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

Faisal Gill Evades Lobbyist Disclosure Laws

By Greg L | 29 May 2007 | 51st HOD District | 39 Comments

After Julie Lucas mailed out a flyer to 51st District residents mildly criticizing Faisal Gill for lobbying for increased government expenditures on behalf of his clients, Faisal Gill responded with his own mail piece saying that there’s nothing wrong with being a lobbyist, and includes pictures of RPV Chairman Ed Gillespie and Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, who have done lobbying in the past. So Gill admits that as a principal of Sapentia, LLC, he is a lobbyist. Interesting.

But is he registered as a lobbyist? He’s not registered in the State of Virginia as a lobbyist. He’s not registered with the United States Senate as a lobbyist. Federal law (2 U.S.C. Sec. 1603) requires lobbyists at the federal level to register with both the House and Senate within 45 days, and failure to register is punishable by up to $50,000 in civil fines. Virginia State law (VA Code Section 2.2-422) requires registration prior to conducting any lobbying, and the penalty is a $50 per day fine. Has Faisal Gill done any of this? It would appear that he has not. His partner in Sapentia, Asim Ghafoor, has.

I’m not sure how fond Ed Gillespie and Haley Barbour might be of Faisal Gill’s suggestion of their endorsement by using pictures of them on his mailers. I’m pretty sure they’re not going to be happy at all about being used as an example of how Faisal Gill’s activities are entirely innocuous when it appears that Faisal Gill is in violation of the law while doing so. Haley and Ed have complied with the law here, and being equated with someone who has not is pretty disturbing. If Faisal ends up angering the head of the RPV and a sitting Governor who is legendary for raising huge amounts of money for his political campaigns over this, it might have some impact on this race, depending on how upset they get.

Is this yet another instance of Faisal Gill cutting corners? It sure looks like it, although this time I would suspect it’s going to be a little harder for him to weasel his way out. Violating lobbyist disclosure requirements is pretty serious business, and the penalties are steep. Trying to make yourself look like Jack Abramoff is bad politics as well.

UPDATE: NLS has more here.

UPDATE 2: Here’s the page in the mailer in question. Click the image to “enbiggen”.  Notice the unusual tag line, which appears to be missing some punctuation marks.  It would read much more coherently as “No Way!  Julie Lucas, should she be our Delegate?  Yes!”



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.

39 Comments

  1. Loudoun Insider said on 29 May 2007 at 2:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    It’s probably more deep undercover work!

  2. Jonathan Mark said on 29 May 2007 at 2:26 pm:
    Flag comment

    Asim Ghafoor lobbies for the “Friends Of Charities Association”

    5. BELEW LAW FIRM FRIENDS OF CHARITIES ASSN GHAFOOR, ASIM REGISTRATION 2004
    6. BELEW LAW FIRM FRIENDS OF CHARITIES ASSN GHAFOOR, ASIM YEAR-END AMENDMENT Year-End (July 1 - Dec 31) 2004
    7. BELEW LAW FIRM FRIENDS OF CHARITIES ASSN GHAFOOR, ASIM MID-YEAR REPORT Mid-Year (Jan 1- Jun 30) 2005
    8. BELEW LAW FIRM FRIENDS OF CHARITIES ASSN GHAFOOR, ASIM YEAR-END REPORT Year-End (July 1 - Dec 31) 2005
    9. BELEW LAW FIRM FRIENDS OF CHARITIES ASSN GHAFOOR, ASIM MID-YEAR REPORT Mid-Year (Jan 1- Jun 30) 2006

    http://sopr.senate.gov/cgi-win/m_opr_viewer.exe?DoFn=3&LOB=GHAFOOR,%20ASIM&LOBQUAL==

    So what is the Friends of Charities Association, exactly? Read about in this 8/19/04 Washington Post article entitled “U.S. Eyes Money Trails of Saudi-Backed Charities”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A13266-2004Aug18?language=printer

    I am going to study this Washington Post article when I have time later this evening, and I hope others will do so as well.

    Scanning the article I see the names of our old friends Al-Haramain and Global Relief.

  3. Patrice Harrison said on 29 May 2007 at 2:26 pm:
    Flag comment

    This really is very Ho Hum stuff.

    What were Faisal Gill’s words in the mailing?? (I haven’t seen it)

    Did he explicitly admit to being a lobbyist?

    “Faisal Gill responded with his own mail piece saying that there’s nothing wrong with being a lobbyist”

    You can certainly argue that there is nothing wrong with being a lobbyist without admitting to being a lobbyist yourself….

    Why is this so hard to understand? It seems very elementary to me.

  4. Anonymous said on 29 May 2007 at 2:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    Yet another instance of dirty tricks by Faisal Gill! Why would ANYONE want to associate with him???

  5. Greg L said on 29 May 2007 at 3:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’ll have a scan of the flier up a little later on. Stay tuned.

  6. Jonathan Mark said on 29 May 2007 at 3:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    First of all let me say that I cannot believe my eyes. A Faisal supporter has posted here and denied that Faisal is a lobbyist. All this person would have to do is visit the website of Faisal and Asim Ghafoor’s lobbying firm, Sapentia, LLC in order to confirm that the two men are lobbyists.

    http://www.sapentia.us/services

    “”"You can certainly argue that there is nothing wrong with being a lobbyist without admitting to being a lobbyist yourself….”"”

    You can. However, why would a candidate for office send out a mailing making this point if he were not, in fact, admitting to being a lobbyist?

    Let’s say I am running for office, and I am criticized for drinking a fifth of gin a day. If I responded with a mailer which does not deny the accusation but argues that drinking a fifth is okay then I have admitted to the charge.

  7. Patrice Harrison said on 29 May 2007 at 3:25 pm:
    Flag comment

    Jonathon Marks says: “First of all let me say that I cannot believe my eyes. A Faisal supporter has posted here and denied that Faisal is a lobbyist.”

    Clearly Mr. Marks has very poor reading comprehension. I never said that.

    Nevermind! JM will make up facts to suit his insipid arguments.

  8. John Light said on 29 May 2007 at 3:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Patrice, yes, Faisal comes straight out in his flyer and states that he is a lobbyist. He says something to the effect of that he is a lobbyist just as Hayley Barbour and Ed Gillespie. Stay tuned for Greg’s scan, best to see for yourself and remove all doubt then to believe someone who has only seen the flyer himself (me).

  9. Bryan J. Scrafford said on 29 May 2007 at 3:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    What I believe Jonathan was trying to get at (and correct me if I’m wrong) is the plain and simple fact that after the whole Abramoff scandal, most politicians are trying to put as much distance between them and lobbyists as possible. While they might say something in a speech such as “not all lobbyists are corrupt” or something along those lines, you won’t find very many people who are actually going to send out a mailer defending lobbyists unless they themselves have some experience is that particular trade.

  10. John Light said on 29 May 2007 at 4:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bryan, actually, in the flyer, Faisal states that he is a lobbyist. The problem that Greg pointed out is, nowhere is he registered as one. Just wonder who would be the agency to investigate this and if so, how would that affect Faisal IF he was to win on Saturday.

    It would be like me saying that I served as Counsel for someone in a Court of Law yet I am not licensed to practice law. He, Faisal, also stated that Ms. Lucas attacked lobbyists when, in fact, she was bringing forth the fact that his firm lobbies for organizations that are being investigated by the Department of Treasury.

    Both campaigns had a flyer that went out on approximately the same day. What would be great is if Greg was able to do a side-by-side of the two which would answer most questions being posed. That way we (read, people like me) won’t have to go off memory and if someone wants to debate a certain part of a lit piece, it’s right there for ALL (read, everyone on the world-wide web) to see.

  11. Mitch Cumstein said on 29 May 2007 at 4:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m not sure which is funnier: That Faisal puts himself in the company of Gillespie and Barbour or the amateurism of the piece. Very poorly written. I’d love to know who put this thing together.

    [Ed note: I have been told that the mailer was produced by Marcus & Allen]

  12. Loudoun Insider said on 29 May 2007 at 4:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    Maybe Kopko is doing some more consulting for Gill on these pieces!

  13. James Young said on 29 May 2007 at 5:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    Of course, Faisal says no such thing, JM and JL. He certainly does not “admit[] that as a principal of Sapentia, LLC, he is a lobbyist,” as Greg breathlessly alleges. Neither does his firm’s website say anything more remarkable than that THE FIRM engages in such activities.

    What he actually says is that “his firm represents” interests lobbying the government. What he says is his “law firm does lobbying work.” Of course, law firms are complex creatures. Not all members of a law firm engage in the same kind of work, and many law firms have principals who engage in highly specialized work. Even in the specialty of litigation, some perform exclusively appellate work, while others focus exclusively on trial work.

    It must be discouraging that the truth so unremarkable that you people have to construct and repeat elaborate lies to achieve your goals.

  14. Anonymous said on 29 May 2007 at 5:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    Jeeez James, that would be a great argument, if that firm had more than 2 people…

  15. Loudoun Insider said on 29 May 2007 at 5:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    James, here’s EXACTLY what Gill’s own lit piece says:

    “Faisal Gill, Ed Gillespie, and Haley Barbour - all Republicans - all lobbyists”

    Please get your Faisal Gill blinders off! Why would his own piece say this if he were not a lobbyist? This is really getting Clintonesque!

  16. Anonymous said on 29 May 2007 at 5:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    By which I point you to the email contacts…

    Address:
    8133 Leesburg Pike
    Suite 360
    Tysons Corner, VA 22182

    Phone:
    703-992-6849

    Email:
    Asim Ghafoor: asim@sapentia.us
    Faisal Gill: gillfm@sapentia.us

    Fax:
    703-991-7269

  17. Jonathan Mark said on 29 May 2007 at 5:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    If James Young and Patrice do not deny that Faisal is a lobbyist then what is the point of their comments?

    Referring to the obvious fact that the two-person lobbying firm of Sapentia LLC has Faisal and Asim Ghafoor as its principals, Jim Young natters:

    “”"”Of course, law firms are complex creatures. Not all members of a law firm engage in the…”"”

    Whereas Patrice carps:

    “”"You can certainly argue that there is nothing wrong with being a lobbyist without admitting to being a lobbyist yourself….”"”

    Why do Patrice and Jim Young dispute the simple, self-admitted (by Faisal) fact that Faisal is a lobbyist? What part of Gill For Delegate’s own literature:

    “”“Faisal Gill, Ed Gillespie, and Haley Barbour - all Republicans - all lobbyists””"

    do Patrice and James Young not understand?

  18. oldie said on 29 May 2007 at 5:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    Is it true that Julie Lucas has been dating a married man? If it is, where are the family values? Is this kind of leadership we need in PWC?

    You guys were so quick to find Jeff Dion’s add……How about doing some research on “Ms. Snow
    White”.

  19. Youngie said on 29 May 2007 at 6:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    Is it true that Faisal Gill has been dating a married man? If it is, where are the family values? Is this kind of leadership we need in PWC?

    You guys were so quick to find Jeff Dion’s add……How about doing some research on “Mr. Snow White”.

  20. Batson D. Belfrey said on 29 May 2007 at 6:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Is it true that Julie Lucas has been dating a married man? If it is, where are the family values? Is this kind of leadership we need in PWC? ”

    Moldie,

    You should at least cite a reference. Where is your proof?

    That is like me saying ‘Is it true that Gill had Hamas members to his house for dinner?, If so, where is his patriotism?”

  21. freedom said on 29 May 2007 at 6:09 pm:
    Flag comment

    What I am wondering is if, repeat IF Ed Gillespie and Haley Barbour (who, according to the flyer, are “…all Republicans and — all lobbyists”) in fact CONSENTED to the unquestionable flyer implication of being Gill supporters.

    I trust that they did NOT give such consent…but instead, that the flyer represents a last minute, frantic Gill “leap of faith” effort to convince casual Republicans that he’s a good, honest, reliable, and trustworthy guy. How sad.

  22. Patrice Harrison said on 29 May 2007 at 6:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    Geez Jonathon Marks, I don’t mean to be rude, but why are you so unbelievably ignorant??

    You write “Why do Patrice and Jim Young dispute the simple, self-admitted (by Faisal) fact that Faisal is a lobbyist?”

    If you had bothered to READ the entire thread, you would have seen me say this:

    “What were Faisal Gill’s words in the mailing?? (I haven’t seen it)”

    Did I dispute he was a lobbyist? No. I asked a simple question because I hadn’t seen the mailer.

    Are you on crack?

    Look… Obviously your thick skull blocks most of what you read from getting to your brain. But you at this point you are just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly fabricating things I have said. That is twice now in this thread.

    Jeez, I think Faisal Gill is the worst candidate for the Republicans to choose. He will get destroyed by Nichols. I’m supporting Julie all the way. But if everyone on Julie’s side does as poor of a job representing us, then we are in big trouble.

    Stop flailing around wildly. You are making a fool of yourself.

  23. freedom said on 29 May 2007 at 6:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    …but, on the other hand, we must all commend Mr Gill for having the legal prudence to finally stop using the US Navy uniform as a tool to advance his political career.

  24. Jonathan Mark said on 29 May 2007 at 6:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    Patrice asked, “”"Did I dispute he was a lobbyist? No. I asked a simple question because I hadn’t seen the mailer.”"”

    I thought that the answer was yes, Patrice disputed that Faisal was a lobbyist. That was my interpretation of “You can certainly argue that there is nothing wrong with being a lobbyist without admitting to being a lobbyist yourself….”

    “”"Jeez, I think Faisal Gill is the worst candidate for the Republicans to choose.”"”

    In that case I apologize for misunderstanding what she wrote.

  25. Greg L said on 29 May 2007 at 8:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    Cripes, there’s evidence that Faisal Gill has been evading legal requirements for his profession over at least the last six years, and all Faisal supporters can come up with is some wacky rumormongering about Julie Lucas’ personal relationships? That’s pretty stunning. I guess they just need more time to come up with a way to spin that Faisal Gill may be facing upwards of $150,000 in civil penalties for being an unregistered lobbyist, and his legendary failure to attend to detail has once again embarrassed him.

    Let’s see now, there’s reckless driving, failure to attend PWCRC meetings when he was Vice-Chair of the party, running the Taxpayer’s Alliance into the ground, screwing up a labor day picnic, huge numbers of problematic delegate filings, using his uniform as a campaign prop (against regulations), giving the “blog ate our candidate filing” excuse to the MJM on behalf of Steve Chapman’s campaign, and looking like a bag of donuts despite being required to maintain a level of fitness according to Navy standards.

    I’m sure I left some things out. It’s getting hard to keep track of this list.

  26. anon said on 29 May 2007 at 10:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    Since when was dating a married man a family value? Why do you think supporting a home wrecker supporting family values, Greg?

  27. AWCheney said on 29 May 2007 at 11:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    This is an unsubstantiated allegation of a desperate campaign that came right out of left field anon. Nobody is saying it is a “family value…they are only saying, “Where’s the substantiation (investigative report, witnesses, at least one other person claiming it to be true…with a real name)?” The allegations against Gill actually have real names on them.

  28. Greg L said on 29 May 2007 at 11:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    anon, I’m filing stories like that in the same folder I keep those that involve Faisal Gill being a secret agent. If you’ve got something serious for me to consider, drop me an email. In the meantime there are substantiated stories that are worth pursuing.

  29. anon said on 30 May 2007 at 12:12 am:
    Flag comment

    Every time I read a post about Faisal being a spy, Johnny Rivers’ tune pops into my head - “Secret Agent Man”.

    This video remake by a 2nd rate actor and German music icon is good for a laugh (turn up your volume):

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5723893266910487152

    Secret Agent Man - the new Faisal Gill theme song!

  30. James Young said on 30 May 2007 at 9:24 am:
    Flag comment

    I, for one, dismiss anonymous/pseudonymous posts regarding Julie as quickly as I dismiss those regarding Faisal. I would be shocked and surprised if those assertions were true, given what I know about Julie.

    I’m surprised that those of you who credit every negative, innuendo-filled, guilt-by-association comment about Faisal do so, however.

  31. Anonymous said on 30 May 2007 at 9:56 am:
    Flag comment

    I am not sure most republicans are going to be happy with Gillespie. He was closely allied with Harriet Miers, a liberal and a lightweight Supreme Court nominee.

    Gillespie also told Rush Limbaugh to his face that the era of small government is over and that the era of Reagan is over.

    Gillespie led the fight for the White House to massively increase Government SPENDING. The Reagan budgets were less than one trillion dollars when Reagan left office. Now the Federal Budgets are over three trillion with large deficits.

    Gillespie destroyed major parts of the conservative movement by arm twisting, lobbying and threatening many congressmen to vote for liberal Bush spending policies.

    Does Gill endorse those policies?

  32. Jonathan Mark said on 30 May 2007 at 10:41 am:
    Flag comment

    “”"I’m surprised that those of you who credit every negative, innuendo-filled, guilt-by-association comment about Faisal do so, however.”"”

    Faisal Gill was the chief lobbyist for the imprisoned Abdurahman Alamoudi’s American Muslim Council. When we say, “Google Faisal Gill” we mean do your own research or follow the links we post.

    Sift through the evidence to see if Faisal did what we say, if his partnership with Asim Ghafoor is what we say it is, etc.

    Compare our hard facts about Faisal to the unsourced postings about Julie. There is Mary Hill’s Faisal-was-a-secret-agent narrative, and there is Oldie’s claim about someone’s sex life.

    For some hard facts about Faisal, just Google Faisal Gill. The first article which popped up is Michelle Malkin’s “Who is Faisal Gill?” Malkin cites an earlier Salon magazine report on Gill. James Young should tell us what of the following he claims is false. Remember also that since the time of the Malkin/Salon articles Abdurahman Alamoudi has pleaded guilty and received a 23-year sentence for terrorist money-laundering:

    http://www.michellemalkin.com/archives/000070.htm

    “”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"
    [Gill was] briefly removed from his job in March when the Federal Bureau of Investigation discovered he had failed to disclose his association with Abdurahman Alamoudi, a jailed American Muslim leader. Alamoudi was indicted last year on terrorism-related money-laundering charges and now claims to have been part of a plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Abdullah.

    —SNIP—-

    After a flurry of interagency meetings, however, Homeland Security decided to leave the policy director, Faisal Gill, in place, according to two government officials with knowledge of the Alamoudi investigation. A White House political appointee with close ties to Republican power broker Grover Norquist and no apparent background in intelligence, Gill has access to top-secret information on the vulnerability of America’s seaports, aviation facilities and nuclear power plants to terrorist attacks.

    —-SNIP—-

    The FBI raised concerns with Homeland Security officials in March after discovering that Gill had failed to list on security clearance documents his work in 2001 with the American Muslim Council, the officials said. The advocacy group, which was controlled by Alamoudi, has been under scrutiny in an investigation of terrorism financing. The lead agent in that investigation works for an arm of Homeland Security. Gill’s omission of the information on his “Standard Form 86″ national security questionnaire is a potential felony violation. There is no evidence, however, that Gill has taken any action to compromise national security.

    A Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman would not comment on Gill or when he was hired, except to say that a “thorough investigation” by the department’s Office of Security found no basis to deny the 32-year-old lawyer a security clearance. Among Gill’s political patrons is Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform and a key ally of the White House. Gill listed Norquist as a reference on employment documents, the government officials said. Gill also worked in 2001 for a Muslim political outreach organization that Norquist co-founded with a former top aide to Alamoudi. Norquist did not respond to phone calls, a fax and an e-mail seeking comment.

    “”"”

    How about it Jim Young? Tell us what in the above article you believe is false. Tell us, if you can.

  33. James Young said on 30 May 2007 at 11:20 am:
    Flag comment

    JM, I was tempted to suggest that you go directly to Hell, but it is clear to all those who read your posts that you exist in your own little private Hell. It doesn’t do any good to tell you which of your CONCLUSIONS, INFERENCES, and IMPLICATIONS is false, because frankly, you don’t care. You have these little macros that you post with the industry of a beaver, and act as though simply because Faisal was once around some people who were engaged in illicit activity means that Faisal, too, was engaged in illicit activity.

    And yet, Faisal is neither in jail, nor under indictment, nor even a witness, so far as we are aware.

    To use your construction, someone could also say “F. Lee Bailey was, for a period of time, regularly seen in the company of convicted murderer Sam Shepard.”

    You’ve created this little fantasy out of your obviously racist beliefs about anyone who is a Muslim, and who dares to associate with other Muslims. It’s a sad little cloudcuckooland that you inhabit, and sadder still that yours may be seen by some mainstream, moderate Muslims who want to be good Americans as a stereotypical American voice.

  34. Anonymous said on 30 May 2007 at 11:44 am:
    Flag comment

    File this entire thread under “this is the week BVBL will desparately throw everything against the wall to see what sticks against Faisal Gill”

    My prediction: Gill wins on June 2.

  35. Anonymous said on 30 May 2007 at 1:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    I am most concerned about the six year relationship with law partner Asim who is suing George Bush and the Department of Homeland Security for investigating terrorism.

    Why is Gill and his law firm obstructing terror investigations?

    Do they want the terrorists to accomplish their goals?

    Gill and his law firm threaten to expose the intelligence collection process in open court thereby aiding the enemy avoid detection in the future.

  36. Jonathan Mark said on 30 May 2007 at 1:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    “”"act as though simply because Faisal was once around some people who were engaged in illicit activity means that Faisal, too, was engaged in illicit activity.”"”

    I am glad that James Young uses the phrase “illicit activity.” While all illegal activity is illicit, not all illicit activity is illegal.

    For instance, lying is an illicit activity. Cheating on your girl friend or boy friend is an illicit activity. Praying to Satan is an illicit activity. Yet all of these activities are usually legal.

    So let us keep in mind the concept of “illicit activity” when we ask what it was that Faisal was lobbying for when he was the AMCs chief lobbyist.

    Yesterday Not Larry Sabato commented on some now-known illicit activity of Faisal’s. In 2001 Faisal while the AMC chief lobbyist stormed out of a White House meeting to protest the exclusion of the now-imprisoned Sami Al-Arian’s son. Faisal and some other representatives of extremist groups such as the Moslem Public Affairs Council then issued an insulting letter that denigrated the White House security personnel.

    You can read Not Larry Sabato’s article about Gill here.

    http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2007/05/memorial_day_me.html

    It has a link ot the original article in IslamOnline describing the incident.

    http://www.islamonline.net/english/news/2001-06/29/article2.shtml

    “”"And yet, Faisal is neither in jail, nor under indictment, nor even a witness, so far as we are aware.”"”

    James Young writes at the top of his posting about “illicit” or shameful activity. Yet when he defends Faisal he claims that Faisal has done nothing illegal. But as I point out, the two concepts are not identical.

    I would hope that as AMC chief lobbyist Faisal has made certain that his interactions with his boss/client Abdurahman Alamoudi did not involve Faisal himself engaging in illegal acts.

    Did Faisal know that there was something funny with AMCs finances (i.e. money from Libya?) He may have suspected. He may not have.

    One former AMC volunteer said that he suspected something was wrong because the organization was always pleading poverty but maintained a large office and staff. The former volunteer said that he asked Alamoudi for access to the AMCs financial information, and Alamoudi refused. The volunteer then quit.

    Faisal would have been stupid to have committed illegal acts at the behest of Abdurahman Alamoudi. But ILLICIT acts? Yes, Faisal engaged in them. One incident we know of was the letter Faisal signed denigrating White House security personnel. Another was the very act of Faisal storming out of the White House in the first place.

    Just because the people Faisal was with stormed out of the White House and wrote a nasty letter impugning the WH security people doesn’t mean that Faisal had to.

    What if the people Faisal was with had jumped off a cliff. Would Faisal have jumped off a cliff too?

  37. Anonymous said on 30 May 2007 at 2:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    With JY it’s always an attack of the person, not the issue.

  38. Unbiased Bystander said on 31 May 2007 at 2:05 am:
    Flag comment

    Since everyone wants to attack Faisal Gill all the time, I thought I’d go against the norm and turn the tables. From my understanding, Julie Lucas is having an “affair/relationship” with a gentleman by name of John Light. Coincidentally, there is a gentleman by the name of John Light who posts on this blog and continuously bashes Faisal Gill at every opportunity. Mr. Light is said to have been married (could be separated right now) while conducting this affair with Ms. Lucas. Everyone questioned Faisal Gill’s donors because a majority of them lived outside of the district. Could it be that they just wanted to support a fellow Muslim? What interest does John Light, a resident of Springfield, VA, have in this election being conducted in a different county than he currently resides in? Ms. Lucas’ reports show that Mr. Light has donated $100 of his hard-earned money to her campaign (I’ll stop short of calling him a cheapskate). One would think someone who’s romantically linked with one of the candidates would be more than willing to support her a little more financially. Instead, he shows his adoration for her by continuously belittling her opponent to no end. What happened to the so-called “family values” that Ms. Lucas brings to the table? So much for this wholesome image she tries to portray. Greg, since you seem to be so pro-Julie (or maybe it’s just anti-Faisal), before you decide to delete this post, I suggest you merely ask around. That should be more than enough proof. Thank you for your time.

  39. freedom said on 31 May 2007 at 7:33 am:
    Flag comment

    Unbiased Bystander….

    I wish we were not faced with a candidates whose past record warrants what you call “…attack all the time.” Unfortunately, the record of Faisal Gill is there; it’s there and it’s available to the public for evaluation. I wish it weren’t, both for his sake and for our sake, but it is. There are those who wish to ignore that record, but it’s there — it can’t be erased. We didn’t create it, we can’t erase it…sadly it’s there, like it or not.

    There are those who support Gill without knowing his past association with convicted terrorists. There are those who do not know of his abominable driving record and apparent disregard for traffic laws. There are those who do not know (or recognize the illegality) of using the military uniform to advance his political career — as a retired Air Force officer, I find that particularly distasteful. …and his performance record goes on and on. These are not “minor issues,” and speaking of his record does not constitute “an attack all the time.”

    I wish those facts of character did not exist so we could concentrate ONLY on key issues of the community — taxes, roads, schools, immigration and so on. However, his record IS there, and it’s the best way I know to predict future performance. In my opinion, Faisal Gill’s undeniable, publicly available record is absolutely deplorable. You may wish to ignore it, but in my opinion, that record renders him unfit for public office. That’s not “an attack,” that’s an assessment of his past record…a record that he alone created.

    I find disturbing the complacency of the typical voter. You would be surprised at the number of people who are so consumed with their work, their car problems, their family life and so on that they don’t know — even at THIS point– that there IS such a thing as the Virginia House of Delegates, much less know who is running for office. However, even MORE disturbing to me is the person who DOES know the facts but dismisses “the Faisal Gill story” as unimportant. It is sad.

Comments are closed.


Views: 3636