Is New York City ready for a mayoral candidate cozying up to a cleric with a history of defending terrorists? Zohran Mamdani, running for mayor, has ignited a firestorm of criticism after a recent visit to a Brooklyn mosque where he publicly aligned himself with a figure tied to some of the darkest chapters in American history. Let’s unpack this with a clear eye on the facts and a healthy skepticism of progressive blind spots.
On Friday, October 17, 2025, Mamdani attended prayers at Masjid at-Taqwa in Brooklyn’s Bedford-Stuyvesant area, later posting a smiling photo with Imam Siraj Wahhaj and praising him as a community pillar. This single event has raised serious questions about Mamdani’s judgment, given Wahhaj’s past associations with convicted terrorists and his outspoken criticism of American values.
Imam Wahhaj, who founded the mosque in 1991, isn’t just a local religious leader; he’s a man with a documented history of supporting controversial figures. He served as a character witness for Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and has raised funds for individuals like Aafia Siddiqui, dubbed "Lady Al Qaeda," who is serving an 86-year sentence for serious crimes. These aren’t casual acquaintances—they’re ties that make one wonder why a mayoral hopeful would seek such a photo op.
Wahhaj’s rhetoric over the years hasn’t exactly screamed "American unity." He’s on record calling the U.S. a "garbage can" and advocating for replacing the Constitution with strict Islamic law, complete with punishments like stoning for certain offenses. If this is the kind of "community pillar" Mamdani admires, what does that signal about his vision for New York?
Back in 1991, Wahhaj was caught on tape urging Muslims to use politics as a "weapon" for their faith, not as a means to integrate into American society. His words aren’t just outdated musings; they reflect a worldview that clashes with the pluralistic values most New Yorkers hold dear. Mamdani’s apparent ignorance—or indifference—to this history is a red flag waving in the wind.
Then there’s the personal baggage: in 2018, three of Wahhaj’s children were arrested after authorities discovered 11 malnourished children at a New Mexico compound, where one of his grandchildren tragically died during an attempted exorcism. While Wahhaj wasn’t charged in that incident, it adds another layer of concern about the company Mamdani keeps. Optics matter in politics, and this isn’t a good look.
Retired FBI agents who worked on the 1993 bombing case aren’t mincing words about Mamdani’s misstep. Frank Pellegrino, who investigated the attack, called Mamdani’s embrace of Wahhaj a sign of "ignorance of history," questioning whether the candidate even understands who he’s aligning with (Frank Pellegrino). When those who’ve seen terror up close sound the alarm, shouldn’t we at least pause to listen?
John Anticev, the lead case agent on the same investigation, echoed that sentiment, noting that anyone in politics should be acutely aware of the endorsements they accept. “Imam Siraj Wahhaj has been a cleric who has endorsed a radical agenda,” Anticev warned (John Anticev). For a city still scarred by the events of 1993 and beyond, these words carry weight.
Mamdani, for his part, seems unfazed, tweeting glowingly about his meeting with Wahhaj and calling him “one of the nation’s foremost Muslim leaders.” That kind of praise for a man who’s denounced American democracy as "filthy" suggests either a staggering lack of research or a deliberate choice to overlook the past. Neither option inspires confidence in a potential mayor.
Adding to the unease is Mamdani’s connection to broader networks that raise eyebrows. A political action committee backing him accepted significant funding in 2025 from a group tied to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization designated as an unindicted co-conspirator in a trial that convicted leaders for funneling millions to Hamas. Guilt by association isn’t fair, but patterns of alignment are worth scrutinizing.
Wahhaj himself has headlined fundraisers for groups linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, and his influence extends to figures like Linda Sarsour, an activist known for leading anti-Israel marches. These connections paint a picture of a network that doesn’t always align with mainstream American values. Voters deserve clarity on where Mamdani stands amid this web.
Critics from within the Muslim community are also speaking out, worried that Mamdani’s actions sidelining moderate voices in favor of extremist rhetoric could harm efforts to separate faith from radical ideology. This isn’t about painting any group with a broad brush—it’s about specific choices and their consequences. New Yorkers, of all people, know the cost of ignoring warning signs.
At its core, this story isn’t just about one candidate or one cleric; it’s about the kind of leadership New York needs in a world still grappling with ideological divides. Mamdani’s decision to publicly align with Wahhaj isn’t illegal, but it’s a gamble that could alienate voters who value security and cohesion over symbolic gestures. Is this the unity he promises?
Let’s be clear: questioning Mamdani’s judgment isn’t an attack on his faith or background—it’s a demand for accountability from someone seeking to govern a city as complex as New York. The progressive agenda often dismisses such concerns as fearmongering, but history teaches us to pay attention when red flags wave this boldly. Voters will decide if this is a misstep or a dealbreaker.
In the end, New Yorkers deserve a mayor who prioritizes the city’s safety and shared values over risky alliances. Mamdani has time to explain himself, but smiling for the camera with a figure as divisive as Wahhaj isn’t the start most hoped for. Here’s hoping the campaign trail brings more answers than photo ops.
