Turkey in radical revision of Islamic [Hadith] texts But but Not the Quran/Koran?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7264903.stm
___ Remember Sir's, Mam's; That Islam is the 3rd Abrahamic Religion. And Mormon is 4th. Judaism is 1st and Christianity is 2nd.

FACT: All Are Imported Religions & "NOT [Needed/Wanted] MADE IN AMERICA". Includes the Hindi/u 1st-VEDiC Religion, Then Buddhisim 2nd, Confucius 3rd & Tao/Shinto 4th/5th. REALiTY: There are only Two Original/Authentic Religion Systems on This Holyi S.pace S.hip Earth:

"ABRAHAMiC" via Mr. MOSES {pbuh] & "VEDiC" via Mr. VYASA {pbuh] Soooo 2's a company & 3's a Crowd (on this S.S. Earth). Since History is i[my] Our Jury, this Means THAT

ISLAMi, or Christianity or Any such wannabe/copy cat Abrahamic 'Derivative' is fake religion. And Any Copy Cat VEDiC is like wise Phony; not Authentic.

___ You & your AL Taqiyah Agents Here & elswhere should be carefull trying to Equate [Some one Else's] Quran/Koran to the Judeo-Abe 10-Commands (+), and the U.S. Constitution based on SARA PALIN's Constitution.

Note: That the Islami sayin, "My Religion Is Your Religion... lalala" is O.K. with Saudi Arabia & the 54+ "OIC" Islami Nations (a U.N. for Islami's only) But Never is Your Quran/Koran's "10 Commandment"s like U.S.A. Constitution".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_of_the_Islamic_Conference

Note again: Because i'm in a Process of Writing a "Ultra-Para-Testament" Sura/Scripture/Pasiks/Stanza's.. a/k/a "The Religion Of Everything, before the Science Of Everything" that i [WE] cannot Comment Further. The NEW Knowledge For Faith Exchanging into a New World Order is Arisen. The Dispensation [for ALL] is Near.

Hint: The "O.ne U.niversal R.eligion" is Here! a/k/a "O.U.R" where our O.U.R. is given'th from our real/genuine Holyi "CONSTITUTION" that WE [i] know "IT" as our "Universe". And our real/genuine Holyi "CLAUSES" that i [WE] know "IT" is as our "LAWS of IT"S NATURE". And The U.S. Constitution is 2nd to none; And All "Chumash/Bibles, Geeta/Gita's, Kangyur, Tangyur's, Quran/Korans, Book of Mormons...; are Last (if Any)! Note: Mormon's use the KJV bible; which like the rest needs their own "Correction Of Sin'"s therein. And thus also Imported from Crown of England. Sooo,

WELCOME To S.pace S.hip Earth's APOCALYPTiC-ON NEW-Religion/Faith, Belief, Born from Ye Pre-Apocalyptic-OFF OLD-time Religion(s). "MADE (Born & Prophesied) IN AMERiCA" for American's 1st; Then The World at large 2nd!

GoodBye; MUHAMMAD! Bye; MOSES! bye Smith! bye Jesus! & Bye VYASAa! Bye GAUTAMA! bye Confucius, Tao et al!

A Prophecy Whose time via our Holyi O.U.R. awareness is Here! Note: THEOCRACY & MONRACHY must be wiped off the face of this Sin/Curse free, NEBULAE-Built, Holyi S.pace S.hip Earth!

It is so difficult not to hate That disgusting pig of a failed politician. But I will keep trying, because God says so.

"What is truly indicative of the pig ignorance of the liberals who post here is the utter and horrific way they will be treated under sharia law.
Homosexuality? Death sentence.
Adultery? Death sentence.
Keep on playing with fire, degenerates. You are going to be the first roasted."

Posted by: VirginiaConservative

Wow. Just wow. Talk about pig-ignorant. Following our constitution, not discriminating against a religious group means adopting sharia law? Can you say excluded-middle logical fallacy? And the only people who support the constitution are gay or engaging in adultery? By virtue of supporting constitutional law?

I've got it, you're a parody, right? Because no one can be that goofy, unless it's a joke. Whew, I feel much better.

First, it's not a "megamosque", it coiuld more accurately be described as a community center which includes a place to pray. Since it's privately funded, they can get away with that. Either Amphibian-Boy hasn't studied enough to know what he's talking about--in which case he should just shut up--or he is purposefully spreading misinformation. In which case he should also just shut up. And be hit by a bus.

Secondly, what does Saudi Arabia have to do with anything? They're massively biased against non-Islamic religions, absolutely, but hey--the Saudis, as a nation, don't aspire to be anything other than Islamic. We, on the other hand, have other ideals, so of course we should behave differently.

As for Cordoba, well, to judge from Nasty Newty's comments, maybe people are right to be "confident in our historical ignorance". And what's with the generalizations? Thanks for telling me how every single Muslim in the world thinks!

You people DO realize that there has been a mosque four blocks from Ground Zero since 1970, right?

Freedom of religion means EVERY religion, not just Christianity.

oppps. From Brad Hirschfeild's Site. Thanks.

Muslims are fond of symbolism. Look at what they attacked on 9-11; the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and were heading toward the White House. Those in the eyes of the Jihadists are the symbols of the power and dominance of the USA and the USA is the symbol for the Western civilization.
When the Arab armies entered Jerusalem the first thing they did was build a mosque over where the Temple of Solomon once stood to symbolize their dominance over Palestine. As soon as they entered Damascus they converted the church of John the Baptist into a mosque. When the Turks overran Asia Minor they converted the Cathedral of Aia Sophia into a mosque. The same they did in Spain and every place they trashed.
With this in mind it becomes easy to see that building a large mosque within sight of where the Twin Towers once stood would be the next best thing to having dominance over who they consider to be the “Big Satan”: The power that frustrates their efforts from winning all the lands of the infidels for Allah and His prophet.

Hey Newt wish i could find god after i cheat on my wife, and suddenly need to expose myself as religious.

Ameer pontificates thus:
“There is a billion dollar campaign in the U.S. today to demonize Islam by
Zionists and Christian fundamentalists in order to isolate Muslims and keep the
growing number from having any influence on politicians who have been bought by
a lobby that puts foreign interests above U.S. national interests.”

In just one year (2002) Saudi Arabia had spent 70 billion dollars in Europe and North America, to supposedly provide “houses of worship” and supply them with imams and literature .This was exposed by a recent Arabic BBC program. Most likely the mosque you attend was built by Saudia. You should very well know that those are not places of worship but cells that propagate hate intolerance, discrimination, and supremacy of the Wahabi Muslim faith. They openly call for the replacement of the secular laws and constitution by Sharia (Muslim religious laws). We do not need to demonize Islam because Muslims are doing a good job at that. Crying over US national interest is the epitome of hypocrisy while using the Palestinians to score points against everybody but the Muslim nations that used them as pawns for selfish goals is unconscionable. There is not a single Muslim majority country that had not benefited from the Palestinian tragedy.

Comments here show the virulent nature of Islamophobia.It brought
out all the termites from the woodwork whose mentality is what has now provoked
a revenge ideology by a few misguided Muslims, claiming inspiration from the Qur'an, but who see US policies causing the oppression and deaths of many more than 3000 innocent souls.
Please tell Muslims how many feet away from Ground Zero must Muslims keep
from in order to satisfy you as honoring those who were killed (including
Muslims) by those who acted against Islam because they saw present American
polices as supporting undemocratic anti-Islamic Muslim dictatorships and an
unquestioning, one-sided support for Israel regardless of its violations of
international law and oppression of Palestinians.
The writers of these comments that want to demonize Islam and Muslims as
unworthy of being on the soil of "The land of the free and the brave" and
perhaps on the earth should declare another crusade not just a "war on terror"
but on Islam, Muslims, and Muslim countries countries which they see as
responsible for all the evil, past, present and future. They offer no answer to
what they demonize as a danger to humanity, so let them start their hate
campaigns, destroy Muslim businesses, prevent them from working in professions
and in government and begin to
open up their concentration camps and light the ovens. Let a second holocaust
(capital "H" is patented by Jews) begin but enemies of Islam should be careful
that they are not engulfed in these flames that will spread like a forest fire out
of control, set by those who ignorantly and carelessly lit it. The sparks from
the flames will also set your own house on fire.
Perhaps an apartheid system can be instituted to isolate the Islamic virus to prevent it from spreading as a pandemic if a suitable immunization cannot be found. Of
course,hatemongers, will not restrict themselves to Muslims as incompatible with
a genuine American identity that sees the "other" as unworthy to hold citizenship or reside here. Europe is beginning to carry out restrictions on Muslims so you will have a precedent and a model from countries like France and
Belgium who want assimilation not integration. America is more a mosaic rather than a "melting pot" and allows for pluralism in belief and way of life while
incorporating the best of American values.
There is a billion dollar campaign in the U.S. today to demonize Islam by
Zionists and Christian fundamentalists in order to isolate Muslims and keep the
growing number from having any influence on politicians who have been bought by
a lobby that puts foreign interests above U.S. national interests. Many comments
here seem to have a similar political and religious agenda.

WRONG!!!!!!!!!

Mr. Gingrich is a model for all Texans married for a quarter (or two quarters in some cases) of a century to the same woman. What the heck are we doing wrong?

From Wikipedia, Newt Gingrich's qualifications to comment on religious issues:
Gingrich has been married three times. He first married Jackie Battley, his former high school geometry teacher, when he was 19 years old and she was 26.[55][56] They had two daughters. Gingrich left Battley in the spring of 1980. According to Battley, Gingrich visited her later that year while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery to discuss the details of their divorce. Six months after it was final, Gingrich wed Marianne Ginther in 1981.[57][58]
Gingrich began an affair with Callista Bisek, who is 23 years his junior, in the mid nineties, which continued during the Congressional investigation of Bill Clinton and the Lewinsky scandal.[59] In 2000, Gingrich married Bisek shortly after his divorce with second wife Ginther was finalized. He and Callista currently live in McLean, Virginia.[60]
A Baptist since graduate school, Gingrich converted to Catholicism, his wife's faith, on March 29, 2009.[61]

the horrors of islam are eternalized in the holy scriptures of islam: koran, hadit, sharia.islam is the enemy and annihilator of our western democracy and democratic values.find out the truth about islam from people born and bred in islam who chose to leave islam. they are known as apostates of islam and former muslims.inform yourself about islam by googling anti islam.may god protect our western democracies from the deluge of unfettered islam!

You know, and I know that the Mosque is NO YMCA, but none-the-less let us turn the other cheek.

Let's build a church and/or a synagogue (or both) next to the MegaMosque at Ground Zero to show religious solidarity and perhaps a dialogue can ensue.

All the off shoot religions of Abraham.

what do YOU think.

For once I agree completely with Gingrich. The idea of a mosque on or near the site of 9/11 is preposterous. It is 9/11 all over again. The 'Americans' who are for it are either extremely naive, or deliberately anti American. Muslims are using our constitution and laws against us, and to their advantage. They have done this every place in the world where there's democracy. In their own countries they have no rights, and can be beheaded for sneezing. They become very demanding and aggressive in pushing their agenda in places they perceive as being 'soft'. This latest is nothing more than an attempt to show their fellow muslims around the world that they can not only get away with the murder of 3000 Americans, but can further insult the dead and their families with a mosque on the site with the name of 'Cordoba' which means conquest. The elite idiots who support this should know they are included in the muslim hate list. If these maniacs finally realize their dream of world domination, they will be the first ones they'll come for.

kilosierra:
"Not only should there be no mosque built at ground zero there needs to be zero tolerance for mosques and muslims in the U.S.A."

Yes indeed. In order to prove that we're better than the intolerant cultures in other countries we should... become just like them. That'll show 'em!

"Gather all their korans and burn them. islam is not a religion if you are a Christian."

I guess there's nothing like mass murder to prove you're a True Christian.

We need to gather the foreign invaders and so called naturalized muslims into a herd and give them the same choice the Spanish gave them when they kicked their butts out of the Iberian Peninsula.

*******************************************

While at it, herd all humuses, falafels, pitas as "foreign invaders" as so-called "naturalised food" and expel them back to the Middle East.

Regarding the building of this mosque and the large volume of expressed negativity in several of these threads - the world of Islam is not precisely the problem.

The problem is specifically the fundamentalist school of Islam known as Wahhabism - found in Saudi Arabia and throughout the Arabian peninsula. The Al Qaeda and Taliban are the evil fruit of this Muslim sect, and are wreaking global havoc everywhere they're found.

They leave the Shiites in Iran alone because they seem to display a sufficiently anti-western agenda without the Wahhabi influence (which may be there covertly).

This is the Muslim influence that we do not want to see extend into the USA. They view not only non-Muslims as infidels, but pretty much the rest of the non-Wahhabi Muslim world in the same way. Many Muslims have been murdered by the Wahhabi-influenced fanatics, including those Muslims working in the Twin Towers.

In my opinion, moderate Muslims do not disavow this extremist branch of Islam in sufficiently strong terms - and never have. Whether this is due to fear, confusion, an allegience to Islam, or for other unknown reasons, this deafening silence is a misplaced strategy.

Only recently are we hearing noted Muslims speaking out against the extremist practices of Muslim fundamentalism - Muslim clerics everywhere should be doing the same.

The USA is compromised in this regard because of a close relationship with Saudi Arabia and many corporate business interests in that part of the world.

The unfortunate truth is that many non-Muslim US citizens confuse moderate and non-violant Muslims (the vast majority) with the tiny Wahhabi sect that nevertheless wields a disproportionate ability to influence the entire global community of Islam and beyond.

When Muslims petition for Sharia Law and perpetrate unmentionable 'traditional' practices on women and young girls, they are playing the Wahhabi game - a totalitarian theocratic regime in every way.

Since it's a completely legal transaction on private property, this mosque will be constructed. While some supporters believe this is a big, in-your-face counter-terrorist gesture i.e. freedom of religious expression etc. - only the future will tell if they are right.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Wahhabism

Not only should there be no mosque built at ground zero there needs to be zero tolerance for mosques and muslims in the U.S.A. The U.S. is a western civilization. The east has been the sworn enemy of the west for centuries. Only the enemies of the U.S. would advocate for the admission of this enemy into our country. Muslims are intolerant bigots. We protected the arrogant Saudi heathens and our troops were denied Bibles and Christmas trees. I say what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Round the muslims up in their places of worship. Gather all their korans and burn them. islam is not a religion if you are a Christian. islam is a cult of heathens who worship a man and a moon god from the arabic pantheon of gods. islam means SUBMISSION in arabic. NOT PEACE. Immigration reform is needed. BADLY. We need to gather the foreign invaders and so called naturalized muslims into a herd and give them the same choice the Spanish gave them when they kicked their butts out of the Iberian Peninsula. University means one truth. Diversity means NO truth. Diversity is to Unity as Divorce is to Marriage. Diversity is the enemy of Liberty. NO MOSQUE at GROUND ZERO or ANYWHERE ELSE ON THIS CONTINENT. I am SICK TO DEATH of being asked to be nice to an enemy who despises me and who I DESPISE. Tolerate Intolerance!

"There shall be no Catholic Churches near middle schools.."

Old, has-been-neocon contempt for the First Amendment.

Tha Vatican is 0.17 sq miles in area , less than half a mile x half a mile, about the same size as the kaaba and the surrounding walls.

Muslims should stop beating around the bush , open up Mecca and Medina to non-Muslims and allow the building of non-Muslim places of worship any where in countries that have Muslim majorities.

THECAT7 says" As for building a church in Mecca--that's like building a Hindu temple in the Vatican, or building a synagogue in the Mormon Temple Complex in Salt Lake City. It's a pilgrimage city. That's its purpose."

Not quite the same. The Vatican is a very small area within Rome just as the kaaba is a very small area within Mecca. Like Rome, Mecca is large city with an urban area of 328 sq miles and a metro area of 463 sq miles. No one is demanding that a church be built inside the kaaba which is the same size as the Vatican.

Just as there are mosques in Rome outside the Vatican so should churches be allowed to be built in Mecca outside the kaaba.

People of New York need to be aware that a mosque is not a simple house of worship. It is a place for the propagation of a primitive supremacist and intolerant ideology, and need to be treated as such. Wahabis mosques which most of the so-called Islamic centers in this country belong to are the literalist brand that is practiced and funded by Saudi Arabia. At least fifteen of the nineteen of the 9-11 criminals belonged to it. I can see a future imam of this den point out of the window to the believers “the wrath that Allah hath wrought at the hands of the soldiers of Allah on the filthy infidels.” A sample of the venom spewed in such places is exposed by an undercover team in the link below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undercover_Mosque

It is my understanding that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which Mr. Gingerich and his colleagues are so fond of extolling, guarantees the right of assembly and freedom of religion. These two basic elements of the things that make the United States of America a bastion of freedom and intelligence in the world nullify his argument that if "they" don't have a church or synagog, then we don't have to practice what we preach.

Being an American means living up to a higher standard that those who oppress, not being childish or a bully. Grow up, Newt. And practice what you preach.

Um, "no churches in Saudi Arabia?"

Hey, let's show them by not buying their oil and building their infrastructure.

By the same logic, if your rear has a crack down the middle of it, so should your head.

How does someone who has demonstrated such lack of critical thinking, integrity, common sense, and general intelligence get to write columns for the Washington Post?

OH. That's it? Lie to a bunch of backwoods morons, win a seat in the Senate, and destroy your reputation through gaffes, positions, and lies, both deliberate and inadvertent?

Sign me up!

I'll run for Senator from Kentucky, on the Tea Party platform... but I'll beat my opponent by going one better: Income Tax is Unconstitutional.

Who couldn't win on that? In a "red" (synonymous with dumb) state?

Then, I can write whatever ill-conceived and moronic BS I want and the Washington Post will print it?

Must be nice to be a racist, fascist, ignorant, lying bigot. Does he get paid for it, too?

If so, that would be a crime.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. Building this mosque just a block or so away from ground zero is a very aggressive act.

And calling his column hate speech or racist is a cheap trick. Hate and racism is what emanates from mosques. That's the point. The rules have changed. We are at war. Let's say no to the mosque.

why America jealous of muslims?

What an opportunity we have here to point out to the world that America is not afraid of mosques or of anything else; that our country is ready to act on its ideals of religious freedom; and that in our country, people are held accountable for their own actions, but not for the actions of other.

It would be a shame to let this opportunity pass without acting on it. Maybe that is why the authors of our Bill of Rights insisted that Congress not make laws concerning establishments of religion.

Continued from below

The point I am trying to make here is that the other side is not willing to work things out in good faith. Not only that the none of the key players here ever address incongruities on the islamic side, the absolute intolerant practices there. However, when it comes to their group rights go they conflate them as individual right issue and go aggressively after them. They are prepared to ascribe the worst motives to their opponents on these issues and play the victim. For someone who is so sensitive about their rights hardly ever give a second thought others rights.

For instance just this 24 hours on Ms. Pamela Taylor's blog she wrote a very aggressive article regarding this very same issue. I responded with a scathing comment about the muslim paradises in general and Dubai in particular. She very quickly responded to my comment by offering to add her name to any petition list to build temple. Like her signature really makes any difference. She was only do some lip service. She did not undertake to organize anything on that count, all she was willing to do is sign a piece of paper that absolutely does not oblige her to anything. Where on the current issue put herself out there and I am sure she is prepared to do a lot more.

I have seen several comments saying we are better that Saudi, we have our standards. the usual liberal credulous rubbish. Our constitution guarantees individual rights and does not guarantee group demands. I would equate this to what we do with China on their human rights issues, we pressure them. Same as what we did against erstwhile Soviet Union and Apartheid South Africa. We imposed embargos on SA, which trampled on several Afrikaner group interests. We ultimately prevailed, we need to do the same with muslim world to guarantee human rights in their countries. We should expand the agenda to include the rights of every one in the muslim world not just the minority rights. Until the country decides to join teh 21st century, then the neither the government nor any individual from an OIC country can fund such projects in the US or Europe. As simple as that, let Ms. Daisy Khan, & Mr Reuf build their 13 floor Cardoba center as long as they get funds from individuals or countries that have join the 21st century. If Saudis want to throw $100,000,000, they may as long as they are going to reciprocate. In teh meanwhile let the Daisy Khan, & her husband can fork the millions to finance the project in the meanwhile. My goal is not to let the Trojan Horse into the premises.

Hello All:
I am a secularist, left leaning pinko liberal and damn proud of it. I am into all the liberal social agenda hook line & sinker. But surprisingly enough Newt is with me on this. I agree with almost every negative epithet cast at Newt on all issues except this one. All those who are beating their chest about and raising the issues of individual rights and individual freedom must tread carefully here.

I don't know how many of you know this but according Pamela K taylor one of the muslim bloggers on this forum herself said there are 100 mosques in just NYC. At 100 they must be catering to every stripe of islam there can be. this issue is no longer a individual rights issue but a group rights issue. We have to make a constitutional distinction between the two. I am with all of you ensuring that the individual muslim is given a fair shake every aspect of public lives.

In comparison how many Temples, Gurudwaras, Churches do you think there in the entire islamic world. Other than the historical edifices that were there before muslim conquest of those lands, I would say in the last 500 years places of worship that were opened for non-muslims would probably need just 2 digits to keep the score. In Dubai finally in 2000s they allowed one Hindu temple to be opened. Even that was highly constrained. Dubai had this anal-retentive regulation that no non-muslim shrine be built on their soil. So the temple was built on the second story. All hindu temples keep an obelisk type column in the temple, so meet Dubaian sensitivities, they had to fore-go the column.

Encouraging religious freedom around the world as foreign policy is ok, but linking its outcome to the religious freedom in US or other countries with similar values is wrong. It is surprising coming from Mr. Gingrich. The reason given by Sarah Palin is more sensible that it is not about opposition to any religion or place of worship but proposed construction at the very site is painful to the victims and unnecessary.

Actually, a number of predominantly Muslim countries have plenty of churches, synagogues, temples, etc: Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and Bangladesh, for example. Pakistan has a great many Catholic complexes, including a Catholic school which a friend of mine, as well as famous Pakistani politician Benazir Bhutto, attended. In much of Pakistan, Christian and Muslims live side by side without any friction, and have for decades. I know, because I've been there and seen it. I have a Pakistani grandmother who lives out in a village, and who is super religious. Some of her best friends are devout Christians. It's just that it's never in the news, b/c it's not considered newsworthy when people get along.

As for building a church in Mecca--that's like building a Hindu temple in the Vatican, or building a synagogue in the Mormon Temple Complex in Salt Lake City. It's a pilgrimage city. That's its purpose.

So, we are going to shred our Constitution, our First Ammendment, and our values based on what some thuggish Kingdom (Kingdom!) in the Middle East does?

We are not Saudi Arabia, we are America. We value our religious freedom. Newt and these right wingers don't seem to understand what America was built on.

Newt is right, almost. The mosque should not be built unless not just Saudi Arabia but all Muslim countries

1. Allow non-Muslim places of worship any where in their countries including Mecca and Medina.

2. Remove all laws that prohibit apostasy, especially apostasy from Islam.

Where Gingrich did not fully get it is that he should have included Hindu temples, Buddhist temples, Sikh Gurdwaras etc also in his list of religious buildings that should be allowed to be built in Saudi Arabia.

Finally we should all be told where the money for the mosque is coming from.

OnFAith PAnelist Daisy Khan should worry about this subject, about where to pray on.

"No surrender"? Newt Gingrich has already given up on America and American values. Thank God he is not in a position to lead.

i am sorry to say, such an earth is not qualified to pray on, such an earth is not clean. there cannot be any mosque over there.

STOP ISLAMIZATION OF AMERICA

Good update on the NYC Mosque

website: SIOA.com

What exactly Saudi Arabia's preferntial and biased treatment of its citizens has to do with America's values is not addressed by the former speaker of the house. Comparing the two countries is quite astonishing and horrifying to the muslim community in the US as he refers to the muslim community as islamists. It is sad and unforunate that the former republican Speaker of the House somehow hints at discimination of certain citizens based on religion and its restoration delegated to the behavior of a despotic regime. Whether there are 100 mosques or more in New York City does not change the fact that these are places of worship and muslims have the right to build more. Denying muslims of having a church in Ground Zero is somehow a sign of blaming Islam and rightfully offensive to hundreds of millions of peaceful muslims around the world. Mr. Gingritch is also criticizing the proposed name for the mosque and rejects the founders claims for unity among worshipers right off hand. I'm eagerly waiting for any suggestion from the former speaker that based on historical findings resembles that unity and at the same time upholds his Christian values.

Wrong ARKNS!! Pakistan has some of the biggest Churches of Christian world. My wife grew up in Pakistan and attended a school run by Catholic nuns. Apparently the best schools of Pakistan are considered to be those run by the Catholic Church and guess what 97% of the students are Muslims.

Thank you more making may day to everyone who have posted these comments. man, these observation are the most brilliant and remarkable! There is comic genius in all us we just need a Newt to bring it out!

Shows how little Gingrich knows about the basic principles of America.

Also we should stone adulterers as long as they stone adulterers in Saudi Arabia. And guess what, Newt? You're first!

Hi-
Mr. Gingrich isn't stupid, he's a conniving pol. He is simply trying to be a demagogue. He is tearing at the fabric that binds the country together to rabblerouse, like Beck and others. He is unpatriotic, attacking our country's ideals with no concern for their place in our common good. Shame on this unAmerican opportunist. Where is HUAC when you need it?

A petty argument from a petty politician who belongs to a petty political party.

All the sissy liberal pinheads who attack Newt should realize that if the muslims ever take over, they will be the first to perish.

Nope. Anyone here supporting the building of a Mosque anywhere near 1 World Trade Center is absolutely out of his/her mind.

Yes, we believe in freedom of speech. Yes, we believe in freedom of religion.

But as long as our nation is fighting a war of ideals with an entire region, and those ideals are codified in the Q'uran, and the followers of the Q'uran refuse to "clean their own house", it would be an act of self-destruction to allow a foothold house of worship on what must be seen as sacred ground.

This is the first and may well be the only time I will ever agree with the 'little fat lizard' from the right, but in this case, I cannot find fault with his central argument.

Like it or not folks, Radical Islam has declared war on us - the United States - and all it represents. Until the so-called moderate, reasonable, "civilized" Muslim community we are always told about stands up and takes responsibility for its own crazy relatives, there is no sanity in making it easier for those lunatics to make inroads. Or do you really want to hand the killing knife to the crazy guy on the other side of the room?

Wake UP!

The good thing about the megamosque is that when we finally rebuild the WTC site, there will a huge mosque there to hopefully deter a future attack on the new WTC site due to the fear of killing fellow Muslims (a voice from a far utters something) What's that you say? Radical Islamists do not care if they kill other Muslims? Then I say let them build an even bigger mosque for when we are hit again at least more Muslims will die in that attack and perhaps change the tide causing moderate Muslims to combat those who have hijacked their religion.

A mosque at Ground Zero would be a place of pilgrimage for extremist Muslims who wish to celebrate Allah's greatest victory yet over the USA. No-one can sensibly contradict this proposition. If those intending to build the mosque are not extremists, it will soon be taken over by those who are. It will quickly become a hot-bed of Islamist radicalism. Of all places for this to occur! But perhaps that is the intention.

Btw those accusing Mr Gingrich of double standards misunderstand his argument. He is pointing out the double standards of those who wish to build the mosque and suggesting that they should take concrete steps to support freedom of expression of other religions in the Muslim world before they insist on expressing theirs in such a sensitive place. The USA and other Western countries go to great lengths to accommodate Muslims but by and large this is not reciprocated, especially not in Muslim countries where persecution of other religions is generally increasing.

I could never imagine that Newt will be so stupid and ignorant fat jackass. First of all we (all U.S. citizens) are governed by U.S. laws, and not by the laws of Saudi Arabia. Secondly, it is the citizens (happen to be Muslims) who are building a mosque, and not the government of Saudi Arabia. Thirdly, those who are planning to build the mosque were not the ones who attacked ground zero, so why deny them their rights. Fourthly, the constitution of the U.S. does not allow this discrimination based on faith. Fifthly, if you allow this discrimination, how will it help the security of the U.S., and will it not feed more fodder to the extremists (even if wrongly)? There is more, but this should be enough to educate you, Newt.

I'm just wondering... Have the Muslims who wish to build this mosque said anything to indicate that they want to do it in order to show Muslim-American solidarity with the rest of our population, rather than disdain?

Is it possible that they are trying to demonstrate (symbolically) that they, too, are part of the grieving?

I honestly don't know if this is so, but I would love to hear from somebody who does know.

I would add that I have known (and continue to know) many honest, honorable, friendly, generous followers of Islam here and abroad (and no, I am not Muslim), and the radicals are no more representative of Islam than are the radical zealots in the Christian or Jewish communities here or abroad. Some of the kindest, most hospitable people I have ever met are Muslim, but they are not the ones that the media (or the Gingriches of the world) want to publicize.

Once more, Newt proves there is no fear he will not stoke, no hate he will not exploit, no ignorance he will not promote, no rage he will not feed, and no check he will not cash.

The man's whole life is a lie.

Where's the link to Report Offensive Comment for Newt's idiotic hate speech?

Should we wait to treat women as equals until the Saudis do too?

Newt:
I am a Democrat, but for this once, I agree with you totally. We are the defenders of Freedom in the World, and the defenders of free speech as exercised on this blog. We cannot afford to treat those who wish to destroy us, by any means, with the same respect we hold for all of those who died in past wars defending our liberties and on 9/11. No Mosque of any sort should be built on ground zero, no more than one should be built in Arlington Cemetery. It would be a National Disgrace to our Country, and to everything we stand for as a people. This should not be about "Money" but the one thing this country needs more of: "Honor" in the truest sense of the word.

Its blasphemy to allow shia,sufis,deobandis,etc.. from entering Makkah so to allow non muslims in is heresy. What it will all boil down to is money and how much the Cordoba House is willing to pay. Face it america, Insh'Allah, these united states will become and Islamic country soon.

Pres. Reagan often paraphrased John Winthrop's words about America being a "shining city on a hill." Though Winthrop wrote those words many years before the Bill of Rights was penned, both are important tools against Newt's fallacious argument. America should not measure itself by the standards of Saudi Arabia or any other country. America should lead by example, holding the bar as high as possible on issues as central to the forming of our nation as religious freedom and tolerance.

I didn’t know Mullah Newt Gingrich was so conceptually close to Mullah Omar and other similar fanatics. Mullahs love Saudi Arabia, and so does Mullah Gingrich. Mullah Gingrich loves the thuggish state of Saudi Arabia so much that he would like to make America mimic Saudi Arabia. Too bad for Mullah Gingrich, America’s founding fathers took care of bigots like him for all times to come. There never was a state religion in America and there never will be; God-willing, InshaAllah. If Mullah Gingrich wants to live in a country that is bigoted enough to run its government on the basis of religion, he can move to his darling Saudi Arabia; we are not going to contaminate our values of human dignity and equality for him. Does Mullah Gingrich know that in his darling Saudi Arabia, pre-marital sex and extra-marital sex are serious crimes, too? Does he recommend that we also adopt that draconian rule too?

Siddique Malik, Louisville, Kentucky.
www.courier-journal.com/muslimblog.

Mr. Gingrich,

What you call "double standards" is the DIFFERENCE between our Republic and its enemies, the DIFFERENCE we are fighting to defend!

We, unlike our enemies, have respect for EVERYONE's right to worship and defend it. I don't like the idea of a Mosque (or ANY religious building) so near a site so important to Americans of ALL religions and none but the people who want it have an absolute and inalienable right to express their beliefs provided they are not violent and do not violate the rights of other citizens. Building a Mosque is not a violent act and it violates no one's rights, no matter how much it may offend some people.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Saudi Arabia's theocratic policies are disgusting but provide NO excuse for us to behave the same way. They should, in fact, serve us with more evidence, if we needed it, of the threat of bigoted, religious tyranny and make us that much more ardent to keep such nonsense from our OWN shores!

We can be better than them.

We should be better than them.

We MUST be better than them.

Otherwise, what's the point?

Good night.

Imagine Newt as a german during WW2, no we cannot he is only a proud puritan.

This seemed a downright desperate attempt by Mr. Gingrich to "connect" with the section of his party's base who actually thinks in these terms, and is most vocal at present. If asked, he will undoubtedly point to the justified thrashing he's received by Washington Post readers as just a sign of his anti-elitist credentials, even though he's about as "elite" as they can come. It's like watching the downfall of "Maverick" (RIP) McCain . . .

This man is a demagogue.

I can't say that he actually believes this hysterical rant, or that he really is a cynic. But this much I do know: his argument comes from, and appeals to, only the gutter.

Dear Newt,

Move to Saudi Arabia where you belong. The America that I helped create is better than to engage in Ground Zero McCarthyism.

Yours truly,
James Madison

Newt wrote:
"There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia."

So what you are saying, Mr. Gingrich is, "but THEY started it!" If you wonder why no one takes you seriously, this is one of the reasons.

"We have not been able to rebuild the World Trade Center in nine years. Now we are being told a 13 story, $100 million megamosque will be built within a year overlooking the site of the most devastating surprise attack in American history."

...and? Are you complaining about the incompetence of those rebuilding the WTC or the work ethic of the Muslims who are building faster?

Dear Newt,

You are an idiot.

Best regards,
Jon

Two questions for you, Newt:

1. How in the world did you get The Washington Post to publish any of the hate you spew?
2. How can you compare Saudia Arabia and The United States?

Newt, do us all a favor and go away. Far away. Please.

Are you serious Mr. Gingrich?? Have you thought that maybe, there are not any churches or synagogues in this area is that maybe the Christians or the Jew don't wish to pay the property values?? How short sighted your view is. I challenge you to provide proof that the reason for no churches or synagogues is prejudice. The United States of America is NOT Saudi Arabia, nor is New York Mecca; nor do I or the New Yorkers want it to be. I want New York to be just what it is too many people in the world today; the gates of freedom and religious tolerance. I want New York to be the place that caused France & Mr. Bartholdi to create and present the gift of the Statue of Liberty to us. The mosque is not the cause of 9/11, religious intolerance is. Unfortunately, it appears religious intolerance is what you are espousing.

Newt writes:
"There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia. The time for double standards that allow Islamists to behave aggressively toward us while they demand our weakness and submission is over."

My God! No double standards? Really? There should only be one standard, and it should be the one set by Saudi Arabia?

Hey, while we're at it, let's ban all women from driving. How about chopping-off hands for stealing a loaf of bread? You know what? You're right. The time for double standards is over! Let's show those "Islamists" (which, by the way, is not a word) how wrong-headed their ways are by doing exactly what they do.

Freedom of religion? That's just for some religions, right Newt? (wink, wink) You know, when they wrote that Bill of Rights thing way back when, I'm sure they didn't mean freedom of all religions -- just the ones we like, right?

It's truly amazing how Republicans cling so tightly to the Constitution when it comes to the second amendment. I guess they just skip right over that first one. You know? The one that starts, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."

How do you think this battle between us and the "Islamists" (still not a word) is going to be won? By bombing them back to the stone age? Too late. They're already there. By building a 100-foot wall around the entire country? Got an extra trillion dollars to build it? (and it wouldn't work anyway)

No.

We win when we show the World that America is the greatest nation -- the greatest idea -- ever conceived because we allow more than one idea, more than one belief, more than one way of life to have its say.

There have been a lot of times over the last 9 years where people have said, "...if we do that, then the terrorists win." Well, Newt, if we start telling folks in this country to whom, how, and when they can pray, that is the day the United States follows the standards set by Saudi Arabia. That is really the day the "Islamists" win.

Kevin Olson
Manassas, VA

Georgia is cesspool of ignorant stupid fat people and Newt Gingrich is their hero.

Newt...Newt...you come from Georgia where Blacks are still treated as slaves, and the theory of evolution is banned from the classroom. New York is not your ignorant south, so keep your mouth shut.

"What is truly indicative of the pig ignorance of the liberals who post here is the utter and horrific way they will be treated under sharia law."

So in response to a regime that treats liberals and other decent people horribly, we liberals should, like Newt, urge our country to behave just like that regime?

No way. We're better than the Saudi fundamentalists. We respect religious freedom and property rights, and treat others decently. Including Muslims who abide by our laws and live peaceably among us as fellow Americans.

Good idea Newt, lets go down to the level of the islamists. What an ugly American you are.

And you're idea, comparing NY to SA is just, well, stupid. If they were asking for a mosque in Vatican City, then you might have a point, might. But in a free America, we don't act like religious bigots ... oh, I forgot who I'm responding to ...

That is one of the stupidest things ever said by a politician. He has no idea what this country is about if he thinks freedom of religion here should depend on freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia.

If a mosque was built, I wonder what the public reaction or "tolerance" level would be to a large Baptist church being built right next door? Would there still be a celebration of diversity, or would an evangelical church be considered offensive?

Gingrich the bigot strikes again. Mosque bad, but cheating on your wife while she lies dying is fine by Gingrich.

Newt wants the US to be more like Saudi Arabia.

On that theory there should be no mosques in this country at all until there are churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia. Of course there is a double standard -- we have religious freedom, they don't.

It pains me to say this, but I agree with Newt. No Mosque at ground zero or anywhere near it. The promoters of this mosque are certainly aware of the symbolism it will have for muslims overseas. Think of the American flag atop Mt. Suribachi if you need a comparison. The goal of the promoters for building a mosque THERE is patent. How can anybody miss it? We are in fact in a struggle between civilizations. Unless you want America to be more like Iran or Iraq or Saudi or Yemen or Sudan or Ethiopia ... then drop the vapid political correctness and act. No mosque at ground zero.

The flaw Mr. Gingrich's logic is that he equates Saudi Arabia with the United States. Our adherence to the principle of the free exercise of religion does not depend on whether Saudi Arabia allows churches anywhere. What a sophomoric argument!The people who wish to build a Mosque in New York are not Saudis -- they are Americans. We as a nation celebrate our diversity and accept people of all faiths. That is one of our core principles. I can't believe that a person as educated as Mr. Gingrich would see the hypocrisy in his argument -- that our principles only have value to the extent that other countries value them. Aren't we supposed to be better than that?

What an idiot...we should conduct ourselves in accordance to the prejudices and intolerance of other, backward societies? And really, does the former Speaker of the House, a former college professor and a holder of a doctorate in history, not think he's not "elite?" Seriously?

.
.

Gingrich suggests there be no ground-zero mosque until Saudi Arabia opens itself up to churches and synagogues? He considers that a fair trade because Saudi Arabia is a Muslim theocracy and America is a Christian/Jewish theocracy?

Even though the GOP keeps whipping up the lie that America is a Christian country, it's not. It's a country that "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." That includes Islam.

But I guess Gingrich isn't familiar with the Bill of Rights.

.
.

First time ever I agree w/ Newt. I just find it offensive that a mosque would be on ground zero. Prime real estate in Manhattan. Who pays the taxes? Oh - that's right no taxes on religious institutions even those that want to wage jihad against Americans.

As a christian who read the Muslim holy book, the Quran, I learned that Islam is the only religion in the world, after Christianity, that recognizes Christ as a Savior and that Virgin Mary is Holy and Saint! Yes, there are extremists Muslims--just like in Christianity and Judaism. But the vast majority of Muslims are struggling to live in peace and dignity. In fact, the US enjoys close military, economic and political relations with most of the Muslim countries! Some of the largest US military bases are found in Muslim countries! As for the Saudies and the discredited Newt the Nuts and GOP company-the party of "values"!- it is their habit to describe the Saudies in negative terms prior to elections! The secret affection between the rotten Saudies and the rotten GOP comes after the elections! The mosque in question represents the 1.5 billion Muslims and not the mere 1% Muslims who live in Saudi Arabia! Also, Newt, as a history "teacher", should have known that when the streets of Muslim Cordouba were full of lights the rest of Europe was living in full of darkness! The Cordouba Islamic Center in NYC might bring lights to the dark hearts of the bigots here and in Saudi Arabia!

For a flatulent gasbag like Gingrich to call someone else "arrogantly dishonest" is a true case of the pot calling the kettle black. The fact that this self-important hypocrite is considered the intellectual voice of the Republican party shows how devoid of anything approaching reason and intelligence they are. No wonder they all worship at the Church of Sarah.

As a christian who read the Muslim holy book, the Quran, I learned that Islam is the only religion in the world, after Christianity, that recognizes Christ as a Savior and that Virgin Mary is Holy and Saint! Yes, there are extremists Muslims--just like in Christianity and Judaism. But the vast majority of Muslims are struggling to live in peace and dignity. In fact, the US enjoys close military, economic and political relations with most of the Muslim countries! Some of the largest US military bases are found in Muslim countries! As for the Saudies and the discredited Newt the Nuts and GOP company-the party of "values"!- it is their habit to describe the Saudies in negative terms prior to elections! The secret affection between the rotten Saudies and the rotten GOP comes after the elections! The mosque in question represents the 1.5 billion Muslims and not the mere 1% Muslims who live in Saudi Arabia! Also, Newt, as a history "teacher", should have known that when the streets of Muslim Cordouba were full of lights the rest of Europe was living in full of darkness! The Cordouba Islamic Center in NYC might bring lights to the dark hearts of the bigots here and in Saudi Arabia!

Newt Gingrich's arrogant hubris is equaled only by his total lack of knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the principles that have marked the greatness of the United States since the time of our Founding Fathers. Newt is a disgrace to the nation that so foolishly elevated him to the seat of power his recent comment has now so gratuitously besmirched. One cringes at the thought of his once more rising to a position of power and trust in which he may treat all of his fellow citizens with the same view of honor and decency he has now accorded some of his fellow Americans.

No mosque of any kind or other Islamic structure should be built near Ground Zero. Ground Zero is sacred. It must be protected and dedicated to the memory of our own beloved fellow Americans who died, by an attack of Islamic extremist terrorists. The United States must continue to be the guardian of FREEDOM and fighter against evil. Let's keep the U.S.A., that "Shining City On A Hill."
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wow that's so beautiful, except that fellow Muslim Americans died in those towers too. So we should dishonor their lives by condemning an entire religion for the actions of 17 mad men? What an ugly city the U.S.A.would become.

By the way are you Shakespalin? Just wondering, it sounds like something she would write...

Assuming no local ordinances are violated, there should be no restriction regarding what sort of construction is "allowed" near the former WTC site.

And what point can be made by holding up Saudi Arabia as an example?--that the U.S. should behave the way the Saudis do?--is that the standard we want to set?

Capitalism is the religion of the United States. Capitalism doesn't care what your beliefs are, only what your bank balance is. As long as the builders of this mosque have sufficient money to pay for it, nothing should prevent it from being built.

I was prepared to object in length and strongly to the continued hypocrisy of Newt Gingrich, however I found plenty of American compatriots that did the job even better. America is great, despite our "want to be leaders." 911 should not diminish our values, neither should we emulate our adversaries.

Newt: Go ahead and make your own home in Saudi Arabia if you want to live in a country that doesn't allow religious freedom.

But honestly, I'd much rather you changed your mind about the whole matter, and spent your time convincing Saudi officials that freedom is a good thing. Personally, I love Gulf Arab culture, and I know many Gulf Arabs who would love to have the freedoms we have.

I COMPLETELY APPLAUD THIS ARTICLE AND NEWT FOR WRITING IT. I WAS BORN IN DOHA QATAR OF CATHOLIC PARENTS. WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO PRACTICE CHRISTIANITY, AND A PRIEST WOULD ARRIVE INCOGNITO TO SAY OUR WEEKLY MASS IN A PRIVATE HOME. WE HAD TO BE FLOWN OUT OF THE COUNTRY AS INFANTS TO BE BAPTIZED. I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT SAUDI ARABIA IS SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE WHEN IT COMES TO RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE. WHAT HYPOCRITES AND I CANNOT IMAGINE OUR GOVERNMENT WILL ALLOW THIS SORT OF "IN YOUR FACE" ABUSIVE GESTURE. THE MONEY IS NO DOUBT COMING FROM THE COFFERS OF SAUDI ARABIA AND BUILDING THIS MOSQUE IS A COMPLETION OF BIN LADENS EVIL WORK. NO MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO PERIOD. I THINK WE AS CHRISTIANS SHOULD PREPARE A MASSIVE PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATION AT GROUND ZERO TO PREVENT THIS FROM EVER HAPPENING.

Did Shakepalin bungle her "Muslims of the country refudiate the mosque" rant so badly that Newt had to wait a little longer than usual to parrot her?

OMFgG! I side with Newt on something! Enough of giving in to the double standards expected by those arrogant sheiks who cite their religion whenever it benefits them in any way at all. They're hypocrites, and our own elite- both Dems and Repubs- don't have the guts to say so!

Yes, it makes perfect sense to decide moral and political issues in the United States by criteria that will be determined by the actions of a medieval theocracy on the other side of the world. Newt sure nailed this one right on the head. The Arabs will provide our moral compass. And he's considered a Republican intellectual. Well, OK, compared to Sarah.

As congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO) put it very clearly, "Nuke Mecca". If a mosque is built near ground zero by the Cordoba House, then that's what should happen. USA can allow mosque to be built near the devastating 9/11 site in exchange for the freedom to nuke Mecca.

Newt Gringrich is perfectly correct.

No mosque of any kind or other Islamic structure should be built near Ground Zero. Ground Zero is sacred. It must be protected and dedicated to the memory of our own beloved fellow Americans who died, by an attack of Islamic extremist terrorists. The United States must continue to be the guardian of FREEDOM and fighter against evil. Let's keep the U.S.A., that "Shining City On A Hill."

Why not put a head shop, and make peace with the drug cartels, organized crime, and black money behind the Saudi operatives that executed 9/11.

Or we could continue to amuse ourselves with religious wars.

Want to do more to prove a point with the Middle East? Pass a comprehensive energy bill that kisses their oil goodbye. Except I think it's too late now, China has surpassed us in sucking it up. They won't need our money anymore.

Newt Genrich is neither a Conservist or a liberal but just another corrupt Politician and should be more careful about what he vomits out. This Mosque should not be built anywhere near Ground Zero in spite of what our Constitution says. This constitution is Americas and Governs us and not any foreign country or their religion. The fact is that it is a document we obey and cherish.as it separated us from Europe and the Catholic church. NOW, for some it is Just a piece of paper to be taken advantage of.
As Americans we can interprit as we choose just like the Saudi's interprit the koran or Coran as they choose. The original coran had a chapter on Virgin mary and another on Jesus as mohammad spent 7 years in Jerusalam studying the Jewish and Christian religions before he met with Allah in the Saudi desert and received instructions for forming the Islamic religion. The original Coran does not preach that infidels or non believers should be destroyed and killed but says that they should be converted to Islam or believe in Allah.
The worse part of all this has not been mentioned by anyone. The Saudi princes were meeting in New York on 9/11 with the president of the Carlilse Group, which they own and is the largest Defense
Contractor the Pentagon has. The only airplane allowed to take off after the world Center Towers went down was a 747 after the CIA had rounded up all of the Saudi family, shopping in New York, and taken safely back to Saudi Arabia. All of this was authorized by P. Bush to protect the interests of his fathers Partners. i would think that the Saudi's would think twice before ofending America because a couple dozen Drown's would solve the Saudi problem forever. There is a limit and it is being Traspassed. As for Newt, shut and get lost!

Why don't we ban oil companies from doing business with Saudi Arabia?

The mosques in Saudi Arabia didn't produce the monsters who hijacked those planes. The Saudi royalty and it's government did.

Why is newt a guest speaker under Faith? He's a liar, tax cheat, draft dodger, check bouncer, and self-admitted ADULTERER.

"There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia."

I agree completely. The US and Saudi Arabia are very similar in so many respects. So we should live our lives and run our society to the standards of the Saudis.

And as Gingrich points out, we should cheat on our spouses while actively prosecuting an opponent for cheating on his.

Posted by: AhlamAssaddiq | July 23, 2010 1:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
People of New York need to be aware that a mosque is not a simple house of worship. It is an indoctrination place for a primitive ideology that is supremacist and intolerant. It propagates an ideology that whoever does not accept their belief system does not deserve to live.
Below is a link to what an undercover team found what is being taught in one such place in England.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If the rest of us don't deserve to live and there are 1.5 billion Muslims I'd say they are doing a piss poor job of indoctrination.

The question I haven't heard is, why does someone want to build a mosque at this site. Its a business hub, not a residential area. Further, the funding for the site should be required.

I'm not advocating either way, but one thing I do find disturbing is Mosque have been known to be built on places that have been conquered. Thats a bit insulting

My 3 year old grand daughter can reason better than this BS. What a shining symbol of freedom Newt wants to project to the world. The very fact that we are allowing that mosque to be built despite what a few mad men did to us, is our affirmation that we are better than the ones who hijacked those planes.

And I highly doubt our civilization is going to dissappear anytime soon. Most of the world copies everything we do. Newt has very little faith in the power of our way of life.

I never thought anyone could top Shakepalin and her asking American Muslims to "refudiate" the mosque. And to top it off Newt thinks that he's going to be President in 2012 too!

Newt most surely poll tested this argument with the rabid right base. The loud speakers of that party will say and do anything to keep them fearful, engaged and enraged.

P.S. When is he going to apologize to Mrs. Sherrod for calling her a racist?

I am so happy this defender of family values and religion comments on religious freedom and what private property rights should exist. After all, he is running for President alongside his tea pot nuts and other demagogues.

Shhh!!!!

Don't anyone tell Newt that there has been a mosque right around the corner from "ground zero" SINCE 1970.

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/07/23/there-has-been-a-mosque-at-ground-zero-since-1970/#more-16254

So now we should strive to be more like the Saudis? Of course Newt doesn’t really believe this (actually being a politician, he probably doesn’t believe in much of anything) but since he has presidential aspirations, it's prudent for him to say so.

Mr. Gingrich, we have freedoms in this country. If you don't like it and want to start dictating who can and cannot build buildings, you need to move to some repressive Islamic state, where it seems you and your totalitarian Taliban friends will be much more comfortable.

I realize you are just pandering to the brain-dead tea partiers as you look toward 2012, but we don't need your kind here.

Mr. Newt Gingrich you never did make any sense. This is no exception.

The last I checked I thought we had private property rights in the US. But I guess it is just like any other right when it comes to the GOP, they are only rights when the GOP says that they are rights.

Gingrich, why not simply that ultimatum to: we stop gulping their oil until they stop chopping off hands, treating women as chattel and enslaving those who work for them as housemaids?

In order to defeat the terrorists we must sink behave the way they do. Anything else is unamerican.

Signed,

Newt, Sara and Georgey

Mr. Ginerich : What is wrong with you? You should not suggest that the U. S. communities, neighborhoods and the City of New York , follow the rules of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the laws and traditions of the ruling family of Ibn -e - Saud . This is a local New York affair . The new Yorkers know how to build their community centers and their own Al Hamra , if they decide to have one . As a student of history you know better , the differences between the teachings of Islam and Wahabism , history Saud's family etc . How have you become a prisoner of the right wing extremists ? You have deliberately ignored here and are advocating against the basics of American Constitution , principles of Jeffersonian democracy ,the American value system and traditions . First , it was Sen . John McCain and now Speaker Ginerich , why the moderate republican are hiding now , and what you moderate GOP leaders are afraid of ?

Who the frig is Newt F-ing Gingrich to tell anyone anything about morals or ethics? Please don't tell me people bite on this because of the use of "Saudi Arabia."

What about Newt disgusts most? His serial lying? His cheap treatment of his ex wife? His pate' bloated body and face? His dumbed-down Pied Pipering of white trailer trash? It's hard to pick a low point in Newt, there are so many from which to choose.

At any rate, I'm not waiting for Saudi Arabia, on ANYTHING. This is a call to sling mud, not a valid approach to any religious issue in Manhattan. If Gingrich speaks for anyone, it's Muslim extremists who love to see us go Nazi in response to them.

I do think the erstwhile and able mayor Bloomberg has it right on this issue; It's unAmerican to prevent religious practice.

What is truly indicative of the pig ignorance of the liberals who post here is the utter and horrific way they will be treated under sharia law.
Homosexuality? Death sentence.
Adultery? Death sentence.
Keep on playing with fire, degenerates. You are going to be the first roasted.
Posted by: VirginiaConservative
---------

I am a liberal and I am here to convert you, VAConservative to be a homosexual muslim and force you to have an abortion as you urinate on a picture of Jesus... you found our incidious plan out... You must be a MENSA candidate.

see the right wing moron brigade is out in force.
To lessen the diversity, I'd be happy to ship you to a country like Saudi Arabia since you want to be more like them.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Actually, drooler, you prove my point. It is not us who want to be like saudi - it is you fools.

So a sharp look from a Christian now equates with a beheading from your new friends in islam. Is that it?

Pretty funny.

Almost makes one wish for sharia - it would save us ammo.

your freer, more tolerant utopia gave us 9-11. Your idiotic acceptance of illegals gave them cover.
Nice work, liberals. Your diversity really enhances us - those of us who are still alive.
Posted by: VirginiaConservative
-----------

I see the right wing moron brigade is out in force.
To lessen the diversity, I'd be happy to ship you to a country like Saudi Arabia since you want to be more like them. Its a shame dummies like this who have no common sense or intelligence can vote. He prbably doesn't even realize that Ronnie Reagan gave amnesty in the 80's to illegals and when Bush and the GOP ran things... they did nothing about illegals... but please continue to give the opinion Fox news and Rush gave you.

Amazing Newt - and I thought that you were a Muslim with many wives!

It is simple - The Democrates think like children, the Islamic nation(s) are a bunch of heartless bullies,
and the Republicans are a timid bunch of good ol' boys. All together they are a bunch of thugs.

That is why - the women are starting to come to the fold, they see the spineless decision making
and want to voice an opinion for the true 'creators' of humanity.

Obama, is a trojan horse - with heartless Muslim ideologies (with a twist of leftism) and is bent on
taking America to its knees. He is more than a Marxist, he is more than a Dictator -
he is a self proclaimed King (Like the King of England) not a rational thought in his head, but a great orator.

But the warped minds of the Bilderberg Group, of a New World Order (banking and currency)
are the driving force to eliminate all connection to ancestry and in addition cause worldwide financial chaos.
Then rebuild it back up with World Currency.
(The Beavis Dollar and the Butthead coin, I am only saying this might be the names for the currency,
I can not be sure)

Note: Collect coins the paper money will soon be nothing.

Is the world coming to an end in December 2012 ... (I doubt it)
Is the Messiah coming (any religion will do) soon ... (I doubt it)

Interesting Factoid:
The only wealth closest to the Federal Reserve Bank were the Knights Templars of old.
(before the church crushed them).

All hail the World Bank (in Holland) that will over see the world's financial institutions.
As America united the states, so does the World bank want to unit countries (with Obama's ok),
for monetary gain.

Thank you Bilderberg Group. (Can I join?)

The old Rothschild's are at it again, quite a crafty bunch. (Have to had it to them, they sure know
how to capture an audience better than any pop star).

Thank G I am Dutch, maybe I can get a cut of the action.

Your Friend,
Wh
Note: Dude, If a church or synagogue can not be in Mecca, then no Mosque near Ground Zero.
(Simple Math).

Last note - I promise: America doesn't like bullies. We tear them to chreds .. once we are provoked.
They have not seen our rath yet, but it is getting close.
(You can not tease a Pit Bull too many times, you know what I mean?)

But I digress: My message is this .....
Peace, Love and Happiness make sure to Give Peace a chance
and pray for guidance for our leaders and love they neighbor as thyself.

What happened to the Constitution? Muslim Americans enjoy the same constitutional protections as any other American citizen.

Second what happened to states rights and in this case city rights. Zoning is a local issue and since Newt is not a New Yorker it really is not his nor any other outsiders business. It's New Yorks call and they should be able to make their decision without interference from outsiders.

What is truly indicative of the pig ignorance of the liberals who post here is the utter and horrific way they will be treated under sharia law.

Homosexuality? Death sentence.

Adultery? Death sentence.

Keep on playing with fire, degenerates. You are going to be the first roasted.

George W. Bush said, famously, "They hate our freedoms," referring to the terrorists funded by our good friends and allies the Saudis. We know that George W. Bush wasn't that fond of our freedoms, either, and clearly Newt Gingrich isn't that thrilled about them either.

Following the Gingrich garbage line, it seems to me that all Catholic churches in Manhattan should be shut down until the College of Cardinals selects a lesbian Pope.

So you would punish Muslims who come to America from other countries besides Saudi Arabia or who were born in America for what Saudi Arabia does?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No, I would demand that moslems respect Christianity.

The only way to do this, obviously, is to demand reciprocity.

Pretty pig ignorant simple - even for a dipobama liberal.

POSTED BY: VIRGINIACONSERVATIVE

You obviously mean Muslims but are too pig ignorant to know how to spell it. However, Saudi Arabia does not own Islam any more than America owns Christianity.

You would punish Americans who are Muslims because of Saudi Arabia and that's all we need to know about you.

Oh, and that you can't communicate without being childishly insulting. You're a credit to conservatism, sir. You give conservatism a face for us to see.

I would love to agree with Newt on this one, and in my heart I truly do, but we need to live by our ideals, not theirs. So, we need to tolerate a bunch of anal pores who are so stupid, or just so purely evil, that they can't see, or don't care, why what they want to do with their Islamist center is offensive.

So, Islamists, go ahead and prove to us how you can use our own virtues against us. Go ahead an name your pit of sanctimonious crap after the capital of al-Andalus, and laugh at how you think we don't know that what you mean by living together in a Golden Age is that you get to treat the rest of us like well kept pets. Why a Jew or Christian would want to visit a hot dusty tourist attraction like Mecca, let alone live in Saudi Arabia, even if you let us pray there, is beyond me anyhow.

I love it when Newt drags all the Liberals out for a run around the track... tee hee. Newt is smart, creative, bold and unabashedly conservative. Amazing how that can rile some folks up. Newt is not rude, or personal, or emotional, or led by some strange desire to denegrate ones own country... instead he is led to honor it.
Myself, I like to see both sides -- and there is NO acceptable side to the mosque in NYC. Any and all methods should be used to stop this abomination on our country... and I do mean our country.
Posted by: CARealist
-----------------

So according to you... all other religions can but Islam...can't... wow...

And about Newt... were you living in this country from 1994-2000? Newt is a crooked political opportunist and they only thing he tries to honor is himself. He like most GOPers are full of their own sanctimonious non-sense to realize they have been dragging this country down since 1981.

Wow I actually agree with Mr Gingrich on something... there shouldn't be a mosque at Ground Zero until there are Churches and Synagogues in Saudi Arabia.

But he doesn't go far enough. There also should be no US Troops or bases in Saudi Arabia.

And there should be no US Puppet Monarchy in Saudi Arabia either. And thus no US contractors training security forces to keep that monarchy in power in order to keep all of Saudi Arabia's oil wealth flowing to a single family.

Likewise, there should be no Mosque at ground Zero until Jerusalem is under shared control of Muslims, Christians and Jews with a Palestinian Capitol in East Jerusalem.

Nor should there be a mosque at Ground Zero until there is a nuclear weapons free Middle East with Israel's nukes taken away and dismantled by the IAEA.

Peace

So whenever we face intolerance abroad, we should counter it with our own intolerance here at home?

If that's the case, what's the point of America any more?

It is simple - The Democrates think like children, the Islamic nation(s) are a bunch of heartless bullies,
and the Republicans are a timid bunch of good ol' boys. All together they are a bunch of thugs.

That is why - the women are starting to come to the fold, they see the spineless decision making
and want to voice an opinion for the true 'creators' of humanity.

Obama, is a trojan horse - with heartless Muslim ideologies (with a twist of leftism) and is bent on
taking America to its knees. He is more than a Marxist, he is more than a Dictator -
he is a self proclaimed King (Like the King of England) not a rational thought in his head, but a great orator.

But the warped minds of the Bilderberg Group, of a New World Order (banking and currency)
are the driving force to eliminate all connection to ancestry and in addition cause worldwide financial chaos.
Then rebuild it back up with World Currency.
(The Beavis Dollar and the Butthead coin, I am only saying this might be the names for the currency,
I can not be sure)

Note: Collect coins the paper money will soon be nothing.

Is the world coming to an end in December 2012 ... (I doubt it)
Is the Messiah coming (any religion will do) soon ... (I doubt it)

Interesting Factoid:
The only wealth closest to the Federal Reserve Bank were the Knights Templars of old.
(before the church crushed them).

All hail the World Bank (in Holland) that will over see the world's financial institutions.
As America united the states, so does the World bank want to unit countries (with Obama's ok),
for monetary gain.

Thank you Bilderberg Group. (Can I join?)

The old Rothschild's are at it again, quite a crafty bunch. (Have to had it to them, they sure know
how to capture an audience better than any pop star).

Thank G I am Dutch, maybe I can get a cut of the action.

Your Friend,
Wh
Note: Dude, If a church or synagogue can not be in Mecca, then no Mosque near Ground Zero.
(Simple Math).

Last note - I promise: America doesn't like bullies. We tear them to chreds .. once we are provoked.
They have not seen our rath yet, but it is getting close.
(You can not tease a Pit Bull too many times, you know what I mean?)

But I digress: My message is this .....
Peace, Love and Happiness make sure to Give Peace a chance
and pray for guidance for our leaders and love they neighbor as thyself.

To rohit57: You said "But is it actually a constitutional right to build a mosque in THAT PLACE? Let the courts decide. My own take is that it is not a constitutional issue here at all."
It IS a constitutional issue, but only because people are trying to block this mosque *because* it's a mosque. There is little doubt what Supreme Court precedent intructs in this area. You can prevent a church from being built somewhere due to zoning laws, for example, but not because of the religion that the church espouses. Same for a mosque.
Posted by: tomguy1
--------------
You are making a VERY valid point, but note that among those attacking Gingrich for not respecting the constitution, you are the ONLY one who has understood the point I was making.

And yes, it would probably not stand scrutiny if other religions were allowed to build churches or temples or whatever near the WTC,but not the Muslims.

That would probably be illegal. But I would still prefer that the courts rule on this. The reason is that it was a Muslim group which attacked the WTC. And so it is not so much that Muslims are being singled out, but rather that they have singled themselves out.

Compare this case. Every man is allowed to go near a certain apartment, except for Edward. Are Edward's rights being violated?

Not so. It turns out that this apartment is where Edward's ex-wife lives, whom he has beaten in the past, and she has obtained an order of protection.

For another example, every political group is allowed to march past a certain clinic except one group X. And why? Because it is a clinic which performs abortion and the group X has a history of harrassing women who come to the clinic.

So distinctions CAN be made, if they are for a reason. What would happen in THIS case, I do not know. It is for the courts to decide.

But I am depressed by all the people attacking Gingrich for not understanding the constitution, when it is fairly clear that they themselves do not.

Gee, ummm....., Newt?

Since you're making this about Saudi Arabia, here's a question for you.

Since the second largest shareholder of Fox News is Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia, and you are a frequent contributor to Fox News, will you extend your outrage and demand that all American news organizations even partly owned by Saudi Arabians should be shut down completely?

If you're going to draw the line in the sand about churches in Saudi Arabia, then I, for one, don't think we should extend any tolerance to news organizations of which Saudi Arabians own the second largest share.

Do you?

Newt Gingrich doesn't seem to understand...our freedoms aren't dependent on what Saudi Arabia thinks or does.

If you want to play right into Bin Laden's scheme, follow Newt's direction.

Myself, I like to see both sides -- and there is NO acceptable side to the mosque in NYC. Any and all methods should be used to stop this abomination on our country... and I do mean our country.

POSTED BY: CAREALIST |
______________________

And I think there is NO acceptable side to having you in our country and I do mean our country.

But this piece of paper called the Constitution prohibits me from getting rid of you. The same document that allows us to pursue happiness by building a church or a mosque.

your freer, more tolerant utopia gave us 9-11. Your idiotic acceptance of illegals gave them cover.

Nice work, liberals. Your diversity really enhances us - those of us who are still alive.

Patriot 0523 wrote: "Our Constitution does not give a free ride to some foreign entity to come in and do whatever it pleases in our country. Period." Okay. If you're going to say that Saudi Arabia=Islam and Islam=Saudi Arabia (which is called a conflation), are you also going to say that Israel=Judaism and Judaism=Israel and nobody can build a synogogue because we don't give a free ride to some foreign entity? How about Roman Catholicism? Anglicanism? Both of these had strong geographic connections.
Why don't you and Gingrich go of adultering together. That doesn't require as much thought as commenting on current events.

We are a freer, more tolerant, more diverse, stronger, more exciting and interesting country then Saudia Arabia. Let's keep it that way Mr. Ex-Speaker.

So you would punish Muslims who come to America from other countries besides Saudi Arabia or who were born in America for what Saudi Arabia does?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No, I would demand that moslems respect Christianity.

The only way to do this, obviously, is to demand reciprocity.

Pretty pig ignorant simple - even for a dipobama liberal.

I love it when Newt drags all the Liberals out for a run around the track... tee hee. Newt is smart, creative, bold and unabashedly conservative. Amazing how that can rile some folks up. Newt is not rude, or personal, or emotional, or led by some strange desire to denegrate ones own country... instead he is led to honor it.

Myself, I like to see both sides -- and there is NO acceptable side to the mosque in NYC. Any and all methods should be used to stop this abomination on our country... and I do mean our country.

No bibles in Saudi? No mosques in America.

Pretty simple and pretty straight forward.

Even a pig ignorant liberal should be able to grasp that concept.

POSTED BY: VIRGINIACONSERVATIVE

So you would punish Muslims who come to America from other countries besides Saudi Arabia or who were born in America for what Saudi Arabia does?

I may be pig ignorant but I'm smart enough to feel really sorry for your kids.

I didn't realize that the land of the free based its policies on those of a hereditary sheikdom. I doubt that was what Jefferson and Madison had in mind. 21st Century America surely has room for freedom of religion. A mosque near ground zero is a statement by those building it that they are willing to put themselves in the line of fire in one of the most likely spots for terrorist attack in the U.S.

Way to go Newt! That's the spirit! Why should we allow all those freedoms when others don't. What were the founding fathers thinking? They must have been a bunch of flaming liberals. I say: No freedom of speech in the US until they have it in North Korea. No capitalism here until Cuba comes around. Stop all elections until Libyans can select their leaders. No freedom of religion until everyone believes in the same God as Americans. That'll show 'em.

Whether or not you agree with Mr. Gingrich's prescription (I don't), the question of funding is worth exploring, and this would help in answering a second important question, which is what is the objective the mosque project backers hope to attain? It is not enough to say that it is to "celebrate religious diversity" or "heal interfaith rifts". If that were the case, a museum or other civic building would do the trick. But a mosque is a house of prayer, so what is the main *religious function* this project is supposed to fulfill? Will it be a place where Muslims can ask forgiveness for the deeds of some of their co-religionists? Is it a place to celebrate martyrdom or a "milestone" or Islamic re-awakening? Is it mere banner-planting, announcing a denomination's "possession" of what is now hallowed ground for many? The Constitution may trump, but as an American I would certainly be interested in knowing more about the background of this project.

fairlingtongayblade - I am far from pig ignorant.

The establishment clause has nothing to do with this issue. If you truly believe it does - and I doubt you truly believe anything which doesn't begin or end at one of your degenerate nerve endings - you would support Christianity in school.

But you don't.

You are just another degenerate who lathers and foams at anything decent.

Find a greased fence pole and have at it.

"In fact no Christian or Jew can even enter Mecca." Newt Gingrich.

And I can't enter the sanctuary of a Mormon Church. Perhaps we Perhaps we should ban all LDS churches too.

As a Catholic, Newt should know that a person who is not "in a state of grace" can't take communion in his church. Perhaps we should ban all Catholic churches too.

Evidently, VA Con is a pig ignorant conservative. Those on the left are repeatedly lectured about the constitution by the TP'ers. So, here's your lesson for the day:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What part of FREE EXERCISE do you not understand? I welcome your riposte. Preferably quoting original text which you conservatives profess to honor. Evidently, you're one who doesn't.

BB

There you have it folks... More proof that all conservatives are not stupid but all stupid people are conservative... Way to go Newt... Put us on the same level as Saudi Arabia.... Makes sense though... the right wing does want to drag our standard of living down by busting unions, outsoursing jobs to the rich can have even more and if we get another Bush into the WH (I shudder at the thought of another GOPer in the WH named Bush) we just might become Saudi Arabia if these morons have their way.

Gingrich is as illogical as he is ridiculous. Newt, we have a Constitution-embodied freedom of religion enforced by a democratic government in our country. We make our religious decisions based on our principles, not based on what any other country may or may not do. When should our religious freedom begin? Two blocks from the outer edge of "ground zero"? Four blocks? Twenty blocks? Maybe the truth is Gingrich doesn't want freedom of religion in America or perhaps he only wants his preferred religion to be free.

Liberals for reasons I do not understand extend tolerance to the most intolerant of peoples.

POSTED BY: MHR614
_________________

Because that is what Jesus did.

Apparently for Newt Gingrich, Saudi Arabia has taken over as Ronald Reagan's shining city on a hill. If they (that particular country) are to take a particular position on religious freedom, that leaves little for us to do but admire their thinking and do likewise. God forbid we should set an example or expect more of ourselves and our liberties. That would be suggesting the United States and American democracy have something special and valuable to offer, above and beyond the Saudi position. Newt Gingrich doesn't think that's true.

He also isn't smart enough, or make that honest enough, to distinguish between a specific country that has one of the worst human rights records in the world and is largely the "property" of a powerful family, and all Muslims everywhere, however they practice their faith and their politics. Apples and oranges, Mr. Blithering Idiot Gingrich.

On the other hand, it's exciting to see how he's found a new moronic view to espouse since no random white mother has recently drowned her two kids in her car and falsely blamed an imaginary black man. That happened when the foolish Gingrich was in elected office and -- wait for it -- he figured that murder and reflexive racism must somehow be the fault of the Democratic Party. It was almost as bad as the time he thought the fate of the Congress and the nation hinged on the fact that he wasn't given his preferred seating on Air Force One. Disgusting man.

Aside from the fact that the M folks (Morons) often like to build on the site of a military victory, I have one rule that I learned from the days of the Cold War: I do not tolerate those who are intolerant.

That said, who cares what Newt thinks? Would you like a list of people who should never be allowed close to national power again? His would be one of hundreds of names, and close to the top.

So Mr. Gringrich insinuates that all Muslims are from Saudi Arabia? Or that Saudi Arabia runs Islam?

What about the millions of Muslims that come from countries that practice religious freedom? What about Muslims who live in the US? What about the fact that WE are not like Saudi Arabia?

Mr. Gringrich is a shameful panderer and fearmonger.

Most American Jews need not comment. THEY are part of the problem. Through guilt, or more likely, absence of proximity, they have no sympathy to Israel proper for the thousands of rockets rained down on Israeli lands from territory they gave back to the "Palestinians" since the 1973 war. American Jews have no sympathy for the bombings throughout the period from 1990 through 2006 before they walled off the cities from Islamic terror bombers. American Jews deliberately supported, voted for and now celebrate a U.S. President that is stridently anti-semitic and has no interest in supporting Israel. American Jews overwhelmingly support anti-Israeli Democrats for no rational reason I can fathom. For American Jews to support Islamic interest over the Israeli interest makes no sense. Therefore, shut UP!

Actually, Gingrich's logic is sound. I just object to his timing.

It is way, way past due that America demands reciprocity from these third world potentates we have either created or support.

No bibles in Saudi? No mosques in America.

Pretty simple and pretty straight forward.

Even a pig ignorant liberal should be able to grasp that concept.

I would just like to point out that the following is an utter prevarication:

"overlooking the World Trade Center site...."

The proposed site is 2 1/2 blocks away, cannot be seen from Ground Zero unless you are above 50 stories, and will not under any circumstances even be capable of seeing Ground Zero.

The lie here negates all value of the writer's opinion.

I'm a Jew; not an Islamic supporter to say the least. But we are people of reason. If the locals believe that the mosque will foster inter-religious understanding, then I am a supporter of it. If it were truly planned for Ground Zero (on it, across the street, etc.), I'd oppose it. There's no intellectual validity to the arguments against it.

by mr Gingrich's logic we should do away with our constitution until Saudi Arabia adopts our values. I used to think he was a smart man even if I disagreed with him. He is proving to be either no smarter than Palin or is a total hypocrite- but we already knew that

Gingrich is a shameless opportunist. I applaud his sudden epiphany of realism, but why didn't he have these public thoughts when he possibly may have lost moslem votes?

All politicians are the same. They will sell America to garner a few votes.

Thats why we have the illegal alien issue. Trust me, not a sould in Washington gives a rat's obama over these people. They are scared obamaless that if they take a stand for law and order they will lose a vote or two.

This is why the tea party frightens so many - to the point they invent the phony racist charges. It has always worked in the past when they lose arguments.

When facts are embarrassing - attack with the indefensible - the race card.

But those days are waning. As we watch Sherrod slowly but surely unveil her vicious racist rants - we see the truth. She now feels emboldened. Both by the little hustler in the White house and the lame stream media.

Newt Gingrich makes his case for denying a potentially bridge-building effort upon a questionable interpretation of events in Spain in the 8th Century. That tells us a lot about the status of his intellectual world view. He's a Republican politician appealing to the worst form of xenophobia and the idea that this is something about faith is ludicrous.

The idea that we would not allow a house of worship, of any type, near Ground Zero, does not square with the Bill of Rights protection of freedom of religion. I would prefer the world, including the Islamic world, to see that we are willing to include all people of good will in the American family, which comes from all nations, all religions, and all races. We should continue to be a city on the hill providing an example of tolerance and inclusion to people around the world. No race, nation, or religion should be excluded from our shores.

QUOTE: "OF COURSE there is a double standard between American religious freedom and Saudi oppression. OUR OWN CONSTITUTION holds us to a higher standard. "

I'm from Vermont. I live in Saudi Arabia.

Yes, there is no religious freedom in Saudi Arabia. There are many cultural and religious actions I find to be against human rights and dignity. But it's A SEPARATE COUNTRY.

Unless Newt wants to give up the idea of national sovereignty, that's the way the World works. Any diplomat understands this.

I'm glad the USA will go with it's OWN Constitution and it's guarantee of religious freedom, and allow US Citizens to build a Mosque in Manhattan.

And I resist completely the attempts by some to impose Religious or Cultural limits from THEIR country on OUR country. So many of us drew pictures of the Prophet (PBUH) here in America, to support the uniqueness and authority of the US Constitution, not to insult Islam.

Newt is not dumb. He just will tell us whatever he wants to make his point, without worrying about the truth. Ho Hum...

I REALLY appreciate the Constitution and Culture of the USA after living in Africa, China and the Middle East!

One would think Newt would support Islam. It would have been much simpler for him to divorce his ill and bedridden wife by simply renouncing her 3 times via text message rather than having to go to the hospital and see her.

I do have to laugh that this is Newt Gingrich offering this. I am always amused that the "liberal media" continues to cover him (that should be proof enough that the liberal media is NOT liberal or biased). Let's look for some contradictions. Saudi Arabia doesn't allow any churches or synagogues to be built at all. They are an Islamic nation, and are there Jews and Christians living there to begin with? Do they prohibit any of the other 3 bazillion religions to built places of worship. The United States is founded on religious freedom. Saudi Arabia is not. Newt want us to be more like Saudi Arabia.

Gingrich has every right to question the authenticity of the cordoba proponents motives. None of you CLOWNS who call him names have attempted to define who is funding this. Are they Americans or foreign interests? The constitution or any other ordinances do not give unidentified foreign interests to come in and do whatever they want in our country. Get that through your thick skulls. So, I challenge any of the bleeding heart liberals or the masquerading jihadi supporters to address that. We will patiently listen to what you have to say and then decide to support you or oppose you. Are you all afraid of that? or is it easy to write nonsense after nonsense because you have nothing better to do?

To rohit57: You said "But is it actually a constitutional right to build a mosque in THAT PLACE? Let the courts decide. My own take is that it is not a constitutional issue here at all."

It IS a constitutional issue, but only because people are trying to block this mosque *because* it's a mosque. There is little doubt what Supreme Court precedent intructs in this area. You can prevent a church from being built somewhere due to zoning laws, for example, but not because of the religion that the church espouses. Same for a mosque. If you wanted to zone the area so that NO religious organizations can have a structure there, that would likely be fine constitutionally (although a bit difficult to pull off in downtown Manhattan, I'd say). But if you allow, say, a church but not a synagogue, or a Lutheran church but not a Catholic church, you are violating the Free Exercise (of Religion) Clause in the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." And in case you're wondering about whether state law or city ordinance could do this rather than Congress, the answer is no. The 14th Amendment makes this provision apply to the states as well as federal government.

"A newt is an amphibian of the Salamandridae family, although not all aquatic salamanders are considered newts. Newts are classified in the subfamily Pleurodelinae of the family Salamandridae, and are found in North America, Europe and Asia. Newts metamorphose through three distinct developmental life stages: aquatic larva, terrestrial juvenile (called an eft, and adult. Adult newts have lizard-like bodies and may be either fully aquatic, living permanently in the water, or semi-aquatic, living terrestrially but returning to the water each year to breed."

Mr. Gingrich: It's time for you to return to the water. Have a good swim.

I am amazed at the naivete of the comments here. The muslims are here to subvert and destroy. Do you think if you make nice with them they won't harm you? They'll just kill you last, when you are no longer useful to them.

"There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia."

So the point is we should be more like Saudi Arabia? I think we're witnessing the nasty, slow motion death of the old, puffy, self-righteous, nasty, hypocritical, didactic, immoral, condescending, manipulative, old guard. Where are the men? Who are these petulant children pretending to be adults? Newt Gingrich is what they call an opportunist, and nothing is beyond his grubby manipulating for gain. Certainly not the truth. Certainly not 9/11.

...........................................................................
.....O.......……………………,/////////////……………..........,/..
..0.........………,……..__,---///////////////////,…..............,/././..
0............…………,-'.. ). ). ). ). ). ).''///////_\…........../././././ ..
....O.......……_,-' ))`.. ) .) .). ) .) .) .). ). ).)..`-......././././././
……......../..(♥)_).).).).).\. ) .). ) .). ). ). ) .). )__././././././././ .
............…\____ ).).).).).). ). ). ). ). ) .). ). ).__.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\...
{-ABRAHAMICs;> .)))))))./.). ). ) ) ) .). )_/,-’__.\.\.\.\.\.\..
............…..___,').),'). ). ). ). )_),,--'……………...\.\.\.\.\.\ …
............….(_______............\.\)_),--'"……………...`\.\.\.\ ...
............……………….-.........\.\.\……………………...`\.\.\ ..
............……,…………...........\.\.\……………….............`\.
.....................................................................................
...........................................................................
.....O.......……………………,/////////////……………..........,/..
..0.........………,……..__,---///////////////////,…..............,/././..
0............…………,-'.. ). ). ). ). ). ).''///////_\…........../././././ ..
....O.......……_,-' ))`.. ) .) .). ) .) .) .). ). ).)..`-......././././././
...........…./..(♦)_).).).).).\. ) .). ) .). ). ). ) .). )__/./././././././ .
............…\____ ).).).).).). ).). ). ). ) .). ). ).__.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\...
.. }-VEDICSs;> .|)))))).)./. ). ). ) .) .) .). ).)_/,-`__.\.\.\.\.\.\.\..
............…..____'‘).),'). ). ). ). )_),,--'……………...\.\.\.\.\.\ …
............….(_______............\.\)_),--'"……………...`\.\.\.\ ...
............……………….-.........\.\.\……………………...`\.\.\ ..
............……,…………...........\.\.\……………….............`\.
.....................................................................................
...........................................................................
.....O.......……………………,/////////////……………..........,/..
..0.........………,……..__,---///////////////////,…..............,/././..
0............…………,-'.. ). ). ). ). ). ).''///////_\…........../././././ ..
....O.......……_,-' ))`.. ) .) .). ) .) .) .). ). ).)..`-......././././././
........……/..(♠ ♣)_).).).).).\. ) .). ) .). ). ) .). )__/./././././././ .
............…\____ ).).).).).). ).). ). ). ) .). ). ).__.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\...
{-ISLAMICs;> .)))))))./. ). ). ) .) .) .). ).)_/,-`__.\.\.\.\.\.\.\..
............…..___,').),'). ). ). ). )_),,--'……………...\.\.\.\.\.\ …
............….(_______............\.\)_),--'"……………...`\.\.\.\ ...
............……………….-.........\.\.\……………………...`\.\.\ ..
............……,…………...........\.\.\……………….............`\.
.....................................................................................
..
... CREDIT to "JJ" . . @ . . http://onwapo.com

As some important dude in the Bible said, "Do unto others as they do unto you.

Ergo, Newt is right: no Islamic cultural center espousing peace and reconciliation between religions 2 blocks from the WTC.

3 Blocks, maybe, 4 blocks, OK, but 2? We are being cuckolded, whatever that means, and I know it ain't good.

Mike
Mike

Is Newt trying to make Saudi Arabia like us or us like Saudi Arabia. I think the latter. We're bigger than that.

Gingrich's argument is crazy, IMO. At the same time, I can understand the provocative and insensitive nature of building a Mosque at ground zero. How about this idea? The City of New York passes a zoning law prohibiting the building of ANY churches, mosques, synagogues etc. at ground zero.

"The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy—a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship.

It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support."

from: Letter to the Hebrew Congregation at Newport, August 1790

-G. Washington

Newt: Please note.

The criminals who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks represent the peaceful beliefs of Islam about as much as Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church represent Christians, or even Baptists. Should we bar all Baptists from building a church near a military cemetary because of the despicable actions of the WBC faithful? That's how logical Gingrich's position is.

I would think that building a mosque near Ground Zero would be a step toward healing the breach caused by 9/11. Muslims are not our enemies - religious extremists of all types are.

Wasn't Gingrich one of the many republicans who ended up serving time in the slammer for some misdeed while on up the Hill abusing the American voters' trust? Is he out already?

Mr. Gingrich has absolutely no credibility and well.. an idiot. A five second Google search turns up the history of "Cordoba House" on Wikipedia: "The (Great) Mezquita (of Córdoba or Cordova), now known as Catedral de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción (English: Cathedral of Our Lady of the Assumption) is a Roman Catholic Cathedral.."

Now, if only the loose interpretation of facts to scare the general public was ancient history as well.

Gingrich already had his soundbite moment for this. Fifteen minutes later he usually forgets these and outlets like WaPo forget, too. Why on earth was he given a second chance to remind us what bigoted moron he is? On faith? This is a guy who served divorce papers to a wife undergoing cancer treatment. He criticized Clinton's morality while carrying on an affair of his own--which Clinton's detractors in the press knew about. Maybe that's it...Sally Quinn and her friends just love Newty and they insist that we do, too. We can only hope he actually runs for President this time, so we can watch him completely self-destruct in a way that Sally and her friends can't ignore.

I sure hope none of those filthy Christian churches were built in the vicinity of the bombed federal building in Oklahoma City. That would surely be an insult to those who died there in the attack by that Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh.

I'm sure Newt and the tea klanners here would all agree that we should tear down all the churches within a mile or so of that site. Because neither Newt nor the tea klanners are hypocrites.

Are we really going to compare United States, with Saudi Arabia? almost all of the Muslim countries including the Iran allow synagogue and churches. I would love to know under which article of constitution Mr. Gingrich wants to stop this. The problem with right is that they want to re write constitution and want this secular country to a Christian country. They would never succeed, never......

What a grand move this is by Gingrich, remodelling our country on the example of Saudi Arabia. You go, Newt! No free elections in the US until SAUDI ARABIA has them. No women should be allowed to drive until they can in SAUDI ARABIA!

This is definitely the platform the new Republicans need to run on. Make us more like Saudi Arabia! You tell 'em, Newt. What a thinker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YOh-rpvjYg

Hey, I hear the Saudis don't allow religious freedom!

Let's be just like them!

Why can't I report Newt Gingrich's article as an offensive comment?

His representation of the meaning of Cordoba house is a misrepresentation of facts at best. Further, why does he advocate reducing America's standard of tolerance to that of Saudi Arabia?

Also, he complains about no WTC rebuilding. Who does he expect to pay for it? If it is not a good business decision it is not going to happen unless the government pays for it. I am sure he would be opposed to that.

I am a Jew and an American. As such, I have tremendous disagreements with Islam and like Newt Gingrich I am not pleased with a mosque near Gound Zero. Nor am I pleased by its being called the Cordoba House, which is like showing us the sole of their foot (which is a very offensive gesture is Islamic culture).

However, this is America, not Saudi Arabia. So I call on all concerned to let this mosque be built. Let the message of that action be that we will be true to our principles, and not give in to intolerance.

Whether Newt Gingrich likes it or not, America is at its best and its most effective when it leads by example. If he truly wishes for there to be religous tolerance in Saudi Arabia, then we must demonstrate it here first.

First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Fourteenth Amendment: "... no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ..."

Exactly what Constitutional argument, principled or otherwise, do you use to block the building of a mosque?

What strange perversion of the Constitution and religious freedom does Gingrich espouse?

OF COURSE there is a double standard between American religious freedom and Saudi oppression. OUR OWN CONSTITUTION holds us to a higher standard.

1st Amendment: Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion and Petition

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

I used to think Gingrich had a good mind. No longer. Is Saudi Arabia to be our model now? How about "There should be no free elections in the US so long as there are none in Saudi Arabia"? Makes as much sense as Gingrich's mosque comment.

The man is washed up, a has-been, and he's just trying to reinflate his empty image.

YEEEEHAAAW! CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS! DOWN WITH ISLAM! GO NEWT!

(sarcasm)

Who cares what the old crumpled-faced geezer thinks about anything. He should be dead by now.

Islam is slime, Islam is a collection of racist, filthy vermin.We'll deal with them when we have real, conservative Republican leadership. Now? We can't. We have an Islamist President, Kenyan-born and an administration that is sympathetic even to the Fort Hood shooter, Iran, Gaza, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and in fact, will not even define our enemies as Islamic vermin and all because the Obama crew is pro-Islamist. Newt speaks truth. And why SHOULD we allow ANY mosques on U.S. soil when the Islamic vermin not only don't allow non-Islamic-vermin houses of worship on their soil but kill any non-Islamic citizens? They don't allow the bible in Saudi Arabia? Fine. Why should WE allow the Koran in THIS country?? You left-wing liberal Demokratt wingnuts need to F*ck off. I want MY country's interests defended. All Obama is interested in is vacations in between American destruction sessions. Creep.

I think our Constitution supports the idea of a state separate from religion. The government should not interfere with religious freedom. Saudi Arabia does not operate under our Constitution, nor does any other country. The Muslim religion should be respected just as we respect scientology, evangelicals, and weird sects like mormons and catholics that carry all kinds of odd beliefs. Newt Gingrich and his followers simply want another "patriot" issue to drag out for the election season.

Gingrich has it exactly right. As long as Saudi Arabia and other islamic countries forbid Christian churches to be built there and for Christians to worship in them, no mosque should be allowed anywhere near Ground Zero. Only liberals can suggest that it should be otherwise. Liberals for reasons I do not understand extend tolerance to the most intolerant of peoples. Perhaps they feel more sympathy for Islam than to Christianity and Western Civilization.

I do not like Islam. I agree that a mosque is not appropriate for this location. I think Saudi Arabia is a despicable country. But I respect the law and the Constitution above all. The law is most necessary when controversy arises and people do things most of us find despicable, or uncouth, or unpopular. There is no need to defend people's freedom to say things we all agree upon, or worship in a way that offends no one. We need to defend freedom and ensure that people are allowed to do things we hate!

Posted by: jedrothwell1
-------------
Fine but should you not ask what the constitution WILL say about this? My feeling is that you are wrong in thinking that the constitution requires a mosque on THAT location. The constitution would only require that Muslims have a reasonable access to mosques.

Perhaps the solution would be to block the mosque, have a group of people, Muslim and non-Muslim, sue that their rights are violated. And then see what happens.

We are, let me point out, NOT all constitutional experts. We have courts for this purpose. If it is indeed a constitutional right to build the mosque, then so be it.

But is it actually a constitutional right to build a mosque in THAT PLACE? Let the courts decide. My own take is that it is not a constitutional issue here at all.

Newt's an idiot. It's sad that he was an elected official and doesn't understand that Americans don't base our freedoms on what's allowed in other countries. America doesn't have an official religion, so it doesn't matter how many churches any other country has. It only matters that we will not be held hostage by diabolical acts committed against us. The 9/11 terrorists may have been of Islamic faith but that doesn't mean others share their exact beliefs. McVey was a christian. The loon that flew into the IRS building -christian. Should we refuse to allow the construction of new churches because of these wackos? No. We have rights afforded by the constitution. Not public opinion.

If Stubby's against it
I'm FOR it

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

That settles it. We are better than they (Muslim extremists)are because of it. No matter what they call it, or where the money is coming from.

Mr. Gingrich's comments are vexatious, ignorant and completely counterproductive. Apparently, if we lived in Gingrich's version of the U.S., individual freedoms would only be afforded and respected if the same freedoms were afforded elsewhere - worse yet, only if they were afforded in Middle Eastern nations. Somebody hand him a copy of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights to read and learn please.

Everyone is attacking Gingrich the person. No one seems to care what he is saying. No one has addressed the question on the real bodies behind this cordoba house. Are they Americans or Saudi'es or someone else. If these people want to remain anonymous, then we can assume the worst. If it smells fishy, there is possibly some fish rotting behind the door. They could really be the wahabi jihadi groups. While our constitution gives full rights to US citizens, there is no such privilege for foreign interests. Why don't all of you calling Newt names get that? Instead, debate the issue of the secret society behind this project. Honesty and facts are the best way to prove to us that this thing is what it is announced to be. Otherwise, it is nothing but a Trojan horse, and we ain't buying the liberal, bleeding heart crap. So, will someone come up with a better argument instead of calling Newt names?

One of the things I would like to point out is that it isn't Newt who is the central person here, but the relatives and friends of those who were killed on 9-11.

I personally know a man (very likely a Democrat) whose son was killed on 9-11 and who refused to come out of his apartment for more than a month.

We need to think of that grieving father and not of Newt.

Are we willing to spit in the faces of some ten thousand friends and relatives of the 3,000 dead, just so we can spit in Newt's face as well?

And then how are we different from Bush who was (supposedly) willing to kill a lot of Iraqis so that he could kill Saddam as well?

Harming the innocent so you can also harm someone you hate, how is that moral?

What does Saudi Arabia have to do with terrorism? We went to war with Iraq and Afghanistan, Newt! What? What's that? The terrorists were actually from Saudi Arabia, and our focus on Iraq and Afghanistan has been a colossal fvcking waste of time, money, and human lives? Well, I guess, after almost nine years, it's nice to see at least one chicken-little conservative admit it, even if he doesn't actually have the nads to admit it directly.

http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm

"Muslim Victims of Terrorist Attack, September 11, 2001"

Build the mosque as their memorial.

The first amendment reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

In my humble interpretation of this amendment, I believe that it would cover the Muslims, Jews, Christians, Catholics, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, etc. from harassment about building their places of worship as well.

It also seems to me that what I think about the Muslim religion isn't important enough to prevent the people who are Muslim from building their mosque near the WTC site.

As for the WTC still not being rebuilt, you can thank the politicians and that dipstick Larry Silverstein, who was so lucky as to lease the place, conveniently making sure it had plenty of insurance before the alleged Muslim led attacks, thus making billions of dollars, and making sure the process has taken years to get going.

If that site was really so important to us we should have shaved a couple billion off of the budgets that have been wasted on Iraq and Afghanistan and rebuilt the buildings post haste. That would have sent a bigger message to the world than invasions ever did, showing that no matter how hard we get hit (from an inside job or from radicals), we will spring back immediately-and still keep our values intact.

Of course, that's for another universe it seems...

PATRIOT0523 wrote:

"Newt is 100% right here. Who is funding this mosque? If you won't divulge your funders, we have the right to assume the obvious. Wahabi's of saudi arabia. That is enough reason to stop this farce. Our Constitution does not give a free ride to some foreign entity to come in and do whatever it pleases in our country."

OH YES IT DOES. Read it! It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It says nothing about foreign entities or money from Saudi Arabia. It says that everyone -- including foreigners -- are allowed to worship as they please.

You and Gingrich want to throw away the Constitution and replace it with your own rules. You call yourself a "patriot" but you want to betray the Constitution and destroy our freedom. You are no patriot.

I do not like Islam. I agree that a mosque is not appropriate for this location. I think Saudi Arabia is a despicable country. But I respect the law and the Constitution above all. The law is most necessary when controversy arises and people do things most of us find despicable, or uncouth, or unpopular. There is no need to defend people's freedom to say things we all agree upon, or worship in a way that offends no one. We need to defend freedom and ensure that people are allowed to do things we hate!

And the Newt “family values Gingrich is still talking, why?

I much preferred him when he crawled back under his rock after divorcing his wife, while she lay in the hospital bed dying of cancer, in order to marry the woman he was having an affair with... all the while denouncing then President Clinton for the blow job he got.

Jealousy didn’t become him then as now...

Newt,
It would be easier for me to go against my gut reaction and agree with you if you didn't omit material facts. Like that while Cordoba mosque was built on a church, it was turned back into a church in the 13th century.

As for the Saudis. Well, we all know they're backwards in more ways than I'll bother to list here. But if you have the moral high ground in an argument, the way to win is not to act like the person who's wrong.

I'm not entirely comfortable with the uber mosque in that area either, but it would be a great way for us to signal to the Muslim world that we are better than religious conflict.

Actually America is being attacked by talk like this. Religious freedom is a good part of our foundation as a country. They have every right to build a Mosque and center two blocks from ground zero. We are not at war with the entire religion of Islam, just the extremists and terrorists. Even his pal George W. said this.

9/11 was not the sin of every Muslim in the world and they should not be made the whipping boy for that act.

Put your money where your mouth is Mr. Patriotic American. We pride ourselves about being a shining beacon to the world so why are you stomping on religious freedom like the people you mention in your little essay?

The place could start by teaching the truth about suicide and murder in Islam which are still strictly forbidden despite the twisted views of extremists.

One must question the Newt's understanding of religion.

As a lifelong Christian he never seemed to understand that multiple acts of adultery and divorce are sins.

As is lying.

As is stealing (22 bounced checks he wrote on government money revealed in the 1992 House Banking scandal).

Newt gives newts a bad name.

A Perfect Example of Public Waste.

While President Clinton was impeached through violations of privacy, his humanness was exploited by Gingrich as Gingrich was having an affair himself.

History forgets that at the same time Bin Laden was nearly destroyed in an Air Attack. But as Monica's dress was displayed in Public, Bin Laden layed the plans for 09/11.

Maybe if the Country had been focused on Terrorists instead of Politics during a distraction enabled by Gingrich, 09/11 would never had happened.

SAVE YOUR MONEY AMERICANS AND SAVE OUR COUNTRY. JUST SAY NO TO POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

thank-you.

Newt Gingrich announced the following on Hannity's Fox News show regarding the doctored Breitbart tape of the Sharrod talk to the NAACP: "Secretary Vilsack did exactly the right thing... firing her after that kind of viciously racist attitude was exactly the right thing to do." Many people have apologized for statements like this when it because clear that such statements were false. This includes Bill O'Reilly. But not Newt Gingrich. This man has no credibility about anything. They might as well have asked Breitbart to comment on this matter.

I think Gingrich is giving a bad argument for a conclusion which might well make sense. The comparison of the US with Saudi Arabia is silly. But ultimately we are not discussing Gingrich - we are discussing the project.

No doubt Gingrich brushes his teeth but surely none of us regard that as a reason to stop brushing. Issues have to be judged on their own merits.

It is more relevant to say that there are already plenty of mosques in New York, so it is not as if Muslim religious observance hangs on whether this particular mosque is built or not.

Note that the constitution guarantees freedom of religion but it can hardly guarantee that religious structures be built in this or that particular location. THAT issue needs to be decided on the basis of other factors.

To give a comparable example - Republicans have a right to have a convention. But that does not give them the right to hold it at any particular place. If a liberal university were to say, "Sure, but you cannot have it on our campus", that university would not be treading on the rights of the Republicans.

The right to have a convention is one thing. The right to have it in some particular place is another. One does not imply the other. Ditto for mosques.

Someone did offer an argument which seems stronger, namely that the proposed building is actually primarily a community center with only one floor devoted to religious purposes. That argument is much more relevant.

In such a case, my concern would be to make sure that the proposal is not a Trojan horse, that we approve of one thing and get another.

But if it is indeed a community center with a mosque embedded in it, then the case changes quite a bit.

Way to go! Newt and his Republican Demagogues aspire to join the Saudi family in the late 15Th century and be as bigoted, reactionary, and rich as the mighty Saudi Princes! Would you like to have whippings, hand whacks, stoning in the mall on Sundays as well? Need to put scarfs back on the uppity women and instill proper respect for the wealthy and elite! Poor ole Newt, just another sorry white man carrying the burdens of society.

Does this mean Newt wants American women not to drive cars?

How the Gingrich Stole Religious Freedom . . .

That was almost a genius comparison there, Newt, between NYC's 100 plus mosques and Saudi Arabia's zero churches or synagogues. Except for one thing . . . you forgot that NYC is part of America -- now I know you right-wingers don't consider it REAL America, but it really is part of the U.S. -- and in America we have religious freedom. Remember the First Amendment? It's part of that document called the Constitution that you claim to hold so sacred. In fact, religious freedom is one of the main tenets of our country's founding, one of the main reasons early settlers came to America. Did you think that the Pilgrims came here 'cuz it meant they got to take a fun, fun boat ride?

Sadly, last I checked, Saudi Arabia doesn't have an establishment clause or anything resembling a First Amendment. That's because they are a theocracy. Their country just doesn't respect the rights of individuals. But guess what -- that's one of the reasons WE'RE BETTER THAN THEM! Because we allow everyone to practice the religion they choose. Did you know that in Saudi Arabia, you can't switch your religion? Under penalty of death! Why, in our country, you can switch from being Baptist to Catholic! Just imagine if that carried the death penalty here in America! But YOU, of all people, don't need that pointed out, now do you?

That's why I find it odd that you, of all people, enjoying your freedom to switch religions, want our country to be a little more like Saudi Arabia. You want to restrict the ability -- nay, the right -- of others to practice the religion of their choosing. Oh sure, I know, you're not saying people can't be Muslim. You're just saying there are certain places in America where people can't be Muslim. Are there any other places -- or any other religions -- for which you want to diminish religious freedom? How about not allowing any Hindus in Brooklyn? Or no Buddhists in South Dakota? Or do you just want to go the whole nine yards and establish a theocracy, like those Saudi royals that your political party is so cozy with?

I reject your offer to undermine a basic tenet of my beloved country, and instead choose to respect the Constitution, continue to allow religious freedom, and KEEP AMERICA BETTER THAN THEM -- in spite of people like you!

Newt is 100% right here. Who is funding this mosque? If you won't divulge your funders, we have the right to assume the obvious. Wahabi's of saudi arabia. That is enough reason to stop this farce. Our Constitution does not give a free ride to some foreign entity to come in and do whatever it pleases in our country. Period. So, unless the cordoba people make a full disclosure of the real backers and their contributions for this 'poke in our eyes' scheme, sorry amigos, we will do everything to stop this nonsense. We know the jihadi movement's intentions, and we have every right to be on guard. Islam does not have a track record of being noble.

What? Did Newt just compare the US to Saudi Arabia and hold them to the same standard?

Newt, my dear. Read your history. Cordoba refers to the Library where there was a great deal of shared learning from Islamic, Jewish and Christian intellectuals. Further, the Mosque was converted TO a cathedral, not in the backwards/revisionist method that you describe. Read, Newt, Read!!!

Why should New Yorkers care what this serial adulterer Georgian thinks? After all, to him New Yorkers aren't "real Americans" anyway.

Wow, Mr. Gingrich. I may not agree with your political philosophies but I respected you as an intelligent adversary. However, your ignorance on religion is appalling. I agree with ClandestineBlaze above
in that this is our country and we are of a diverse spiritual people. We are not Saudi Arabia and we should not aspire to be in many ways. Why would we want to change that which has made this country what it is? Tolerant and incredibly powerful. Yes, we abuse that power at times but it doesn't mean we should continue down that path. Your words speak to that abuse and you are of an outdated mindset that is becoming more and more irrelevant as the years pass. The rest of the world progresses and evolves. I actually feel for you in that you are so blind that you will never know that you can obtain tolerance. All religions preach forgiveness. That is where our tolerance will stem from.

Since when are we lowering our freedoms to that of Saudi Arabia?! The liberty we enjoy to worship as we please demands that we allow others to do so as well. If they want to build a church on their property, a basic respect for American freedom demands we respect their freedom to do so.

Anything less is un-American. I'm SHOCKED that Gingrich would demand we compromise our values and reduce ourselves to Wahhabism as he is. Stunning...

This is just so typical of Gingrich and the right wingnuts ... let's get even with Saudis by becoming like the Saudis and deny Americans freedom of religion, expression, assembly, etc. These people are truly abhorrent ...

"SUBSIDYization" of MOSQUES [by Saudi WAHHABi & AYATOLLAHism Theocrats] should be legally ruled s "Illegal-Dumping" of Religion a hostile Religion, let alone Pumping [Islami 'Allah', Not like Kafir's 'G-D', Ishvara et al] such, in America & elsewhere.

Especially when; The Imam's[Captains] of Their Mosques Here; Enjoy Both Foreign Aid/Subsidy + 'Tax Exempt" StatUS's. This is tantamount To 'Capital appreciation or Capital Gain + Dividends' in the Stock market Game. But Mosques, even Though are Corporations here, are not Publically traded Common Stocks; but

They're Shares are in fact [Secretly] owned by the Saudi Arabian Wahhabi's Theocrats + Monarchs; who use OIL embargo (yes, they do) Threat and or NOt accept Petro-Dollars for Oil Sales anymore; which petro dollars gets parked in our Commercial Banks for Economic Stimuli (lending they're Petro dollars here etc..).! So

by Knowingly Addicting the Kafirs to islami Petro, which Kafirs Helped them Find & Pump/Transport, and taking advantage of SECULAR Tax-Haven gimmicks,

Note: Many Mosques; are used to Launder Illegal Proceeds [like Islami Afghani Heroin, Hashish, Opium) from the Islami Ummah Mafia types here. That's How The Nation Of Islam got So so Big So Fast (before Rockefeller Drug-Law's Took Effect).

There Members sold Drugs or fenced Stolen Swagg/property in various Neighborhoods and used The I.R.S. Tax Free Havens privilege to Launder or Wash such ill-gotten Tithes or gains, aye. So, Now Ye Know. So

HISTORY [Everybody's Jury; Judge & Witness] tells us Nice (naive) Kafirs ; Islami's hope We forget History; THAT

if Ye Let'm In in the NABE & be nice to The Wahhabi Islami-Ummah (while thy attack ye Cartoons & media & 1st Amendments rights) that the end is they will be looking to "Dominate Your Nabe" in 2 or 3 generations and Islami Ummah will try to convert Ye Girls (not so much the Boys) therein or at under the pretext "MY [Stolen Abrahamic] RELiGION"!?. Hence

The Islami Creep/Scare Phenomena-on, like Communism. So "ISLAMOPHOBIA" is a Right, and thus there is nothing wrong with you (Kafirs) for experiencing 'Islamaphbia' ; which the Imam's & Wahhabi's & Ayatollah's want you to Think (un)Otherwise.

Use Ye Head first, then ye Guts2nd, Then Heart3rd, Then Osss 4th. Then if ye still feel islamoPhobic, then there's nothing wrong with Ye Yo. Meaning, ye art in the Right Thinking REALm. Beware the "BIG BAD WANNABE [islami-Wolf; no sheep]"

Oh my!

How horribly offensive. Newt Gingrich wants the USA to become as religiously intolerant as Saudi Arabia?

I really think the USA is better than that.

I suppose the fundamentalists in the backward south -- America's Taliban -- support this, but I find this really anti-constitutional and Anti-American.

So Newt's argument is that as long as Saudi Arabia practices religious intolerance then so should we. Really. And this guy is supposed to be a historian.

He argues the time for double standards is over. Actually one of the principles our nation was founded upon was the "double standard" that while other nations refused to allow religious freedom we were better than that. The founders thought this principle so important they included it in our founding documents.

Thomas Jefferson would be disgusted by this argument and if Newt were interested in anything but attention and potential political gain he'd never make this argument.

That the issue of Islam is framed as one of freedom of religion transforms many people's opinions into "racism." This is a dangerous problem. Because Islam is not only a religion, it is also a political system, a legal system, and a totalitarian ideology whose followers are commanded by God to dominate all other nations and religions. Unless we can address this part of Islam while at the same time protecting its religious freedoms then we are sacrificing our own freedom in the name of freedom, and we will lose our selves in doing so. Unless we accept that Islam, not radicalism, for the past 14 centuries has waged this war against all other civilizations we will remain blind to the threat to freedom that is happening now. Islam political side is not compatible with Western society and culture and stands in complete opposition to the freedoms we hold most dear. Under Islamic law, as we see in Saudi Arabia, freedom can not exist.

The totalitarianism and fascist doctrines of Islam must be addressed in concert with protecting its religion as they are inseparable.

It is not only a right, but also the duty of free people to speak against every ideology that threatens freedom. As Thomas Jefferson said, The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

“Saudi Arabia's backwardness on religious tolerance should have nothing to do with America's views or the views of New Yorkers.”

It should have everything to do with our view (about the mega mosque being shoved down our throats) if the Saudis are the ones who are financing that monstrosity.

"I am an agnostic. But I agree, no more mosques anywhere, until Saudi Arabia opens its nation to any and all religions.

No more one way streets, enough tolerance until we start seeing more tolerance from the other side.

Posted by: Billy1932 | July 23, 2010 5:38 PM"
==============================

I'm an Atheist, and I disagree. What tolerance are we talking about? The proposed cultural center is not being built to appease Saudi Arabia, it's being built by Americans to share culture. Who cares if Saudi Arabia has no churches or synagogues. Vatican City doesn't have any mosques and synagogues, so should we remove all Cathedrals in this country until they allow other faiths to build holy sites?

It was an intolerance of cultures that led to 9/11. Building a cultural center shows that there are Muslims in the US who want to go against the thinking and ideology of al-Qaeda.

And worse is that you actually bought what Gingrich said. He's not looking after your values. He's not looking after your freedom. He's looking for your vote by turning you against your fellow man. And you took the bait.

Newt should go back to having torrid affairs with younger women and leave thoughts about religious freedom to those who understand what that means.

You have to admire Newt Gingerich's audacity. This is a man who was thrown out of Congress for massive ethic violations, but he still feels he has the moral authority to preach to others.

Gingrich endorses Saudi Arabia's approach to religious pluralism, and his poll numbers in the Bible Belt go wild.

Do we really have to start the next presidential election already?

Mr Gingrich is not a stupid man but this piece shows that he is a deeply cynical man. This op-ed is pure hate speech. Besides the constitutional issue of freedom of religion Saudi Arabia does not represent all of Islam. It is absurd to deny Muslims in the US the right to build a building because of 9/11, the actions in Saudi Arabia or the fact that Muslims once conquered Spain. Why should they not be able to build a mosque or a cultural center because of the action of others? If Mr. Gringrich is really concerned with the actions of Saudi Arabia why isn't he calling for a boycott of Saudi oil?

"

A few facts about this case that the media seems to have trouble relating:

1) The proposed building is NOT at the WTC site; it is two NYC blocks away with two buildings in between. The WTC site cannot be seen from this location.

2) The proposed building is a 13 story Community Center, similiar to a YMCA or JCC, containing a swimming pool, day care center, cooking school and other amenities open to the public. Religious activities will be held on only 1 of the 13 floors.

3) The site is zoned for the proposed use...no variances were needed, but the group took the proposal before the local community board anyway just to secure community buy-in for the project. End result, the board voted 29-1 to support the project.

4) The mosque behind the proposal has been a well regarded institution in that neighborhood for the past 23 years.

5) Gingrich is a !)&^ idiot. (I made that one up, but it is true).

Posted by: hoos3014 | July 23, 2010 10:59 AM"
===============================

Reposting this since other people may have missed it. Great post by hoos3014. Gingrich is using this topic as bait to get back into politics. It's disgusting that he wishes to turn Americans against each other simply to gain from it.

If he cared about morals and values, he would have done a better job as a family man. If he cares about America, he would do a better job in upholding the Constitution.

I am so tired of activist conservatives twisting and distorting our Constitution to fit their political needs. Newt, have you even read the Constitution?

Sunni Muslims killing Shia Muslims. Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims killing Ahmadia's, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and all other religions. Tolerance and peace loving ......... !!!

This argument is sickening and mocks the ideals that America was founded on and that we have maintained for over 200 years.

His complete lack of wisdom and understanding would disqualify him to lead any group, much less hold elected office.

If he were on a school board of education (God forbid) he would probably seek to outlaw algebra, given its connections to Islam.

At first I found the idea that Rauf was going to build this huge mosque/Islamic center near ground zero repulsive. Of course they should have the legal right to do it and on this the constitution seems clear. However, it does show extreme insensitivity and intolerance of the feelings of large numbers of New Yorkers and Americans who rightfully see building a shrine to the religion which was the motiviation for the attack as an affront and provocation. Instead of being sensitive to people's very reasonable feelings, the Cordoba folks simply claim that all those who oppose it are intolerant. Then I thought about that a bit. They are right, we must tolerate the expression of even those with whom we disagree and whose beliefs we find repulsive. That is their first ammendment right and it must be protected for all of us. But, the beauty of the first amendment is that it protects everyone's freedom of speech, including those who have something to say about the poor taste of such an action and the very offensive texts of Islam which inspired the attacks. Now I am somewhat hoping that they build the mosque and am equally hopeful that every person who walks by will express their opinion of that mosque through peaceful protest. It could also be an excellent location from which opponents of jihad could center to expound on and explain the violent nature of the Quran and Islamic history. Yes, perhaps it could be a place to congregate to learn more about Islam so everyone can realize how dangerous it is and how opposed it is to Western democracy, individual liberty, and separation of religion and state. I would like to have everyone walk by with sheets of offensive passages from the Quran torn out and stop in front of the mosque and simply rip up the sheets and toss them neatly into a trash bin, where they belong. Or, if one wants, just tear up a Quran. I for one find many of its passages offensive. I am sure that they will be offended by such actions, as recent events have proven, and it will be a lesson for them to learn what tolerance means and how they made many non-Muslims feel when they disregarded our feelings and built their shrine to submission.

The problem with the premise of your argument is that we have freedom of religion here and most other countries do not... perhaps that is why our forefathers put it first in the Bill of Rights.

Newt is right, but why stop there. No freedom of speech until China has a free press!

But seriously, our ability to our citizen speak and worship as they believe is a far more powerful rebuttal to radical Islamists than Newt's ridiculous ravings.

This is Newt's way of announcing his run for President, and it reflects his cynical view of the stupidity of the average GOP primary voter. I'm not questioning his cynicism, mind you.

Does he have a problem with Islam or does he have a problem with Saudi Arabia? He wants to ban a mosque in NYC because Saudi Arabia, one particularly backwards Muslim country out of many, won't allow Christian churches. I can understand his problem with the medieval Saudi government's policies, but what does that have to do with a mosque in the US? And the Crusades-era grievance rhetoric about Moorish Spain? Really?

I would certainly welcome any GOP efforts to embargo all oil from Saudi Arabia for human rights reasons. Make them pay for their abuses, in addition to their efforts to export their harsh brand of Islam to other countries. After all, 15 of the 19 hijackers from 9/11 were Saudis. Let the chips fall where they may even if it leads to $6 gas and billions of dollars in stranded costs from our oil companies. Who's with me and Newt? [Crickets].

Hey Newt, how about we remove all Christian churches from Oklahoma City? God, you're an idiot.

Gingrich just needs to shut up!

I am an agnostic. But I agree, no more mosques anywhere, until Saudi Arabia opens its nation to any and all religions.

No more one way streets, enough tolerance until we start seeing more tolerance from the other side.

Gingrich betrays himself here as a sell-out to the worst of the United States. He attacks the elite, although he's got a PhD, which makes (made) him part of the educated elite. I'm fairly sure he makes much more than most people in the United States (and very likely pays a lower percentage in taxes).
Yeah, Newt, I'm a historian, too, and I can probably lecture you about Puritan intolerance toward other religions. Are you trying to lead up back to the seventeenth century?

Mr Grinch thinks that religious freedom is not based in the constitution, but is a matter of some bilateral arrangement with other governments. This is profoundly anti-American in terms of our core constitutional values. It really, really is.

But, Newt, we are a nation with religious liberty and freedom. Saudi Arabia is not. So, if they will not be like us, we are supposed to be like them?????? Our Constitution is meaningfull and it is the Constitution that the President and the Congress swear to protect, to support, and to defend.

Isn't that the difference between us? If all places of worship are forbidden by zoning in that area, then fine, ban the mosque. However, if we abide by our own first amendment -- and there's no zoning regulation forbidding it -- then it should go up as a proud monument to the fact that the United States recognizes the value of the individual and that our rights are for ALL our citizens.

I'm proud to live in a country where this can be debated and approved (or not) by the people of New York. The rest of us should butt out of their affairs. They bore the brunt of 9/11. Let them choose which phoenix should rise from its ashes.

What Mr. Gingrich is really saying is this: There should be no freedom or tolerance in America until there is freedom and tolerance everywhere else.

Gingrich is right on the money.
He is an excellent judge of the public mood.
Those who cry foul and hurl insults are
behind the curve.

A great number of people do not want this insulting structure built on this sacred site.

The American political elite shall ignore this popular feeling at their peril.

"There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia. "

The last time I checked, not only is America not Saudi Arabia, but America ought not be striving to be like Saudi Arabia.

I don't really care whether the mosque/cultural center/whatever gets built in that location--I'm not from NYC, it's not my choice to make, it's theirs. But this opening salvo doesn't even make any damn sense. Saudi Arabia's backwardness on religious tolerance should have nothing to do with America's views or the views of New Yorkers.

We're NOT Saudi Arabia NEWT.
This is the land of the FREE.
If News is against it, I'm for it.
Build that sucker!

To ROHIT57,

Taste and sensativity are very subjective points of view. I do understand some people thinking it doesn't quite fit having a mosque near the site of 9/11. I get the same feeling seeing a convent with alot of crosses near Aushwitz and have to remind myself they didn't put it there because their celabrating the Holocaust. The intention is good and that counts in my book as long as the action is also good. I make a habit of never assuming bad intentions until I can prove otherwise. I'm not very good reading peoples minds.
I do get the gut feeling reaction against the mosque. But I refuse to act on that unless it's backed by logical rational arguments before I would tell someone they can't do it. So far there have been none of those. Mr. Gingrich's argument is an invalid construct therefore his conclusions are invalid. All the arguments I've seen similar to Mr. Gingrich's are the same. They create invalid constructs equating equivalence between al qeada (who carried out the 9/11 attacks and all of Islam. The arguemnts all equal, "al qeada is an islamic group, al qeada is a terrorist group therefore all islamic groups are terrorists." This invalid construct is logic 101. No matter how they dress it up and twist it the arguments keep coming down to that construction. It's lazy, steroetypical thinking pretending to be thoughtfull to reach a predetermined outcome for the profit of the arguer. I detest that no end.

We should just do what muslims do.

Make a video about how we will extract revenge on.... everyone, their families... blood will pool the streets... blah blah blah...

Then, because of imminent threat, they will have to cancel the mosque right?

Just like they canceled south park?... didn't publish the cartoons...

You guys get it?

Poor ignorant Newt. It is a proposed COMMUNITY CENTER, not a Mosque. Perhaps we should not build churches near any federal buildings since Tim McVeigh, the American Jihadist used his religion to kill innocent Americans. Wake up people, the GOP is trying to use race as a wedge issue. We are better than that.

wow, you'd be such a sensitive outreaching president to the Muslm world

Let me acquaint you people with the U.S. Constitution, amendment 1:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .

The U.S. is governed by laws and by the Constitution, not by the opinions of Newt Gingrich. The people commenting here may be entirely correct that this mosque is intended to hurl insults and ridicule, or that it is insensitive, or that it is intended to be a foot in the door to convert us all to Islam and replace our laws with sharia. It may be that 100% of the funding for this mosque is coming from Saudi Arabia. I doubt any of that is true, but for the sake of argument suppose it is? The Constitution still gives them the right to build this mosque on private property, as long as it meeting zoning laws, and to worship as they please.

Gingrich calls himself a conservative, but he is a radical who would subvert the Constitution. He boasts that he wants to take away their freedom of religion today. He will take away your freedom tomorrow.

Maybe Newt would also like us to adopt Saudi Arabia's penalties for adultery as well as religious freedom?

I think it may be important to understand the difference between Jesus and Mohammad. Mohammad was persecuted by the Meccans and eventually he triumphed over them - but it was through force of arms. Also a Jewish tribe betrayed him, and he arranged to have them massacred.

Completely understandable, and we can easily imagine Gingrich acting exactly as Mohammad did. If someone disses you, get back at them.

But it is important to remember that Jesus would not have acted that way. His point of view was, "If one of us has to die, let it be me." That nobility of Jesus is why even people who are not Christians are inspired by him.

"Turn the other cheek", and "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone," these statements of Jesus are the mark of a true religious prophet who stands head and shoulders above all of us. And I say this as a Buddhist.

I do not regard Gingrich as a true Christian, in the sense that it is very doubtful that he takes Jesus seriously. But Gingrich is right about one thing - a mosque at the site of 9-11 is a foolish idea.

Below are some interesting links of fatwa's condemning terrorist and suicide bomber attacks. As I've said before only need one counter example to disprove an ALL argument. Obviously such arguments are exagerations. My point is when you use such an argument to link a small group that shares a single charatoristic in common with a much larger group and then assume equivalnce between those two groups you have committed a logical falacy. Any conclusions based on this falacy are simply invalid.
Posted by: kchses1
----------------
As I said, I was not equating Islam with terrorism so what you are saying is perhaps not quite to the point.

My main point is that having this mosque AT the WTC site shows an enormous lack of sensitivity towards the 3,000 vicitms. To be sure, most Muslims are not terrorist and many even condemn terrorism. But it is true that the aggressors on 9-11 were Muslims who attacked in the name of Islam.

Also, to be honest, Islam has a rather mixed record. Those who brand Muslims as terrorists are wrong, but so are those who think of Islam as a totally innocent religion.

Buddhism came to an end in India because Muslim invaders massacred Buddhist monks at the university of Nalanda, a major Buddhist center. Quite recently, the Taliban destroyed two ancient statues of the Buddha. This act tells us two things. That the statues were destroyed. And that for more than a thousand years, a Muslim Afghanistan allowed the statues to stand.

Also, I have myself a copy of the Koran, a present from one of my students, and I can personally check that the Koran does condone aggression towards "non-believers".

Please see,

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

We in America these days prefer to be simple minded and so we either go the way of "all Muslims are terrorists" or "Muslims are mostly peaceful."

Both statements are over simplifications.

A comparison between violence in Islam and violence in Christianity is misleading, because unlike Mohammad, Jesus was never a general, never killed anyone and never advocated killing. So Christians who want to be peaceful can always escape from the (often violent) Christian church into the arms of Jesus. Muslims have no such refuge in Mohammad.

So the two religions really are different.

"Religions in the US DON'T fly planes into buildings!!!"

No, "religions" don't act on anything. They are not persons. People motivated by religion do all kinds of crazy things, like fly planes into buildings, blow up Federal Buildings because they don't like the Government, kill abortion providers, etc. There are literally thousands of churches in Europe and the Middle East built on former temples to Pagan Gods - after they killed or forcibly converted all of the followers of those Gods. Christians have a lot of blood on their hands, too.

"People of New York need to be aware that a mosque is not a simple house of worship. It is an indoctrination place for a primitive ideology that is supremacist and intolerant. It propagates an ideology that whoever does not accept their belief system does not deserve to live."

Same with many Evangelical churches, yet they are allowed to build wherever and however big they want to. But let a minority religion want to build something? Oh noes! It's attack on our "values"? Well, MY values, and the values of the First Amendment, say that Freedom of Religion means EVERY religion.

Gingrich's bigotry is appalling, but it's also striking that it can be fueled only by stupidity or by cynicism, the latter if he was actually aware what a stupid argument he was making, in the pursuit of political points appealing to some people's worst instincts. There are so many standard tropes of bigotry here. Just to name a couple: (a) There is the vague "they" central to guilt by (even tenuous) association. All Muslims are basically the same, and the sins of some are the sins of all. This is a lynching mentality. And (b) There is the assumption of a terrible conspiracy. Yes, "they" know this is a secret plot with secret wink-wink meaning. Millions or billions of Muslims know about this "conspiracy." Again, standard bigotry: They're taking over! They have secret code words! Don't be fooled: Your Muslim neighbor wants to kill you!
The most bigoted and idiotic part is that Muslims and Saudia Arabia are the same thing. So, since the IRA was once terrorist, and they claimed to represent Catholics, how dare Catholics have churches in this country! What poor taste to have these anywhere near neighborhoods of British Americans since some British Americans died in IRA terrorist attacks (by the logic of some of those who have posted)! Newt, we have a First Amendment.
Yes, there's a problem with Islamist terrorism. And most Muslims have nothing to do with it. I'm not religious, but Muslim Americans are a valued part of American society. I hope such Americans feel welcome and realize that every society has its hateful citizens, the likes of Newt Gingrich.
The best comment on Newt's bigotry and idiocy comes from stevie314159 on Matthew Yglesias's blog: Perhaps Newt should first argue that Saudia Arabia's laws on adultery be applied in the United States?

Utterly unconscionable. If they build this mosque dont be surprised if the peasants revolt. This is just too much.

I hope that we will always have a double standard when it comes to tyranny. I hope that we always stand for freedom against violence and oppression. We fight those who harm us, but we don't deny the rights of innocent people to pray in the way of their choice.

In one case we should have a single standard: Muslims of good will should denounce preachers of hate like Osama bin Laden, and Christians of good will should denounce hypocrites like Newt Gingrich.

I believe that the movement to prevent the building of this mosque shows that the mosque will not bring an interfaith dialogue, which is the primary purpose of this building. The mosque will only make those who don't like Islam in the first place even more angry.

In addition the mosque is way too close to ground zero and will be built way too soon. Maybe 50 years from now, the mosque could be built. Not today, next year or in 5 years. That is just plainly irresponsible in my view.

It will be a danger to the neighborhood, it will very likely be the target itself of reprisal!

""America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization." This is one hell of a claim. Other then this mosque what is the proof of this claim? "
Posted by: kchses1 | July 23, 2010 11:00 AM

In his book "What's Right with Islam", Feisal Abdul Rauf has called for a program on the scale of the Apollo project, something "on a level never before undertaken" to integrate Muslims into America.

Please recall the Cordoba Initiative's mission -

“Cordoba Initiative aims to achieve a tipping point in Muslim-West relations within the next decade”

Please familiarize yourself with the US-Muslim Engagement Program.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBE3Dg6pUf8

Please do your homework on this issue, it is important.

Most times in the past I have dissagreed with Newt. This time I have to agree with him. Go build the mosque someplace else.

do not believe I said that it is put up by Islamic terrorists. So why should I prove what I did not say? :) I would say, however, that if it is Saudi money then it is a bit tainted. The Saudis have been encouraging Muslim nations to go for a very intolerant brand of Islam and one of their methods is to put up money for madrassas which serve as substitute for real education for Muslim children. Don't forget that bin Laden is a Saudi.
And actually have you checked that the terrorists have been roundly condemned by ALL mainstream Muslim authorities? Proof please? :)
What I am saying is simply that having a mosque in THAT location is in very poor taste.
I am very very far from being anti-Muslim, and I already said that if the US really wants to do something for the Muslim world, they should put brakes on Israel's grab for Muslim land. That would be a REAL understanding of Muslim feeling.
But to put a mosque near the site of the WTC bombing and to insult the 3,000 people who died on 9-11 just to prove "We are not like Saudi Arabia" seems a bit childish.
The constitution does protect freedom of worship, but it says nothing to the effect that places of worship can be enacted wherever and whenever the worshippers like.
Since Muslims already have 100 mosques in NYC, what do you think are their chances of prevailing if they sued that their freedom of religion was not protected if the new mosque was not placed near WTC? I doubt even Kagan would vote on their side.
Posted by: rohit57 | July 23, 2010 2:13 PM_________________________________________

Below are some interesting links of fatwa's condemning terrorist and suicide bomber attacks. As I've said before only need one counter example to disprove an ALL argument. Obviously such arguments are exagerations. My point is when you use such an argument to link a small group that shares a single charatoristic in common with a much larger group and then assume equivalnce between those two groups you have committed a logical falacy. Any conclusions based on this falacy are simply invalid.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1969662,00.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2010/05/sec-100522-afps01.htm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8740980/

There Should Be NO Mosque At Ground Zero.Even Though 9/11 was Caused By War Mongers IN The USA.Cheney Was at The Controls For This Event.

rohit57,

You are correct, I just rattled off a few religions and did not intend to offend. We as a nation should tout the fact that we accept all religions here, so maybe we do make that area a cultural, religion center for all.

How about this. For every Christian church built in the Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia, we will build two mosques on Ground Zero!!

rohit57,

The mosque isn't being built to commemorate the murders. It just so happens that the terrorists practiced a very extreme branch of a very large and very normal religion. So your comparison is off. As many others have said, we wouldn't keep churches from being built near the Oklahoma City building, just because McVeigh used the bible as justification for his atrocious act.

Newt's mother and father apparently never told him to be the better person.

Imjustsayin3:

Please describe, specifically. how close the proposed site is to Ground Zero.

There would be no better message to Bin Laden and his flock of idiots, to show that we in America will not let he and his idiots use their terror to control how we behave. Build two mosques, a church, and a Jewish Temple all on the same block.
Posted by: pathfinder12
---------------
As a Buddhist this seems a bit chauvinistic to me. You are mentioning the three mosaic religions, all of which regard the Old Testament as holy, and leave out all other religions.

OK, I suspect you did not intend to insult Buddhists or Hindus.

But one solution would be to have a building dedicated to all religions, and there could be different rooms in that building for each of the different religions. Then there would be no special salute to Islam, but neither would Islam be excluded.

There could also be an empty room for the atheists! :)

Or perhaps it could have a fossil in it to honor Darwin....

I don't believe I have ever agreed with anything Newt Ginrich has said and I do not now endorse most of his argument here. But regardless of whether it is the actual intention of the supporters of this mosque to hurl insult or ridicule at the US, it is supremely cold and insensitive for anyone of Islamist faith to choose this site for the erection of a symbol of the belief system in the name of which such deliberate and horrendous murders were committed on 09/11/2001.

Gingrich is such a jerk.
Based on his "thinking" (and I use the term very loosely), there shouldn't be any Christian churches in most parts of the world, but particularly not anywhere near the Holocaust Museum or any of the former Nazi concentration camps.
Posted by: st50taw
-----------------
I certainly think it would be in bad taste to have a monument to German soldiers near the Holocaust museum, even if most of the soldiers were not Nazis.

If you want a monument to dead German soldiers, fine. But NOT near the Holocaust museum.

If you want a mosque in New York, fine also. But not near where 3,000 Americans were killed.

There would be no better message to Bin Laden and his flock of idiots, to show that we in America will not let he and his idiots use their terror to control how we behave. Build two mosques, a church, and a Jewish Temple all on the same block.

100 Mosques in NYC, that's 20 per borough. I'd bet most are actually in Queens and Brooklyn in residential areas. How many are in Lower Manhattan, Newt? Newt?

so, are you saying this mosque is being put up by Islamic terrorists, who have been roundly condemned by all mainstream Muslim authorities?
Proof, please?
Posted by: summicron1
---------------
I do not believe I said that it is put up by Islamic terrorists. So why should I prove what I did not say? :) I would say, however, that if it is Saudi money then it is a bit tainted. The Saudis have been encouraging Muslim nations to go for a very intolerant brand of Islam and one of their methods is to put up money for madrassas which serve as substitute for real education for Muslim children. Don't forget that bin Laden is a Saudi.

And actually have you checked that the terrorists have been roundly condemned by ALL mainstream Muslim authorities? Proof please? :)

What I am saying is simply that having a mosque in THAT location is in very poor taste.

I am very very far from being anti-Muslim, and I already said that if the US really wants to do something for the Muslim world, they should put brakes on Israel's grab for Muslim land. That would be a REAL understanding of Muslim feeling.

But to put a mosque near the site of the WTC bombing and to insult the 3,000 people who died on 9-11 just to prove "We are not like Saudi Arabia" seems a bit childish.

The constitution does protect freedom of worship, but it says nothing to the effect that places of worship can be enacted wherever and whenever the worshippers like.

Since Muslims already have 100 mosques in NYC, what do you think are their chances of prevailing if they sued that their freedom of religion was not protected if the new mosque was not placed near WTC? I doubt even Kagan would vote on their side.

Gingrich is the Last person who should spout any "religious" views.

He is a real life Dorian Gray

If we can make a deal that Saudi will open their country to all religions and they can spend money to build a mosque in our country, that will work.
Posted by: ak1967 | July 23, 2010 1:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment

___________________________________________

I could be wrong but I'm under the impression that at the moment there is virtually no funding for this project. That the funding as of yet has not been secured. I would have more faith in the ant-money laundering and anti-terrorist protections in place. They are extremely extensive. The amount of money needed for this project will require alot funding. If it's from overseas and has terrorist connections I have alot of faith it will be caught and revealed. If that happens then the mosque would be closed and it's founders arrested. Something for you to look forward to.

It is conceivable that Saudi and others have at the back of their mind the name Cordoba and what it means. I would not worry about it. It is plain foolish. The bottom line is we are a free country and if people with their money want to build a place of worship so they can pray during working hours, that is their call. However, no money should be allowed from Saudi or any other country that does not have complete freedom of all religions to fund any mosque, school etc etc.

Let me say this... FIRST, this is the USA NOT KSA and as such ALL houses of worship are permissable. If Newt wants to start playing by Saudi standards he can go live there. SECOND, Islamic spain is seen by muslims as the height of islamic civilization. It represents enlightenment and tolerance to the avergae muslim. Islamist and Newt seem to have a diferent view on the subject. THIRD, a muslim can't support any "leftist" issue without being labelled a terrorist by these ppl. Well I support the flotilla. I support the mosque and the swimming pool they plan to build in it. And if Newt becomes the standard by which we judge what is right and wrong in islam we are ALL screwed.

People of New York need to be aware that a mosque is not a simple house of worship. It is an indoctrination place for a primitive ideology that is supremacist and intolerant. It propagates an ideology that whoever does not accept their belief system does not deserve to live.
Below is a link to what an undercover team found what is being taught in one such place in England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undercover_Mosque

Posted by: abrahamhab1 | July 23, 2010 1:41 PM
__________________________________________

I didn't open the link to save time I will assume your correct, then this mosque should be closed. How does it connect to the proposed mosque in NYC? Are you assuming all mosques are thereby tainted by this mosque in England and should be closed? Again the underlying asumption appears to be that one mosque or muslim is the same as all mosques or muslims. Clearly that assumption is false.
It is also clear that some muslims have corrupted the religion of Islam and are dangerious. They are not dangerous because they are muslim they are dangerous because they are corrupted.
So far these instances of corruption in the US appear extremely limited and isolated. Why do you feel the need to assume that is systemic to Islam?

Does one in ten people here even know exactly where this mosque would be? On Park Place, two blocks away from the World Trade Center site, with two blocks full of buildings. I strongly doubt it has any view of the ground of Ground Zero, as it would have to be a very high building indeed to see over those two buildings (look at Google Earth). I'm not even sure they'll be able to see the new tower, even from outside.

Anyone, by the way, who thinks they'll be able to hear any calls to prayer from the site obviously doesn't know how noisy NYC is. Jeez. What a tempest in a teacup.

If we can make a deal that Saudi will open their country to all religions and they can spend money to build a mosque in our country, that will work.

I'm not even going to take the time to read the whole article.

Who cares if there are no churches in Saudi Arabia? This country was built on religious freedom. Are we going to ban Roman Catholic churches in Oklahoma City because of Timothy McVeigh?

People of New York need to be aware that a mosque is not a simple house of worship. It is an indoctrination place for a primitive ideology that is supremacist and intolerant. It propagates an ideology that whoever does not accept their belief system does not deserve to live.
Below is a link to what an undercover team found what is being taught in one such place in England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undercover_Mosque

We are a free country and people should be able to build a place of worship. It is that simple.

However, the money should only come locally or from countries who allow similar freedom. It is that simple.

No Saudi money unless they open their country to other religions. It is that simple.

so, if I understand him correctly, we can't have a mosque here because saudi arabia doesn't have a church there?
In other words, Newt wants the US to adopt the religious tolerance policies of a country that considers us infidels and wants us dead and even holds telethons to support suicide bombers in Israel.
Yeah, that will work.
Posted by: summicron1
------------------
Newt is not saying that we cannot have a mosque in America - in fact he points out that there are a hundred mosques in New York city ALONE!
But he is saying that the WTC where 3,000 Americans died from Islamic terrorism, might not be the best site for a mosque.
Are you able to understand this simple point?
Posted by: rohit57 | July 23, 2010 11:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment

so, are you saying this mosque is being put up by Islamic terrorists, who have been roundly condemned by all mainstream Muslim authorities?

Proof, please?

As is noted elsewhere, Islam and terrorists are not the same thing, just as Tim McVeigh and Christianity are not the same thing.

Were there no Muslim Americans killed on 9/11? Have no Muslim soldiers died fighting our two wars since 9/11? Should churches be allowed to be built near schools, as schools are ripe with young children and tempting to priests?

Oh, and apparently Newt forgot that Saudi Arabia is an oligarchy and the United States is a Democracy.

Newt Gingrich is such a has been, who is fighting for the limelight again. Why doesn't he write about delivering a divorce request to his bedridden, cancer stricken, wife, as proof of his righteousness? NY is a money town; no one asks where the money comes from. It is commerce. Besides, the presence of a mosque is symbolic to no one, except the ones who worship in it. Every one else should just mind their business!

You bunch of Wacko's can't admit Newt is right, this is a slap in the face of Americans and Free people. These Islamic wack jobs have so many brainwashed, I am surprised Obama has posted here supporting this digrace to the people who died. Wake up, soon it will be too late, what will it take a nuke by these Islamics to wake you up?
Posted by: huntls | July 23, 2010 12:52

__________________________________________

I would ask who are these islamics your referring too? Al qeada? The Taliban? Neither Al qeada or the taliban are building a mosque in NYC. Are you positing an equivalence of all Muslims with Al qeada or the taliban? If yes, please explain how you came to such a connection.

Newt is certainly showing some wear and tear with old age. What a dim bulb editorial. He is very smart, so you figure that he must be calculating that this type of horsepucky is what people want to hear. Ay caramba. Why is it that the 10% of the population that is the most bigoted and stupid is the 10% that all the GOP wannabes pander to?

YIkes.

Gingrich is such a jerk.

Based on his "thinking" (and I use the term very loosely), there shouldn't be any Christian churches in most parts of the world, but particularly not anywhere near the Holocaust Museum or any of the former Nazi concentration camps.

News alert Newt: Our religious tolerance is one reason we are a better country than Saudi Arabia. You make it sound like our freedoms are a bad thing. What's up with that???

Yes, we are not Saudi Arabia and we have MANY mosques in the US, even in New York.
Those mosques ALREADY prove that we are different.
The question is whether we want a huge mosque RIGHT NEXT to the place where 3,000 Americans were killed by Islamic terrorism.
To erect such a mosque in THAT place would not be tolerance and friendship, it would be a kind of slavish stupidity in the name of the constitution (which apparently many posters citing it seem not to have read).
Posted by: rohit57 | July 23, 2010 12:26 PM

__________________________________________

My problem with stms like this is that their is an underlying assumption of equivalence between Islam and Islamic terrorist. Such assumptions need to be proven. They are not a priori assumptions. Nor can one quote random verses from the Koran to "prove" such an equivalence. If that was sufficient proof I could quote the recent fatwas from the leading Koranic scholers and clerics across the world and in the USA condemning terrorist acts or aiding people whio commit such acts as proof that no such equivlence exists. Tha's not valid either. The best one can do with such examples is show that it refutes Mr. Gingrich's claim that all Muslims would view the erection of a mosque near the WTC site as a triumph of Islam over the USA. Clearly I can demonstrate some Muslims who would not therby invalidating his supposition of all Muslims.

It behooves those who claim this mosque is a 'surrender' or a disgrace or whatever negative pejoritive you wish to use to show exactly how such a mosque equals your claim. Making the claim is not sufficent. So far the attempts at such 'proof' like Mr. Gingrich's have been laced with more unproven and in some instances illogical assumptions supposedly proving the original assumption. You cannot logically use unproved assumptions to prove another unproved assumption. Those are false proofs.

You guys need to think clearly and accuretly. So far you have repeatedly failed.

fr zenwick:

>...While I have never in my life agreed with anything Newt Gingrich had to say, he has a point here....

Yeah, he does. Right on top of his pointed little head.

Newt has a gift. For being wrong. And being crassly politically opportunistic.

As many have pointed out, those wishing to building the Islamic center have the RIGHT to do so (assuming they follow the law, etc), this being America and NOT Saudi Arabia. Now personally I think those peaceful and loyal American Muslims (does anyone have a shred of evidence to the contrary?) are making an ENORMOUS PR mistake. But that's a completely different issue.

I think Gingrich is a bright and articulate guy. I also think he's a bottom-feeder. Glad he's been out of power. May he stay out of power.

Under the Constitution, "we", that is the United States Government, don't have any right to allow or disallow the building of a mosque. And the City of New York has no right to disallow the building of a religious structure based on what religion it is. That's the beginning and the end of the story. I would think that people like Newt Gingrich, who claim to be in favor of small government, would be happy with that result. But no, that would require logical consistency, not a trait native to the Republican mind.

"The question is whether we want a huge mosque RIGHT NEXT to the place where 3,000 Americans were killed by Islamic terrorism."

"We" don't get a say in this. If NYC is OK with the construction plans, why does anyone else really care? And by the way, there were Muslim New Yorkers killed that day. What is this we vs them crap?

You bunch of Wacko's can't admit Newt is right, this is a slap in the face of Americans and Free people. These Islamic wack jobs have so many brainwashed, I am surprised Obama has posted here supporting this digrace to the people who died. Wake up, soon it will be too late, what will it take a nuke by these Islamics to wake you up?

This guy makes white people look and sound crazy.

While I have never in my life agreed with anything Newt Gingrich had to say, he has a point here.

The discussion really ought to be one about engagement versus confrontation. At this juncture I don't think it's clear to anyone whether Western civilization and the Islamic world have the capability to coexist with each other, particularly under our current circumstance where Western dependence on oil gives the Islamic world extraordinary power.

Newt is clearly arguing for confrontation, and what he says is not unreasonable. However, I believe it would be far better to avoid the problem by moving rapidly to end our addiction to oil. The Bush Administration set us back a decade, and we need to make up lost time.

Go away, Newt, you slimy little lizard. You and your neo-facists have an agenda that's so transparent any fool can right through it, except your blindfolded followers.

George W. Bush built a $700,000,000 super embassy in the heart of Bagdad so that every day, the citzens of Iraq will be reminded of the country that destroyed their infrastructure and their society, gave them a civil war, and replaced one dictator with another.

So, Newt...

How do we define "bigot"?

Why are bigots always so anxious to adopt the standards of conduct used by those the bigots claim to detest? To be a good American you want us to adopt the same levels of religious tolerance as the Saudis?

Madness.

Newt...This is how it is supposed to work: Americans set the standards for fairness and generousity of spirit. They don't hide behind the tired words of bigotry. In that context, Newt, do you consider yourself to be a good American?

Newt, we are not Saudi Arabia! We have freedom of religion here and there are many Muslims (who are American citizens) in NYC. Apparently the cultural center will be open to all and only part of it is a mosque, and it does not "overlook" the WTC site. The people who view this a "stab in the heart" or other such nonsense don't live in NYC and normally think NYC isn't "real America" anyway.
Posted by: jake14
---------------
Yes, we are not Saudi Arabia and we have MANY mosques in the US, even in New York.

Those mosques ALREADY prove that we are different.

The question is whether we want a huge mosque RIGHT NEXT to the place where 3,000 Americans were killed by Islamic terrorism.

To erect such a mosque in THAT place would not be tolerance and friendship, it would be a kind of slavish stupidity in the name of the constitution (which apparently many posters citing it seem not to have read).

BTW Absolutely nothing in the USA support of Israel is a sign of disrespect of Islam, that argument is total BS. Posted by: Muddy_Buddy_2000
==================
Why call an argument "total BS" simply because you do not agree with it?

As a matter of fact the Muslim world is VERY angry about the unqualified support which the US gives to Israel.

And even if I was wrong, my statement would still not be "total BS". Total BS is something which is not even plausible.

In this case, the connection between US support of Israel and Muslim anger, EVEN leading to the attack on the WTC, is not only not total BS, it is in fact real.

Do take a look at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/90sep/rage.htm

and

http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100602/FOREIGN/706019789/1002

before you start talking about "total BS".

I do wish that WaPo readers knew some other words beside BS...

Newt, we are not Saudi Arabia! We have freedom of religion here and there are many Muslims (who are American citizens) in NYC. Apparently the cultural center will be open to all and only part of it is a mosque, and it does not "overlook" the WTC site. The people who view this a "stab in the heart" or other such nonsense don't live in NYC and normally think NYC isn't "real America" anyway.

By like token, I would like to see an immediate ban on construction or operation of conservative Christian churches within one mile of the site of the Oklahoma City bombing. Why? Because Timmy McVeigh's links to the right wing churches were at least as strong as Mohammed Atta's links to mainstream Islam.

As for "historical ignorance", Newt, read up a bit on what Muslim Spain was like. By the standards of the day, it was an island of religious tolerance and thoughtful scholarship. The rest of western Europe was, at that time, a cesspool of ignorance and religious bigotry where Muslims and Jews lived in fear for their lives. Christians and Jews were treated unfairly in Muslim Spain (mostly via taxation) but were allowed to practice their religion largely undisturbed.

I (a Christian, by the way) fear an America ruled by the likes of you far more than I fean an America that allows a mosque to be built near ground zero.

Gingrich used to actually be a semi-serious voice in republican party in the 90s. What a jerk he is nowadays with his embrace of christian fanaticism. Really...where have all of the adults in repiblican party gone? Trashing intellectuals, secularism and immigrants is about all the repubs are good for. Go ahead Newt...just keep trying to get angry old overweight white men angry....real statesman you are you jerk....

SportsChickFL -
"If America really wants to show respect for Islam, then tell Israel to stop stealing land from Muslims and to treat the people of Gaza like human beings."

This has nothing whatsoever to do with respect for Islam, its respect for our own principle of freedom of religion. If the group wanting to build the center worshiped Satan, or Elvis my support would not change at all.

BTW Absolutely nothing in the USA support of Israel is a sign of disrespect of Islam, that argument is total BS. It maybe unjust to support Israel over the Pal, or at least to not push Israel to be kinder to the people who will not stop attacking their civilians, but nothing in US support is due to disrespect of Islam. Note its completely possible to believe in and support Israel's claims to the land based on either the UN ruling(pre 1967 boarders) or religion ( all Israel has and a lot more according to some), without any disrespect to Islam. Just because I respect Islam, or at least peoples right to believe how they choose, does not require me or anyone else to accept their claims.

NOOT?

Noot's back? Shouldn't he be out committing adultery with Mrs Noot #4?

Never trust anyone named after a lizard.

Why anyone would listen to this blowhard is beyond me.

What in the name of all that is holy do Saudi Arabia's religious policies have to do with those of the United States? I never thought I'd say this, but I miss George W. Bush. Not as president, but as head of the Republican Party. He went out of his way to differentiate between Islam and fanatical jihadis. I assume Newt is firing the first shot of his 2012 campaign. This should shore up some support among the more fanatical members of the base.

Why is Newt Gingrich trying to tear American down to Saudi Arabia's level. He clearly really hates America and even its rock bottom freedoms so much he is willing to discard them for a political stunt.

First President Obama has no power in the decision whether to allow a Mosque at ground zero or anywhere else. Its not federal land, and zoning laws are local. As long as its not on ground zero, then even the governor of NY has not power. It would not matter in the least whether the President was Obama, Shara Palin (shudder), Rush Limbuagh, or Jesse Jackson, they still would never get a vote. If the President tried to intervene in a local zoning law to favor or disfavor a group based on religion the Supreme Court might not even wait for a case to stop the President.

This is a matter for the local zoning boards in NYC, as far as I know they have the ONLY JURISDICTION which applies. IF the zoning board was to ban this project because of religion, that would be a very, very dark day for America, because if it stood court challenge, this mosque would only be the first in a long line of churches and other places banned. Remember lots of people dislike Mega Churches, Conservative, Liberal, Catholic, Jewish, and LDS Churches. No matter what church or atheist group you belong to, I can promise you that somebody in charge somewhere in the USA would gladly ban your group from building using the same principle here.

For example, several major White dominated churches have a "bad" history with racial discrimination and slavery in the USA. So we could see a total ban of such churches in Atlanta, Memphis and New Orleans if the African American leadership there decides that the church in question support of the crime of slavery makes them too insulting to have in their city. Slavery was certainly a much worst crime than 9/11, so legally its a slam dunk if a religious based ban of a Mosque is approved.

.....................................(..U;S;A..).............................
........................oooooooooooooooooooooo......
....................ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.........
............oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
.........oooooooo................oooo.................oooooooo......
......ooooooo.....................oooo.....................ooooooo...
.....oooooo........................oooo........................oooooo..
....oooooo.........................oooo..........................oooooo.....
....ooooo...........................oooo............................ooooo
.....oooooo......................oooooo.......................oooooo
.....oooooo.....................oooooooo....................oooooo
......ooooo...................oooooooooooo................ooooo
.......oooooo..........oooo....oooo....oooo..........oooooo
.........ooooooooo..............oooo................oooooooo....
...........oooooooo..............oooo..............oooooooo....
...............oooooooo..........oooo...........oooooooo.....
..................oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo............
........................oooooooooooooooooooooo..................
..............................oooooooooooooooo....
...................................ooooooooooo .

. . . . . . . PEACE, SHALOM, SALAAM. AHIMSA, ZINGYU,
. . . . . . . PAZ, FRIEDAN, MIR..…LOVE, ROCK-n-ROLL..!

Islam is one the three great religions in the world. The mosque is where Muslims worship their religion. What's wrong with building a mosque near Ground Zero? Just because SOME of the perpetrators of 9-11 were Saudi Arabian Muslims, doesn't mean that ALL Muslims condone what these few terrorists did.

Newt Gingrich left his wife who was diagnosed with cancer for a younger babe. Does this give him some kind of moral superiority over the vast majority of Muslims? He shut down the government, depriving millions of citizens of services to make Republican political points, out of meanness. Does this make him a better person than all Muslims, or liberals, or progressives in this country?

The CASE for and ARGUMENT to [Legally & within Reasoning) NOt allow that G-dless Mosque to go-up so near/close to 'Ground-0'.

First of All, THIS; It's like as if "Build & They Will Come" (Not a Stadium). And Since We are Talking about Manhattan, NYC, and then there are certain Licensing Requirements, not so much as building codes; but based on the fact that New York State for example, Unlike The Nyc Dep't Consumer Affairs (Which is ironically near the 911 site & Which Dep't Many Islami's infiltrated & do Paper work for many Illegals Biz owners & hanky panky etc..),

has restrictions on , say, How many Liquor Stores [Limited by operation of Law] can a Neighborhood have. Note: The 'New York Liquor Authority' does NOt allow a Liquor store on Every City Block. Likewise

The NYState "Lotto Authorities" Do NOt allow a Lotto on Every Block etc... Soo, it seems that NYS Lotto Machines & NYS Liquor Licenses for store-Fronts are based on Proportion to Demand & Supply, as needed bases. Soo this

can also be looked at in proprtion to as Needed bases of the Type-Of NABE. And That NABE, or "Neck of the Woods" Has NO need for a Islami Mosque Leave alone a CULTtural & a SECTtion Center.

VERDICT: Go Take The "Mobile KABBA" Muhammadian-Mountain Somewhere Else!

iMportant: Pleas know that iSLAMi's claim that Islam is the Last (& first?) Religion that's above all KAFIT Ummah. Soo the Good News out of this whole 911 Mosque{provoke, not Promo} is that fact that That Area, HISTORICALLY, was built by KAFIRS 1st; Not Last! So

Islami-Ummah hath No Right to think by Building a $100,000 WAHHABi & AYATOLLAH {All Mosques acyt as their Eyes & Ears aka Embassy's} Institution that it is tantamount to the song Poppa "Wherever he lay his Hat, it's his Home".

Islami's Missed the Boat, so to spaketh and they will never have any thing to contribute to The America WE [i] Used To Know! Never! WE are Not Indian's & they are Not 'Pale-Face' either! The Islami-SCARE/creep is Real; not only the Communist Threat/Scare of McCartney, Nixon, era of 50's commy Hunting [now Terrorist hunting]..

Opps. The Islami's 54+ OIC Nations Will NOt allow the "1st Amendment" Rights We [i] YE, YO enjoy here, to enjoy in their Islami-Nations. They have "Religio Police" but We Don't. So It's Time [i] WE Americans Do! that is; To keep an eye on them "AL TAQIYAH"ists (Spy's) Islami's [Exponential Creep] Growth Here & Limit their Mosque Acquisitions, buildings; until until They give KAFIR's "Equal [Religious & Speech] Right"s & More!

I don't know. It sucks that Saudia Arabia doesn't allow churches and synagogues. Shame on them. But you know that's their country. They do what they want. Well freedom of religion is in the consitution so that means that a mosque can be built wherever there's land and zoning.

Is it worth it go through all this trouble to have a mosque in such a controversial location. No not really. Do I like it? Especially if the Cordoba stuff is true. No not really? But you know that's the price of freedom you have to deal with things you don't like. I'd much rather live in an America that truly allows religous freedom versus an America that gets to pick and choose its religous freedoms.

seabelly: WHO SAID Muslims couldn't practice their religion in NYC???
jONTOMUS: one question for you that NO ONE has answered YET: HOW MANY CHURCHES THAT AREN'T ISLAMIC ARE IN THE MIDDLE EAST??? Americans live in the Middle East...WHY AREN'T THERE CHURCHES???

so, if I understand him correctly, we can't have a mosque here because saudi arabia doesn't have a church there?
In other words, Newt wants the US to adopt the religious tolerance policies of a country that considers us infidels and wants us dead and even holds telethons to support suicide bombers in Israel.
Yeah, that will work.
Posted by: summicron1
------------------
Newt is not saying that we cannot have a mosque in America - in fact he points out that there are a hundred mosques in New York city ALONE!

But he is saying that the WTC where 3,000 Americans died from Islamic terrorism, might not be the best site for a mosque.

Are you able to understand this simple point?

Gingrich writes "most of them don't understand that 'Cordoba House' is a deliberately insulting term. It refers to Cordoba, Spain - the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards" Actually, Muslim Cordoba was much more tolerant & cosmopolitan than Catholic Spain afterward. Cordoba is more of an example of tolerance than not. The Muslim, Jewish and Christian groups did much better, contextually speaking, under Cordoba than Catholic Spain. Don't take my word for it. Read some of the articles by the late Dr. Wilfred Cantwell Smith formerly of Harvard. Calling the proposed mosque complex "Cordoba House" has the reverse implication to that claimed by Gingrich. But who cares about reason, just envy Saudi Arabia, tear up the Constitution, and maybe tear down Trinity Episcopal Church Wall Street while you're at it.

Why, oh why, don't liberals understand this simple fact?
POSTED BY: ROHIT57

Why, oh why do you assume all people who are for the constitution are liberals?
I resent you calling me a liberal, I am not and never have been. In your tiny little mind American is made up only of wrong-thinking liberals and right-thinking conservatives.
Well, there are lot of us who find both of you equally ridiculous.
Posted by: jontomus
-------------

And why do you assume I have a "tiny little mind"? Actually I have several degrees from an extremely prestigious university, er, um, Harvard.

So you are guilty of the same overstatement which you accuse me of.

But I grant your point. Assuming that everyone who supports the mosque is liberal is an assumption, and not true in general.

But I do think that the US is currently populated by two kinds of simple minded people. Those who think that all questions are answered in the Bible, and those who think that all questions are answered in the constitution.

But such assumptions leave too little room for us to bring in common sense and a sense of perspective.

And let us not forget that the constitution was not written by God. It was written by fallible human beings, some of whom owned slaves, and none of whom knew of Marx or Freud or Darwin or Einstein. To treat them as divine beings might be a mistake.

The constitution is the foundation of America and very important, but it is not perfect nor should we pretend that it is.

Anyway, the fact that freedom of religion is protected does not mean that every single place in the US is suitable for a church or a mosque or a synagogue.

Christians have a right to churches, Muslims to mosques, Hindus to temples, etc. But they also have to yield to other factors which say WHERE their places of worship can be situated.

so, if I understand him correctly, we can't have a mosque here because saudi arabia doesn't have a church there?

In other words, Newt wants the US to adopt the religious tolerance policies of a country that considers us infidels and wants us dead and even holds telethons to support suicide bombers in Israel.

Yeah, that will work.

Newt says, "There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia."

Are you no better than the Saudi's oir are they the exa mple of equality you wish to emulate as your moral compass.

Comparing yourself to others only makes you smaler not larger.

America was formed based on Religious freedonm not freedom for Christians only. I am Buddhist in America, and for some reason it does not feel equal in America, unless you are Christian.

Inequality, but that is what the GOP stands for, inequality.

Funny. I thought FREEDOM OF RELIGION was in the Bill of Rights. I guess it's freedom of religions approved by the Rightwing.

BB

As a Constitutionalist, I agree the mosque should be allowed. I personally don't like the idea of this project because of 9/11, but the Constitution must be upheld, even when it allows for things that aren't popular (flag burning is another good example).
My issue with this project is who / what group is funding this and why hasn't this been disclosed yet? If it has any ties to any terrorist group, then it is no longer a Freedom of Religion issue. Show me the money for full disclosure so everyone can then have ALL the facts & decide.

Why, oh why, don't liberals understand this simple fact?
POSTED BY: ROHIT57

Why, oh why do you assume all people who are for the constitution are liberals?

I resent you calling me a liberal, I am not and never have been. In your tiny little mind American is made up only of wrong-thinking liberals and right-thinking conservatives.

Well, there are lot of us who find both of you equally ridiculous.

The Constitutionalist in me says it should be allowed, just like burning the flag - neither of which I personally like nor agree with.
Posted by: SportsChickFL
------------
Well, no doubt you have a right to burn the flag, but maybe not in Gingrich's bedroom. It isn't just a matter of what you can do but also of where.

As an English noblewoman once said, "People can do what they like as long as they don't do it in the street and frighten the horses."

Putting up a mosque at the WTC site would be a direct insult to the relatives of the 3,000 who died there on 9-11.

It should be possible to exercise one's constitutional rights without spitting in someone else's face. Why, oh why, don't liberals understand this simple fact?

I've been to the Mosque at Córdoba -- it's a spectacularly beautiful space, that's currently a Roman Catholic Cathedral, Catedral de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción.

It's been a church since the Spaniards re-conquered Córdoba in 1236.

So really, I think Mr. Gingrich is presenting a misleading and inaccurate argument when he says "Cordoba House" is a deliberately insulting term."

It's actually a reference to the complicated, many-layered perspective of a place that has seen many, many people of different faiths over much time, sometimes fighting, sometimes living together.

And regardless of Mr. Gingrich's misleading argument, declaring that a mosque shouldn't be built at the WTC (or anywhere for that matter) is in direct conflict with the Constitution. Isn't freedom of religious practice (and therefore, freedom to build houses of religion) a founding principal of this country?

I know there are many complicated and visceral reasons people respond to the idea of a megamosque at the WTC with such fear and outright rejection, but they do not and cannot trump the First Amendment.

KCHSES1, Extremely valid and well spoken truth. To the lazy minded teabaggers here....please get it. You are being subjugated by ad-hominem propaganda.

If America really wants to show respect for Islam, then tell Israel to stop stealing land from Muslims and to treat the people of Gaza like human beings.

It is hypocrisy with a capital H if the US condones Israel's land grabs, continues its support militarily, economically and in the UN, and then in a ridiculous gesture, puts up a mosque at the very spot where 3,000 Americans were killed by Muslim fanatics.

The Constitutionalist in me says it should be allowed, just like burning the flag - neither of which I personally like nor agree with.
My question is - who is funding this project If it can be traced to any terrorist groups, then this is no longer a "freedom of religion" issue. That's my issue with this whole thing - they will not disclose who / what groups are funding this project.

STRAIGHTLINE you got the libertarians to deal with on this issue as well.

I could not care less what the liberals think on this issue, any more than I care what the conservatives think.

The modification of reality to support a preexisting political condition makes both you conservatives and those liberals you love to hate the same kind of weak-minded people, too addled with your mutual hatred to see the bigger issues involved in .... well, in anything!

You're going to sell out the constitution to get even with the liberals, and for that I can honestly tell you to shove it up than black hole you use for a mind.

Oops. I should have said that 'I doubt that even this ultraconservative activist Court, and every single lower federal court, would APPROVE any ordinance or zoning decision NYC would pass to ban the mosque.

Newt would make an excellent member of the Saudi royal family.

Listen to the preacher spewing hate?
Gingrich will be the Milosevic of America unless he is tamed.
A bad economy, national disaster, etc is when the likes of Hitler, Milosevic, etc pops up.
So beware! we already have a bad economy and insecurity about Iraq/Afghanistan.
Gingrich finds it an ideal tim to spew his hate.

Culturally, ideologically, politically and racially Obama and the neo-commie progressives are tearing this country apart on purpose. Obama is the most divisive figure in American history.

The liberals though are like the timid dog who rolls over to expose it's underbelly at the slightest hint of aggression. IE: The "super mosque' at ground zero. These people would have never survived the founding of this country.

So now the GOP including the Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are all for PREACHING intolance.
Is this the AMERICA the Tea Party wants to take us back to??

This nation was built on religious TOLERANCE and freedom of religion. But these people think that a few bad eggs make for a whole religion.

So here is one for you. I think that the CATHOLIC CHURCH should be barred from having churces NEAR SCHOOLS, as it would seem that if there are few bad egg priests then all priests are pedophiles.

Does that make sense -- of am I wrong SOLEY because this is a CHRISTIAN RELIGION and anything goes with the RIGHT WING CHRISTIAN MINISTRY in this country.

So Newt and Sarah, I am very tired of YOUR UNAMERICAN VIEWS. YOu hypocritical slime balls. EIther you agree with AMERICAN VALUES AND THE VIEWS THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON OR YOU DON"T.

I'm from GA, Gingrich's home state. This clown wants to be President, right? Unfortunately, he hasn't the foggiest notion of the meaning of the Constitution. That document, which outlines the rule of LAW in this country, clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". The wording was extended to state and local governments a looooooong time ago. It's settled law. I doubt that even this ultraconservative activist Court, and every single lower federal court, would strike down any ordinance or zoning decision NYC would pass to ban the mosque. Mayor Bloomberg clearly, correctly and eloquently addressed the issue thusly: “Government should never — never — be in the business of telling people how they should pray, or where they can pray. We want to make sure that everybody from around the world feels comfortable coming here, living here and praying the way they want to pray.” All Gingrich is doing is pandering to the conservative base, and in doing so, debases himself. I wouldn't trust within walking distance of the Oval Office.

"...The person who is trying to establish the Mosque at ground zero is funded by Hamas ..."

How about some reference for that, can you prove it? If this is true, it's an ugly thing. If you just made it up to support your rant, how is that any less ugly?

the 1st amendment ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

How about that for a principle? Some principles are more important than money.

USA is spending billions and billions of dollars to fight against the Taliban and Al Queda, the organization founded by radical Islam. The person who is trying to establish the Mosque at ground zero is funded by Hamas which is a terrorist organization and is connected to other Islamic terrorist organization. The officials, Bloomberg et al, who are supporting the Mosque is selling this country for the monetary reason. If this Mosque comes through, the spirit of this country will be gone. It just proves that this country has no principle and only principle it has is money. In the history of mankind there always has been individual who succumbed to money. Specially Bloomberg being a billionaire I am sure he is very sensitive to numbers. And this person is the major of NYC.

America's strength is in its diversity and in the freedom it recognizes as an inalienable right of its citizens. Mr. Gingrich argues that we should deny Muslims the freedom to worship in New York City because the repressive monarchy of Saudi Arabia denies Christians and Jews the same right in Mecca. This is a child's argument. We are not defined by the actions of others, we define ourselves. If we bar the construction of this mosque in lower Manhattan, we become un-American, not more.

Mr. Gingrich's argument is invalid for the follwoing logical reasons;

1. An argument positing, "well they don't have a church in Saudi Arabia so they can't have a mosque in NYC" assumes a tit for tat relationship between Saudi Arabia and NYC. If such a relationship exists it is up to Mr. Gingrich to demonstrate such.

2. "Every Muslim knows" is a sterotypical phrase designed to reduce every muslim to the same muslim. In this case argued by Mr. Gingrich they would be the same muslims who attacked us on 9/11. Clearly this is a logically flawed comparison and invalid. If he's making a different comparison it is up to him make that clear. He has not.

3. Coequivlance of the inability to rebuild the WTC in 9 years and building the mosque in 1 year has no meaning. They are not equivalent entities. There appears to be no point to that comparison. If there is it is unstated. Presumably there are some incognecenti who do know what that means. I would be curious.

4. "America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization." This is one hell of a claim. Other then this mosque what is the proof of this claim? If all you have is this mosque then the argument is perfectly circular and invalid.

5. "Where is the money coming from?" If Mr. Gingrich has reasoin to suspect violation of anti-money laundering statutes he should notify the authorities. Lack of disclosure is not evidence of a crime.

Over all this a patheticlly argued polemic. Designed to appeal to the lazy and weak minded.

A few facts about this case that the media seems to have trouble relating:

1) The proposed building is NOT at the WTC site; it is two NYC blocks away with two buildings in between. The WTC site cannot be seen from this location.

2) The proposed building is a 13 story Community Center, similiar to a YMCA or JCC, containing a swimming pool, day care center, cooking school and other amenities open to the public. Religious activities will be held on only 1 of the 13 floors.

3) The site is zoned for the proposed use...no variances were needed, but the group took the proposal before the local community board anyway just to secure community buy-in for the project. End result, the board voted 29-1 to support the project.

4) The mosque behind the proposal has been a well regarded institution in that neighborhood for the past 23 years.

5) Gingrich is a !)&^ idiot. (I made that one up, but it is true).

I agree with Mr. Gingrich - when Saudi Arabia allows for Churches to be built in their nation, then maybe a mosque would/could be tolerated at the WTC. Otherwise, its a slap in the face, to see if we are going to roll over and let them kick us again.....Stand up Americans, lets not go down licking their boots. Do Not Become Complacent, Be Ever Vigilant!

Gingrich is full of "sound and fury signifying nothing."

Look, I have an idea. Let's stop supporting Saudi Arabia until they become as tolerant of our religion as we are theirs.

Or, better yet, let's get out of ALL countries in the Middle East that don't have our view of religious tolerance, and religious discrimination.

THAT would mean we are out of the whole Middle East, including Israel.

Well, Gingrich, what do you say? Your "principles" are wasted on something so irrelevant. Let's truly speak 'Truth to Power."

Yeah, and me too, some Christian orginazation is at my door seeking to "convert" me to their brand of Christianity. Shameful, I say, Shameful. Those Christians are acting like Muslims, now, aren't they?

SLAMMING, I'm not for building a mosque there, I'm all for seeing the decline and end of the practice of religion altogether, all churches and temples and mosques should be turned into museums dedicated to the infancy of our species.

What I'm trying to figure out is why you're so against their building this mosque. Is it to get even, is it to make yourself feel better ... were you made afraid by these people and you resent them for it?

They have a religion, you have one. Our constitution says the government isn't allowed to determine which religion is better than the other, it's not allowed to establish christianity over islam or vice versa for that matter.

These are Principles, you know, things we live by, our moral code, the Constitution.

And the constitution is FAR MORE important than you wetting your pants in fear or stamping your foot in rage over some freakin' muslims building a mosque somewhere,

So which other principles are you going to sell out now?

Newt who?

The Washington Post should be reprimanded for allowing a hatemonger to preach from its pulpit. There are more holes in each of Gingrich's statements than than are in a slice of swiss cheese. Let Gingrich preach from the New Republic or another source known for its insensitivity. If there were more people like Gingrich in our House of Representatives or Senate, I couldn't wait to immigrate to another country. Is he saying that he will behave nicely only if the guy who lives 6 houses down also behaves nicely? Newt Gingrich is not my ideal for someone we should emulate, and neither should he be for any ethical individual.

laxmom: I totally agree with you...people really SHOULD familiarize themselves with Islam's mission: TO CONVERT THE WHOLE WORLD TO ISLAM!!!! They've come right out and SAID IT!!! Are some of you blind, deaf, OR WHAT????

Posted by: slamming

*******************************************

For those still blind, deaf or WHAT???

Convert to Islam.

You can have up to 4 wives and avoid all that messy skulking around with a mistress, lying, cheating to you wife about it. You avoid having to divorce your firt wife when you can have a second, third and fourth wife. If you want to believe it, you will have "72 virgins" after you died and go to heaven.

Excuse me. I have to answer the door. It's that same Christian evangelist wishing to save my soul asking me to repent or else be damned for all eternity in the fire and brimstone of hell.

Spoken like a true 5th grade bully. Elitists? Really??? You sound like Mel Gibson, little Newt boy thing.

JONTOMUS: Religions in the US DON'T fly planes into buildings!!! And if being realistic about what's going on in the world makes you sick, then I guess I'm SICK! READ THE BOOK!!

NYC is responsible for denying this request. they should do so.

"TO CONVERT THE WHOLE WORLD TO ISLAM!!!!"

Now you understand why people resist Christianity as well. Isn't that also the purpose of your religion?

Of course you're not burning witches or heretics or atheists -- not anymore anyway. But it's still inside there, isn't it. there's still that desire to punish those who won't believe the right way.

And that's what you're trying to do to these muslims, punish them for not believing the right way.

maybe you're not as sick as these people, but you are still sick.

laxmom: I totally agree with you...people really SHOULD familiarize themselves with Islam's mission: TO CONVERT THE WHOLE WORLD TO ISLAM!!!! They've come right out and SAID IT!!! Are some of you blind, deaf, OR WHAT????

Rohit57 said: "The issue is whether a mosque right at the WTC site is appropriate. Gingrich is right that it is not appropriate at THAT spot.
To give an analogy - you may forgive the man who raped your wife and even invite him to lunch. But to show tolerance by suggesting that the two of them now have "consensual sex" is maybe going too far"
---------------------------------

Rohit57, you missed the point of what I said before- the Islamic groups building the mosque at issue didn't bomb the World Trade Center. Your analogy to a man who "raped your wife" is therefore inapplicable.

These people should not be stereotyped- that is not the "American Way." And, by the way, let's get the facts clear: the proposed mosque would NOT be built "right at the WTC site," contrary to what you asserted.

As a lifelong Democrat, this is one time I TOTALLY AGREE with Gingrich. I can't believe someone actually had THE NERVE to propose this!!! These people REALLY think the US is STUPID...and if they end up building it, WE ARE!!!!

What enormous insecurity Mr Gingich displays.

And then there's the weird contradiction: Unless we behave like Saudi Arabia, Muslims will "destroy our civilization".

Huh?

Note Newt: The US Constitution is the foundation of everything that we do in this country. If we burn it then we have nothing to stand on. We will be just another BS country.

The Constitution's guarantee that there shall be no interference with the free exercise of religion is not dependent on what other governments do. The First Amendment does not stop applying because other governments are not as tolerant towards religious diversity as we are.

The Cordoba House is only "insensitive" if you lump the 9/11 perpetrators with ALL Muslims.

Newt has it completely backwards. It's precisely because churches and synagogues are not allowed in a few majority Moslem countries that we SHOULD allow a mosque to be built near Ground Zero. It shows that we are open minded and tolerant.

I suppose now that Newtie is merely a celebrity ex-politician he has to keep his name out in front of the public. As a once-controversial politician, the true source of his celebrity, he needs to maintain that smell of controversy.

This isn't much, Newtie.

I always do enjoy hearing the comparisons, that we shouldn't allow any mosques in the US until Saudi Arabia allows churches.
Think about that for a minute - instead of trying to get them to be better, better like us, we aim to be lower, low like them.

And how does not allowing a mosque near ground zero affect the saudis? Not much. So this is really just beating off for the conservatives.

By the way, just to be clear, I find religion of all kinds to be the most bitter poison humanity has ever fashioned for itself. I would rather see no mosques or churches anywhere, I'd like to see our species grow up past this nonsense.

Oh - and how the hell do you figure that what happens in Saudi Arabia has any connection whatsoever to the religious liberty of Americans?

Mr. Gingrich: Those "Islamists" who want build this mosque and religious center happen to be Americans who hate terrorism just as much as you do. Muslim Americans were also killed on 9-11. You don't care, right? Pig.
.
Though American values and simple decency don't influence you, what about good old strategic cunning? Al Qeada would love nothing more than to see the USA compromise its own principles, oppress its own Muslim citizens, and silence & alienate the voices of Muslims who intensely oppose the terrorist's madness. Since you aren't stupid, you must surely know this, but just don't care. Scoring political points, firing up anti-Muslim sentiment at home, and appealing to fear and hatred to stir up the conservative base are much more important, right? You're some piece of work.

If a mosque is built near Ground Zero Osama Bin Laden has lost.
Posted by: justme18
_____________________________

Somehow, I doubt he'd see it that way...

Americans are more tolerant than any people of any country in the world.
++++++++++++++++++
All evidence to the contrary. Tea Parties, White Supremacists, Black Muslims, Arizona residents...
Posted by: oldwolf53 | July 23, 2010 9:19 AM
=================
If we talk about tolerance, do you know ANY other country in the world which has ten million (or is it eleven) illegal residents, and the government and a large section of the public wants to turn a blind eye?

Arizona is merely asking that the existing law be enforced and what is wrong with that?

Suppose someone suggested that laws against domestic violence not be enforced. What would you think about THAT?

Deliberately not enforcing laws is a terrible idea.

I'm confused. One day Republicans tell me all decisions should be made based on the Constitution. Today, Newt tells me Muslims can't build a mosque where they want. Wasn't there something in the Constitution about freedom of religion? How is Newt's opinion going to hold up? Are there other existing zoning laws out there that say certain religions can't have places of worship in certain areas?

Let me bring something up that no one seems to be grasping. This mosque site is "OVERLOOKING" the 9/11 site. So... what is an acceptable radius of distance outside the site that it's permissible to build a mosque. The mosque is not being built upon the site.

As for Christians and Jews in Mecca, how do you tell whether a person entering Mecca is Muslim? By lifting up their skirts? (a little movie humor to lighten the mood).

I agree with B202. Mr. Gingrich is proposing that we protect our country from a threatening ideology by adopting that same ideology as our own and acting upon it, as do the Saudis. There's no better way to destroy what makes our country unique and welcoming to people from all over the world.
Posted by: mightysparrow
---------------------

Yes, but actually America DOES welcome people from all over the world - did you read where Gingrich said that there are a hundred mosques in New York city? That is not "welcome" in your book?

The issue is whether a mosque right at the WTC site is appropriate. Gingrich is right that it is not appropriate at THAT spot.

To give an analogy - you may forgive the man who raped your wife and even invite him to lunch. But to show tolerance by suggesting that the two of them now have "consensual sex" is maybe going too far.

Americans are more tolerant than any people of any country in the world.

++++++++++++++++++

All evidence to the contrary. Tea Parties, White Supremacists, Black Muslims, Arizona residents...

LAXMOM1 said: "If we allow other peoples to come into our country and impose their way of life on us, then we will cease to be a free country. When others come here they should assimilate to our way of life, not the other way around.
WE ARE AMERICA, not psuedo-whatever country!"
--------------------------------------

Irrelevent to the issue- nobody is imposing their way of life on others by building a mosque. Moreover, the expectation that all people who come to the U.S. should "assimilate" can't possibly mean that all should adopt the official U.S. religion - I thought there IS no official U.S. religion. Next, you'll be suggesting that all synogogues and other non-Christian houses of worship should be closed, too.

To better understand why this mosque is out of step with america and what we as a democratic country believe, you need to read about what happens when a government becomes too overcome with the PC position, and turns a blind eye. Everyone must read: Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. You will have your eyes opened to a world you cannot even begin to imagine on your own. We need to open our eyes to what is going on around us and listen carefully to the orchestrated speeches of tolerance that is being forced on us and our children.
Americans are more tolerant than any people of any country in the world. But our accommodating attitude will only serve to be our demise if we are not careful! If we allow other peoples to come into our country and impose their way of life on us, then we will cease to be a free country. When others come here they should assimilate to our way of life, not the other way around.
WE ARE AMERICA, not psuedo-whatever country!

For one thing, Newt is right on target on this one issue. He asked a question. Has anyone given out a list of the funders of this cordoba house? I bet most of the money comes from the wahabi sect of Saudi Arabia. They are the funders of most of the mosques here and throughout the West. Transparency is not one of their virtues. I am shocked that the NYC authorities do not demand this instead of capitulating to political correctness.
Our constitution does not give you the right to build a cesspool in the middle of a community just because you own some land there. Same logic and law apply to an eyesore in the middle of the city across from ground zero. If you cordoba jihadies can’t see this, you are either too smart for your britches, or you are too thick.
You tell us “trust us, we are the good guys.” Will any of the jihadi admirers and supporters on this forum give the rest of us a believable reason why we should trust you that you bring peace and not a bomb under your burquas. Most of you think that money silences the rest of us. Shame on those who support this sorry excuse for a religion, and their jihadi center adjacent to ground zero where your brothers blew themselves up for your allah. Don’t hide behind our constitution to spread your trash and expect us not to react.

B202 wrote: "It's telling - and fitting - that the pro-death penalty, anti-woman, anti-gay reactionary GOP admires Saudi Arabia's similar cultural backwardness and wants us to emulate them. Our Taliban and theirs are but birds of a feather, even if ours wears Armani and theirs wear white robes."
----------------------------------

I agree with B202. Mr. Gingrich is proposing that we protect our country from a threatening ideology by adopting that same ideology as our own and acting upon it, as do the Saudis. There's no better way to destroy what makes our country unique and welcoming to people from all over the world.

The biggest threats to freedom in the U.S. come from ignorant people within the U.S. Mr. Gingrich would assume that all people of the Islamic faith think the same, act the same and believe the same things. Nonsense- he should know better, if he wasn't too biased to look at the facts.

Shut up, Newt. You are a liar, a philanderer, and a shameless tool. Why anyone gives you a forum for your blather is beyond me.

I don't want to see you in here again.

so, Newt - hows the wife?

Personally, I don't like Newt Gingrich and his far-right narrow mindedness. But in this case, he is 100% correct.

I just don't see how showing religious tolerance is damaging to the national interests of the United States.

Let's assume the super mosque is built and the day it opens a banner is hung that says, "Ha, Ha! Look what we did because America is weak and doesn't crush religious differences."
So what?

The buildings aren't coming back. The terrorists already won that battle. America wins by not letting that act define their view of freedom going forward.

So Newt thinks we should give up the First Ammendment?? Do we now lower our rights to that of the Saudi's??? I think this is fear mongering at it's best, straight out of tea party rethoric. If we can not allow freedom of religon in our country then, no mosgue,temples,synagogues or churches at ground zero. What a shameless liar Newt is!!

No mosque at ground zero.

The idea is just so incredibly offensive I just don't know where to begin.

No mosque at ground zero.

Just a continuation of religious wars. More reason humans need to get beyond religion if we want to survivie.

If Islam was a political party rather than a religion we'd have wiped it off the planet already. Islam is an empty well that offers nothing but misery to Western civilization.

Gingrich is a hater and race baiter. His basic argument is that we should be A-holes because the Saudis are A-holes. In that case, Newt is Exhibit "A" who speaks thru his "A-ness."

I'm not sure it's great judgment on the part of the mosque to choose that location, but Gingrich should be truly ashamed. He continues to appeal to the worst in Americans for nakedly political motives. The division we see in America today started with Gingrich who still sees government as an arena for his personal political cockfights.

mmreay said: "It's frightening when I agree with Newt. It's terrifying. But in this case, I completely agree with him (except maybe for the Cordoba commment, as the muslims in Spain were pretty tolerant at that time compared to the Christians). But he's right about everything else. And I'm a liberal democrat. Go figure. "
-------------
Actually, it is frightening to me that you are frightened to agree with Newt. As an independent, I have noticed that American liberals, far from being the thoughtful, intelligent group which they once were, have now become just another Church whose dogmas are not to be questioned.

I hope that some day, liberals like mmreay will accept that truth and reason must always win out over party loyalty. If Gingrich is right about something, SAY SO!

It in no way implies a commitment to agree with him on other things - it only shows your own commitment to truth and reason.

I think the important thing is to ask how we think of such a mosque. Is it a show of tolerance and goodwill? Or is it capitulation to bullying? Perhaps a little of each.

What about that Afghan warlord who slapped one of the people who were asking him questions? Shall we show our tolerance to him as well by offering an American official to be slapped? :) It would show that our friendship is not just words....

There is another issue here also. American liberals have, of late, become extremely intolerant of the majority religion, Christianity. There are constant liberal attacks on Christianity, and by implication on all relgion. A cross on federal land is NOT OK!!

And now it is liberals who are telling us that there should be a mosque near WTC. So which side are they on? Are they telling us that Islam is OK but Christianity is not? (BTW I am neither Muslim not Christian).

Personally, considering the original purpose of the WTC, what we should have at that site is not a church or a mosque but a temple to Money, which was the real God of the WTC and the God which Bin Laden attacked. That would show him that we cannot be bullied!! :)

It's frightening when I agree with Newt. It's terrifying. But in this case, I completely agree with him (except maybe for the Cordoba commment, as the muslims in Spain were pretty tolerant at that time compared to the Christians). But he's right about everything else. And I'm a liberal democrat. Go figure.

I really don't want a mosque overlooking a sight that is a memorial to Americans and others who were murdered by muslims. Not all muslims are bad, but muslims did kill our people for their beliefs, and I don't want a mosque anywhere near that site. It's an abomination.

If a mosque is built near Ground Zero Osama Bin Laden has lost.

Newt Gingrich is the living demonstration of how a stupid religious mind works, and how religion, generally speaking, is a self-deceiving attempt to be right.

1. During the Golden age of Jewish culture in Spain, beginning in the ninth century, Islamic Spain was very welcoming towards Jews. The 11th century, however, saw several Muslim pogroms against Jews; those that occurred in Cordoba in 1011 and in Granada in 1066. In the 1066 Granada massacre, a Muslim mob crucified the Jewish vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela and massacred about 4,000 Jews In 1033 about 6,000 Jews were killed in Fez, Morocco by Muslim mobs. Mobs in Fez murdered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, in 1465.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom#Medieval

So much for the tolerance of Mohammedans and the true meaning of Cordoba.

2. Cordoba house is the Mohammedans end zone dance.

Much like there is an idea floating around among Tea Partiers that a citation of the Constitution should accompany every piece of legislation being considered, where's the Constitutional citation for this? Oh - that's right. There isn't.

Being a liberal, I don't usually see eye to eye with people like Gingrich. But I do agree with them on the danger Islam imposes on our lives and life styles. We just need to look at the numbers and plight of non-Muslims wherever Muslims are in majority.

In Pakistan Muslims just killed two brothers for alledged "blasphemy". Should Americans do the same to Muslims here for killing thousands of us? No we are humans.

Hardy the Eft shows his true color; one of the things that is really important among the differences between Saudi Arabia and the US of A is the Constitutional up-front tolerance. The argument that synagogues and Xian churches be built in Saudi Arabia before a mosque in lower Manhattan misses the obvious point that there are mosques all over New York City and elsewhere in the US. If we were to extend the Eft's argument to its logical (?) conclusion, we should have to close down all of those places of worship.

Historian?

What humbug! I am wondering what might qualify the Eft to talk about religious matters in the first place.

Just wait until women or men wearing full face covering burkhas or niqabs start wandering around American Cities "en Masse". Feeling aggravated now, see how you feel when that happens. But don't forget that wearing a burkha or a niqab is NOT AN ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS REQUIREMENT! Very important that. Several EU countries are banning full face covering in public. In Britain of course, we have Damien Green who says it would be "un-British" to ban the full face veil, even though burkha's and niqab's are as un-British as things come, and Caroline Spelman who crassly states that the burkha and niqab "empower women"! Really, you couldn't make it up. There's no need to.

Why is it that Conservatives are all for "local control" until something like this comes up? The NYC area Community Board overwhelmingly supported the Mosque. As one who walked away from two attacks on the WTC, so do I.

I have no interest in seeing America turned into a Saudi-like theocracy. Will this be part of The Newt's next "Contract on America"? Our religious tolerance and diversity should be a source of pride, not demagoguery.

By the way, the mosque does not "overlook" the WTC. It's three or four blocks north of the site...but "overlook" makes it sound so much more dramatic. What a low life.

The building of this mega mosque at this particular location and at this point in time is a demonstration of the fulfillment of a strategy that an Islamic cleric cited to the Archbishop of Izmir (Turkey) and quoted by Abdullah al –Araby in his book “Islamization of America”. The imam pontificated thus; "THANKS TO YOUR DEMOCRATIC LAWS WE WILL INVADE YOU; THANKS TO OUR RELIGIOUS LAWS WE WILL DOMINATE YOU”.

No Ground Zero Demagoguery:

dem·a·gogue
  –noun
1. a person, esp. an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people.

If America tosses the First Amendment into the waste basket because it's too weak to hold to its principles Osama bin Laden has won.

I can't believe it! I never thought I would ever agree with Gingrich. However, Gingrich is right. Allowing a mosque to be built so close to Ground Zero, will be an insult to all the families who lost loved ones in the 9-11 attacks. Also, a mosque in that area would become iconic of Osama Bin Laden's hatred towards those he considers infidels and a symbolic victory of the terrorism and harm he caused the American people--If a mosque is built near Ground Zero, Osama Bin Laden has won.

Newt, you are correct about the history of Cordoba House, but a mosque built near Ground Zero is a show of victory and is a monument to the jihadist who took the lives of the American's. That's the only reason a mosque is being built near Ground Zero. It's a slap in the face to free societies. The Democrats and left knows this.

The real weakness is abandoning our ideals when they're put to the test and the real submission is adopting their ideals in place of our own because we're too morally corrupt to stand fast.

If Thomas Jefferson or James Madison were alive today they'd bit_h slap Newt Gingrich into the next county for betraying his country's hard fought principles.

Sure, build the mosk "near" Ground Zero. Then a Shinto shrine on the Arizona memorial and a U.S cultural center on Ground Zero in Hiroshima. See how that works.

The mosk at Ground Zero is a slap in our faces and an open provocation. However, the financiers of this triumphalist symbol can count on the support of the "civil libertarians" and such who shout about freedom of religion. Useful idiots. And thus is Western civilization gradually taken over by people who grovel on the floor five times a day. An inglorious end, for sure.

cordoba is one landmark of islam.

nothing civilized medival backward europ like islam ,

islam accomplished and protected freedom of religion way before the english magna charta and much way befor the constitution of united state of america.

nothing will help civilize medival 21 century western culture like the theology and ideology of islam.

nothing fail nations like megaliar hyocritical delusional heads especialy academic heads who twisting the facts of history to their own delusional agenda.

*why do you see violence in other people theology and ideology eye and forgot the mega paranoia log in your own*???????

on your same mega stupid anaology ,
stop building any mega church that propagaate the tourture of the god who was nailed on the cross and his blood is due on every mankind neck, for the sin of mankind.you know how many were killed and tourtured??????????remmber fernand and elizabeth??????????????do you know any history???

on your same mega stupid anal-ology you voteing to ground zero evey mega church ??????
and every establishment that doesnot match yours???

i,m not into images,
but do not you know that miss liberity is standing their on NY harbor for long time???? and she is overlooking all buildings in manhatan including ground zero????

nothing ground zero nations like hypocritical heads especialy acadmics liars on both scale ,theology and secular ideology .

I agree with you Newt, even if I disagree with your personal brand of politics (and I'm a Republican). Now what you might want to do is tell people that a former British standup comedian has produced a scathing 5-minute video in which he makes all these points and which sounds a lot like what you have written above. I was hoping someone with visibility would pick up on it. I was unaware of the Cordoba reference although i should have been. I believe his name is Pat Condell and googling him with just that name will probably turn it up on a search. But how can you put a stop to this? What are the mechanisms if the land is private property and there is a contract to build?

Well, it would be ironic if the right wing get their way because the Statue of Liberty, is right a couple of blocks from the proposed Mosque. The statue "says give us your tired, your huddled poor, teaming with masses." I grew up in a time, not to long ago when the Republican Party,if it was misgudied in its Christian demagoguery,at the very least, reminded America we are a nation of religious exiles. "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of worship or the right thereof," there are plenty of religious Muslims out there who are never going to try to overthrow the government. Finally,I'm sick and tired of the GOP using 9-11 for their own political purposes,when they were the ones who dropped the ball.

Let me be clear....no mosque at ground zero!!! I hope for change in 2012!!!!!!

It's highly likely - almost a certainty - that Gingrich himself is smart enough that he doesn't believe a word of the demagoguery he's posted here. But he knows the quickest way to make inroads into the GOP rank and file for his pending presidential run is to go into full-bore, Palinesque tea partier Mooslum-hating mode. It's the mark of a true Republican these days to hate indiscriminately (and then try to project your hatred onto innocents like Shirley Sherrod and others). It's also required that he feign religious fervor of the pseudochristian flavor, which explains his getting religion in recent years.

He's playing to the gallery here, and no doubt laughing at his tea partier marks behind their backs. A cynical politico of the most pathetic and despicable kind.

Newt,
You are an embarrassment. For an "academic" you always display a complete lack of intellectual honesty. Good thing you got your Ph.D. before you went down the political path.

All Muslims must bear responsibility for the 9-11 attack? Did you accept responsibility for Mi Lai. Should every solider have born responsibility for that? What about slavery, the genocide of the American Indian, are going to tell us that you weren't around (though of course you've benefited from both)so don't blame you?

Mosque overlooks ground zero? Have you seen the plans? Apparently it's a couple of blocks away. Is it going to be on top of a skyscraper so it can "look down". Exactly how many blocks away do you think it should be sited. Maybe you can hire yourself out as a consultant to the developer and give him your advice. You are an idiot, that you get a forum in Washington Post, which you have derided for so many years is unfathomable.

For someone who actually has an interest in medieval Spanish history, this post looks downright foolish. Please, Mr. Gingrich, do your research. "Cordoba" refers to the capitol of a great- yes, a great, and I say this as a Catholic- Muslim civilization that encouraged a tolerance of other religions unheard of in that time period - especially in the rest of Europe. As for the "insult" of remaking the church into a mosque... again, this was in a time period where reworking older traditions was a sign of respect for them... many of the great stories of Chaucer and Shakespeare are re-writes from earlier (widely admired) authors, and they found this a source of pride, not shame. For Muslims to worship the God of Abraham in the same place where Christians previously had, shows a respect for the older faith, and the humility to appreciate that in the eyes of God, one righteous believer is more or less the same as another.
Also, since when is New York City analogous to Mecca? I think the better comparison would be to Bethlehem or Jerusalem, and last I heard the Muslims weren't doing so well for themselves there...

It's telling - and fitting - that the pro-death penalty, anti-woman, anti-gay reactionary GOP admires Saudi Arabia's similar cultural backwardness and wants us to emulate them. Our Taliban and theirs are but birds of a feather, even if ours wears Armani and theirs wear white robes.

What garbage. We were not attacked by the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world. We were originally attacked by 20 terrorists on commercial planes and a few hundred backers in Afghanistan and has since risen to perhaps 20,000 world wide that use terror BECAUSE they don't have widespread muslim support. We are at war with terrorists who hide behind religion, just like the IRA did and just like David Joresh wanted to define HIS brand of Christianity to support his power. Bin Laden was not a religious leader and is certainly repudiated by a vast majority of the 7 million Muslims here in America. Original terrorists attacked the "American way of life" not Christianity. He said "pan-Arabism, socialism, communism, democracy"—must be opposed and believed Afghanistan under the rule of Mullah Omar's Taliban was "the only Islamic country" in the Muslim world. Don't let ignorance trump religious freedom in the US. This is repugnant and we should be smarter than letting them divide us, peaceful, honest Americans who have seperate faiths. Otherwise, it is a witch hunt. Muslims died in the World Trade Center on 9/11 and the man who recently turned in the Times Square guy was also Muslim and happy to be an American. The mosque should be built. As George Washingon said, "I beg you be persuaded that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution"

any ritewing dude that request a divorce from his wife while she is in the hospital and at the same time screwing his office employee should keep out of this matter!!

That the right-wingers are acting all nervous and scared over the idea of a mosque near groundero, shows them to be the timid pvssies in our society.

Thanks, Newt.
Well and truly said...

Religions are an oppression upon small minds who cannot grasp the concepts of spirituality.

Newt Gingrich and his rightwing jihadists really really hate the United States Constitution. Especially the First Amendment. It's nice to have it on record though that he wants to make our multicultural, multireligious society more like Saudi Arabia.

But then, he would fit right in in that reactionary country, being on what, his fifth wife now? Allah al Akbar, Newt.

With their pro-Old Testament, fervent anti-women and anti-gay stances, the right here is looking more indistinguishable from the fundamentalist Muslims every day.

So, Newt Gingrich thinks that our constitutional principles should be flushed down the toilet in a tit for tat competition with the religious freedoms of Saudi Arabia?

Holy crap. Is this what the Republicans have to offer in 2014?

I do not think it would be at all appropriate to have a mosque near the WTC site. Muslims need to accept their culpability in tolerating extremists & fostering their hatred. I would say the same thing if it was Christian extremists wanting to do something similar. In fact I seriously hope that no one will be treated to some huge Christian church near the site. Extremism is something both branches of the Abrahamic faith are very guilty of, and both branches blow people up & commit terroristic acts with alarming regularity.

I would be very offended to hear some screeching call to prayer echoing over the WTC site as well.

While I expect sleazy Christians to weasel their way around the site borders, there's not much I can do about their sleaze. However since they don't use loudspeakers to blast their propaganda out, I can at least ignore that.

The fact of the matter is that no religion has a place near this site. They should all stay away. Those that don't demonstrate their own evil.

Slight problem, ayatollah wannabe. The First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Remember the U.S. Constitution? Don't let something insignificant like the law of the land stop you on your merry way down to Saudi Arabia's level though.

Wow, after such a compelling argument

AND the FACT that the allusion to Cordoba is 100% correct,

I would have expected some supportive posts.

Putting a mosque there is like putting a walmart in the middle of mecca.

JUST DOESN'T BELONG.

You forget one thing. This is N.Y.C.

Slop happens.

Sure hope a disgusted private sanitation hauler doesn't accidentally let his load of pig entrails and butcher scraps jump the curb on Park Place and desecrate that spot.

That would be tragic.

Newt you rock!

I used to think that Newt Gingrich is a nutjob. But he made lots of valid points here regarding the mosque near Ground Zero. If the Cordoba initiative people have any respect for the victims of 9/11, build the mosque somewhere else. For vast majority people in this country, Islam is at war with the US and the mosque near Ground Zero is an affront to the sensitivities of the people.

Newt ought to convert to Islam - they allow a man to have multiple wives. You can even say "I divorce you" to get a divorce - no need to serve your wife divorce papers while she's getting cancer treatments like Newtie did!

As for the mosque - build it, and dedicate it to the memory of those that lost their lives on 9/11. Name it after Tariq Amandullah, an Islamic community leader who died in the Towers. If only to p*ss off Newtie and Saint Sarah (whose experience with New York only included Macy's, Bloomingdales, and Saks).

Why Saudi Arabia? Pakistan does not allow the building of a church, temple, or synagogue. My take on this is, mullahs can build mosques (subject to an overall limit) for every one they allow in mullah countries. I guess there will be no takers. Mullahs don't know how to spell secular and it does not matter whether you are talking about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or even Turkey. It is fashionable among the news media to call Turkey secular. That abuses the word secular. If you do not have a Muslim name you cannot get a government (or even a private?) job in Turkey. This is secular? The EU should not allow Turkey to eb a member until it becomes truly secular, not secular by mullah standards.

Jihadist, the way I understand the Vatican is a Church complex in Rome. Here nobody is asking to build a church inside a mosque in Saudi Arabia. People are asking about building a church somewhere in that country, far away from a mosque.

We'll allow one new mosque in this country for each new Christian church that is built in Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: Mortal

*******************************************

I don't care for Newt's gripe with Saudi Arabia. I have my own with that country too.

Talking about quid pro quo, as the Vatican also insist on churches being build in Saudi Arabia, perhaps the Saudis can negotiate with the Vatican to allow a mosque to be build at the Vatican.

Oh, all right, as the Vatican is among the smallest sovereign states in the world, a small surau (prayers room) within Sistine Chapel will do.

We have not been able to rebuild the World Trade Center in nine years. Now we are being told a 13 story, $100 million megamosque will be built within a year overlooking the site of the most devastating surprise attack in American history.

Finally where is the money coming from?

- Newt Gingrich

*******************************************

It is not quite a "megamosque". The Cordoba House is also planned to have a gym, a swimming pool, a library, a conference hall among other things.

As for the funding of the Cordaba Centre, I can say with certainty that a couple of my friends donated to the Cordoba Initiative towards building the centre because they believe it is a good thing - a multipurpose centre with a mosque because they often go to Wall Street for banking and finance purposes and there are no mosques nearby they can go to for prayers as and when they want to.

I suppose now my country will be on the list of countries to be bombed to the stone age because a couple of my friends and others like them who donated towards the Cardoba Initiative rather than supporting Al Qaeda or Jemaah Islamiyah are now deem to be part of the Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy American civilization as we know it.

Oh, my gosh! Excuse me while I run outside to make sure the Moon hasn't fallen out of the sky. I actually agree with Newt Gingrich!!! As a moderately left-wing Democrat, I can't recall the last time that's happened. But he's absolutely right. It's time we start insisting on a quid pro quo. We'll allow one new mosque in this country for each new Christian church that is built in Saudi Arabia.

Those Islamists and their apologists who argue for "religious toleration" are arrogantly dishonest. They ignore the fact that more than 100 mosques already exist in New York City. Meanwhile, there are no churches or synagogues in all of Saudi Arabia. In fact no Christian or Jew can even enter Mecca.

- Newt Gingrich

******************************************

I never knew New York or the United States have limits on how many houses of worship are allowed by law.

I never knew too, religious tolerance among Americans building houses of worship is conditional to how tolerant or intolerant other countries are on religions and the building of houses of worship in their own countries.

And why would Christians and Jews, or any non-Muslim tourists, some of whom do have clear aversions to Islam and Muslims, want to visit Mecca?

There is no Disneyland, there is no casino, there is no bars, there is no strip club in Mecca. Even Muslims get out of Mecca as soon as they completed their Umra or Hajj.

By the way, there were Christian adventurers and writers who visited Mecca and wrote about it.

Seriously? This racist garbage of a column wouldn't even be hinted at if "muslim" were repalced by "black" and yet that is excatly what is happening. These are not islamofascists, these are AMERICAN CITIZENS with an american history and all the freedoms and protections afforded therein. This is a community center with a single room set aside for the religious activity of ANY group that so chooses to use it. Thanks for exposing you and your ilk, Newt, for the trash that you are. You were has-been long ago, not sure why anyone would think you're a relevant voice to begin with.

For example, most of them don't understand that "Cordoba House" is a deliberately insulting term. It refers to Cordoba, Spain - the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world's third-largest mosque complex.

- Newt Gingrich

******************************************

Cordoba, as a centre of learning, brings together Muslim, Jewish and Christian scholars. It did spark western enlightenment too.

As for the Spanish Reconquista, Inquisition, discovery and conquest of the New World, I have no comment.

Nor do I wish to comment on Dutch, English, French conquests and colonialisaton in Africa and Asia.

There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia.

- Newt Gingrich

*******************************************

There are prayer rooms for Christians in Saudi Arabia, mostly Filipinos. Perhaps to negotiate with Saudi Arabia to allow churches be build in Saudi Arabia and overcome their reservations on images and representations of Jesus PBUH on crosses in churches as "idoltarous".

Why drag in Saudi Arabia in what is essentially a domestic issue among Americans on the ethics, moral, legality of building a centre which also happens to have a mosque?

Unless you know something I don't, i.e. the funding for Cordoba House is also from Saudi Arabia.

In any case, most churches in Muslim majority countries which have them are from funds by the said church groups also facilitated by US goverment faith based initiatives and tax exemptions. The weekly and monthly collections from the faithful is not enought to build them.

Serial liar and shameless demagogue Newt Gingrich thinks there should be no mosque at ground zero.

That settles it for me. Build it now.