Here’s the radical mosque the Boston terrorists attended

April 24, 2013

Writer

We now know that two of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing regularly attended the Boston Islamic Society. The media, however, keeps running with the story that the pair were radicalized on the internet. So what about this mosque? For starters, one of it’s founders is a convicted terrorist serving prison time. But it gets worse - Glenn explained on radio today alongside guest Patrick Poole.

Transcript of interview is below:

GLENN: Last night I had some meetings I had to be in and then I had to fly to New York and to I had to leave Dallas early before I left for New York and I ‑‑ I'm really bummed because Stu did the show for me and executed a lot of the information that we had on the Islamic mosque that is up in Boston that these two guys went to. And they are trying to make this mosque seem like this is just the all‑American mosque. You know, this mosque is on the front lines of fighting for the Fourth of July and Martin Luther King. Nothing could be further from the truth and we have Patrick Poole who is with us. And Patrick has been at the for front of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic terror and Islamic terror cells here in America for a very long time. I don't think there's a handful of people that have his credibility and Patrick is here to tell us a little bit about what this mosque is, the history of this mosque and who is involved. Patrick, they are saying that this was religion that did this to these guys and the mosque, they knew he was a bad dude because, you know, he stood up and said that we shouldn't emulate Martin Luther King. Is this ‑‑ is this mosque friends of Martin Luther King?
POOLE: Well, it's doubtful because they have a long line going back to their very founding, their incorporation papers where Abdurahman Alamoudi, the Al‑Qaeda fundraiser currently in federal prison, was one of the founders of this mosque and was involved in it for years.
GLENN: This is also their, one of their spiritual leaders, their trustees is the wheelchair guy over in Saudi Arabia?
POOLE: In Qatar, yes, Yusuf al‑Qaradawi was basically the chief jurist for the Muslim Brotherhood and he's probably the most popular Islamic cleric on the planet. He has a Friday afternoon TV program called Sharia In Life on Al‑Jazeera.
GLENN: I'm sorry. On what network?
POOLE: Al‑Jazeera.
GLENN: Oh, Al‑Jazeera. Well, that's a good ‑‑ we've heard from the president that's just a good quality network that gives good people truth, if people would just watch it, you'll get the truth from Al‑Jazeera. That's what we've heard from Hillary and the president.
POOLE: Well, and interestingly al‑Qaradawi who then was a trustee for the Islamic Society of Boston, Qaradawi holds the distinction for being the first Sunni Islamic cleric to issue a fatwah authorizing suicide bombings targeting Israel. This was back in 1994. You know, suicide bombing was typically a Shiite, you know, kind of Iranian/Hezbollah phenomenon and then Qaradawi authorized, was the first Sunni cleric to give suicide bombings the green light, and I mean that launched, you know, all kinds of terrorist movements. And this is the guy who, he's banned from the United States. In fact, the Islamic Society of Boston had a fundraiser featuring Qaradawi but he had to do it by teleconference from Qatar, his office in Qatar which, by the way, his office in Qatar, you look out his window and you can see into CENTCOM's compound there in Qatar, but that's a whole other story. But, you know, these are some pretty noxious guys.
GLENN: So this is also, if I'm not mistaken, this is the mosque that the ‑‑ Americans will remember this mosque. Not that anybody in the media will really point this out, but they will remember this mosque as the mosque that had all of the kids come in from the local area and had these schoolkids come in and get a tour of the mosque and some would say a little indoctrination.
POOLE: Well, even more than indoctrination, they had some of the kids line up for prayer, and one of the mothers who was with the group took video of this and handed it off to Charles Jacobs with Americans for Peace and Tolerance up you there who had been a very vocal critic of the mosque and was sued by the mosque for his criticism and it ended up being a big hubbabaloo but, yeah, it wasn't just indoctrination. And last night Stu played the clip of the woman teaching in the mosque that, you know, women in Islam have been, you know, free, you know, since the time of Mohammed and only here in America, it's only been for the past hundred years.
GLENN: Right. They were trying ‑‑ yeah, what they were trying to do, this clip is amazing. This woman is claiming that, you know, under Mohammed women are free. Unfortunately they kind of leave out the all‑important parts that, no, not really. In Saudi Arabia can't really even drive a car if you're a woman.
POOLE: Right. And one of the other clips that we played last night was the current imam, Abdullah Farooq talking about jihad. We can't just be talking about jihad; we need to be doing jihad by the sword and the gun too.
GLENN: No, I think we've learned from the administration that jihad is a holy practice that brings you closer to God.
POOLE: Yeah. Umm... one of the things we didn't get to, and my hat's off to Stu. I mean, we covered a lot of ground last night. One of the things we didn't get to is that the former chairman of the mosque, a guy by the name of Osama Kandil, he was a trustee for another group called the Taibah Aid International Association with Abdulrahman al Moody, the Al‑Qaeda fundraiser, which was a designated terrorist organization and was raising money for Al‑Qaeda. I mean, this is the chairman of the board.
GLENN: But I don't think you understand ‑‑
POOLE: ‑‑ for the Islamic Society of Boston
GLENN: I don't think you understand, though, that they kicked these guys out because they said they are so mainstream that when they said, you know, we should really celebrate Fourth of July here in America, it made the Boston bomber angry and he left and so they kicked him out for four or five days, you know, because that was a ‑‑ you know, that was a really bad thing. I don't think you ‑‑ I think you're downplaying how American this mosque is and how much they love the whole star change he would banner and everything.
POOLE: Yeah. Well, one of the other current imams, Suhaib Webb, two days before 9/11 was out in California raising money for a convicted cop‑killer with none other than Anwar Awlaki. So I don't know if you can get any more all‑American than that.
GLENN: Yeah, absolutely. I think you ‑‑ now you're starting to see it.
POOLE: Yeah.
GLENN: We have a video on TheBlaze now from the American Muslim Center, a mosque in Everett, Massachusetts. The clip, which is posted on the mosque's website advertises the house of worship many activities. However, there's a woman in this named Kat and she's speaking about how she recently converted to Islam and TheBlaze is wondering and has the pictures side by side. It looks like this could be Katherine Russell, the bomber's ‑‑ the bomber's wife. It's an interesting. It's an interesting promo that you might want to ‑‑ you might want to see.
Is anyone, Patrick, looking at this, really seriously looking at this mosque? And why is this ‑‑ why does this mosque continue to get a pass from the United States government?
POOLE: Well, because looking at any of its extremist ties has basically been outlawed by this administration. I mean, if you were to ‑‑ and as I talked about last night, all the information, which is freely available, you know, everything we've been talking about here for this segment is all open sourced. It's been reported by The Boston Globe, New York Sun, a bunch of other outlets. All this information was inside the DHS system and back in late 2010, Homeland Security purged all of the information, again, all open source, all freely available, purged that information from the system and from my understanding from some congressional investigators who are looking at this purge, there were hundreds of files of mosques and Islamic leaders, negative information that was part of this purge that they're having to look at.
GLENN: Patrick, I thank you very much for all of your hard work. I thank you for all of the work that you've done on our documentary specials that we've done and all the things that you've done not only with us but with PJ Media. You have been brave, outspoken, unflinching and on the front lines this whole time, and there's only a handful of people that are doing that and you're one of them. And we're very, very grateful. And Americans, if they don't know who you are or what you've done, America, you should look into Patrick Poole because you are ‑‑ you're a fearless guy, and I appreciate it. Thank you, Patrick.
POOLE: Thanks.
GLENN: Appreciate it.
POOLE: Thank you.

Patrick Poole also joined Stu on The Glenn Beck Program last night to discuss:

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Glenn's Show Prep