment

    Virgil Goode is 110% correct on his view on Muslim immigration to the USA.

    Democrats may want America to look like the basket case that Europe is now with unfettered Mulsim immigration, but realistic people, and gutsy US Reps. like Virgil Goode do not!

    I look forward to the Day when Democrats don’t hide behind anonymous comments and come out in the open to debate the real issues that confront our nation…

  8. Anonymous said on 25 Jan 2007 at 12:20 am:
    Flag comment

    Umm, spankster, I looked on your website and I can’t find any mention of your identity either. So, either put up or shut up.

    And by the way, I think your post just validated my earlier point. So, thanks for that.

  9. Greg L said on 25 Jan 2007 at 12:49 am:
    Flag comment

    Anon, I know Chris, who runs Spank That Donkey, and although he doesn’t throw his identity up for every casual nutcase to peruse, those of us in the blogging realm know him very well. I’ll excuse you for not knowing what happens among bloggers, but you’re off the mark here.

  10. Jonathan Mark said on 25 Jan 2007 at 10:18 am:
    Flag comment

    Anon, if being unwilling to nominate Faisal Gill means that Republicans are prejudiced, then the Dems must be equally prejudiced. Because I don’t see them nominating Faisal Gill either.

  11. Citizen Tom said on 25 Jan 2007 at 1:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    News Developing On Faisal Gill? A rumor mill is rews? “I’m hearing some rumors that the real story about the cancellation of Faisal Gill’s campaign kickoff is not what we’ve been lead to believe.” This statement is the epitome of gossip. It suggests much without actually saying anything.
    I can understand a post requesting information, but that is not what the title suggests. If you are going to report news, then report what know. Don’t make it up or suggest you have information when you actually don not have anything. Gossip is not news. You can do better than this.

  12. Greg L said on 25 Jan 2007 at 2:25 pm:
    Flag comment

    Given that Faisal Gill is enamored with the idea of filing baseless lawsuits against bloggers, the news that I would like to post needs to have additional sources before I can go live with it. In this case readers can assist in the development of this story, and I’m pretty sure some of them have the ability to do that.

    Lots of news stories start out as rumor, become substantiated, and then transition into news stories. For those of us bloggers who actually investigate our own stories, this is often the way news develops. If you’re not happy that readers get to be part of this, well, that’s unfortunate.

  13. Spank That Donkey said on 25 Jan 2007 at 3:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg:
    is Anon 12:20 just stalking your blog? Maybe he should get out more often and defend terrorists everywhere for our enjoyment, and enlightenment.

  14. Citizen Tom said on 25 Jan 2007 at 8:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, let me get this straight. You are trying to avoid “baseless lawsuits.” How? You are trying to obtain proof that what you say is true before you post it. I wonder how you learned about this innovative procedure. Would it have anything to do with baseless lawsuits?

    Do you really think anyone should post accusations before they have their facts straight?

    In your defense against “baseless suits,” please consider adding one more item to your personal repertoire. Until you have substantiated an accusation with proof, do not presume to know the Truth.

  15. Greg L said on 25 Jan 2007 at 9:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    Regardless of the merits or lack thereof of pending litigation, it’s certain that Faisal Gill will stop at nothing to attack his political opponents if given any slim hope of doing so. Even if a suit has no merit, the defense of a suit is tiresome, inconvenient, and somewhat expensive. Do I exercise more caution in regard to Faisal Gill than I might otherwise? You bet. He is smart enough to be dangerous, and his judgment is very questionable.

    I want to make it as difficult as possible for him to file a suit, even though I’ve no doubt it is what he will do no matter how careful my criticism of him is. Jad Sansour’s flippant remarks about defamation lawsuits to a reporter in Texas a few months ago certainly seem to speak to the culture that Sapentia/Gill & Gallinger is creating, and I’m certain that if they identify any convenient ham sandwiches out there, they’ll end up with a summons, too.

    I want to make it as hard as possible for Faisal Gill to file the lawsuit I’m sure he so desperately wants to file, while continuing to call ‘em like I see ‘em and dig out what the story is that some don’t want voters to know. Find fault with it if you must, but that’s the blog I run. I investigate, I dig, and I tell folks some of the things they can’t get anywhere else.

    I don’t just tell folks my opinion about what they heard about elsewhere.

  16. Citizen Tom said on 25 Jan 2007 at 10:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, I suspect most Americans regard lawyers smart and dangerous, and I also suspect that most people question the judgment of lawyers. Fiscal Gill is hardly unique in that regard. What puzzles me is why we elect lawyers to public office. Nonetheless, if the threat of “baseless lawsuits” causes you to be careful in your accusations, I have a hard time seeing that as a bad outcome.

  17. The Skeptic said on 26 Jan 2007 at 12:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Okay Greg, I’ll play this game with you.

    What candidate in their right mind would cancel out on the highest ranking Republican in the Commonwealth of Virginia 24 hours prior to a scheduled event?

    One must question if the real reason is because Bolling canceled out on them?

    Could it be possible that some elected officials who endorsed him may be having second thoughts?

    AND, IF this is the case, wouldn’t Bolling be one of the first to know if there is new discovery that may lead to a possble indictment?

  18. Greg L said on 26 Jan 2007 at 12:32 am:
    Flag comment

    I have not heard that Gill canceled on Bolling. Beyond that, let me just say that I want to get more confirmation before saying what I have heard.

  19. charles said on 28 Jan 2007 at 3:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, you certainly HAVE heard that Gill cancelled on Bolling. I told you that Gill cancelled on Bolling.

    Maybe you meant you haven’t heard that Bolling cancelled on Gill. I don’t know all the details, but I know that Bolling did not cancel on Gill. In fact, the reason the announcement was so late was to coordinate with Bolling and the other “celebrities” who were invited. I first heard of the cancellation much earlier, but was told it wouldn’t be confirmed until the invitees were contacted.

    Greg also said: “Regardless of the merits or lack thereof of pending litigation, it’s certain that Faisal Gill will stop at nothing to attack his political opponents if given any slim hope of doing so”

    The only thing that is certain is that this site will stop at nothing to attack Faisal Gill. I see no evidence that Gill has ANYTHING to do with any pending litigation, other than being the attorney employed by a private citizen in pending litigation.

    Any evidence that Gill is pressuring Chapman to continue this lawsuit would be “interesting”. That is not my understanding.

  20. Greg L said on 28 Jan 2007 at 3:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Gill is the one who briefly negotiated in regards to a settlement with my attorney on behalf of Mr. Chapman. Gill made the decision to have his form represent Chapman pro-bono. Gill represented himself as the one who counseled Steve Chapman in a legal capacity to file the lawsuit in the first place, according to the Potomac News.

    I believe every communication by my attorney with Mr. Chapman goes through Faisal Gill. I have been told that Faisal Gill is encouraging this lawsuit to continue during his campaign as a means of trying to discourage any commentary by me on his campaign. Charles, everything I’ve seen and have been told leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the only reason this lawsuit is still alive is because Faisal Gill wants it that way.

  21. Harry said on 30 Jan 2007 at 5:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    What’s the deal with him? I’ve read that he was a lobbyist at one point for Hamas or Hezbalah, this can’t be true, er, can it?

  22. Greg L said on 30 Jan 2007 at 6:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    He was a consultant, political affairs director, or spokesman (depending on the source) for the American Muslim Council, and the Islamic Institute which were headed by convicted terrorist Abduraman Alamoudi, who declared himself to be a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah. Faisal Gill has never stated on the record that he supports them.

  23. pwcman said on 2 Feb 2007 at 11:32 am:
    Flag comment

    faisal is not supporter of Hammas or anyother terror organization. He was associated with American Muslim council, which had hundreds of members. Alamoudi happened to be the “bad apple”among the good ones. I don’t think anyone can hold faisal responsible for Alamoudi’s wrongdoings. It would be as redicoulous as blaming President Reagan, Bush Senior, and President Clinton for supporting and creating Talibans and Osama bin Laden. All these presidents supported them to fight against Soviet Union. America supplied them with weapons, training and money to fight the Russians…….talibans were called freedom fighters back then…

    Look what we are going through now? Talibans are our biggest enemies, Osama is the most feared and most wanted terrorist out there. Howcome we re-elected President Bush knowing that his “papa” was once “the biggest supporter”of Talibans, especially Osama.

    Don’t you think that we are all being rough on Faisal because he is muslim and we are afraid that he will open the doors for other muslims to run for office? If this is our fear then we should be ashamed of ourselves. We have come a long way since we elected first catholic president,JFK. I think we need to concentrate on what he can or can’t do for the county, if elected. You guys are supporting a “tootsie roll” just because she is not faisal, it is so pathetic.

  24. CONVA said on 4 Feb 2007 at 4:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    As a muslim, Gill is obligated to follow the Koran. The Koran stipulates that it is his duty to convert infidels to Islam, or force them to pay jizyah (tax), or kill them. That is 7th century thinking. The Christain faith also had many zany stipulations in that time frame. The difference is that Christianity has got over that nonsense where as Islam is still in the time warp of that date. It is up to Gill and other Muslims to reject the 7th century philosophy publically and often, or we can only assume they endorse it.

  25. mohmammd said on 5 Feb 2007 at 12:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dear conva, I have no idea where you got these things about islam. The Koran does not say that “kill the non muslims”. The Koran clearly says that a Muslim man can marry a non muslim who believs in a holy book(bible, tora.etc). That means that muslims are allow to marry christians and jews. I suggest that you read koran before making any references. The koran is availble in english, i can provide you a copy if you like.

Comments are closed.


Views: 3375