There is definitely a certain appeal among many Americans to any demand that we should get to use the same rulebook as any potential opponent on any subject. The whole business that we should show them we can be tolerant despite their disregard for us seems to ignore the simple fact that they don't care. At some point in the election process, because the issue has been raised, everybody will have to established their own positions on the topic.

Despite those who would say it is a New York issue, it is of national interest.

he says the name of this project ("Cordoba House") is itself an insult to Christians for those who know their history. I freely admit that while I am aware vaguely of the Cordoba Caliphate I don't really know what he means. Whatever.

That is the Caliphate that invaded Spain - it would be interesting to know what their reasoning was for picking the name, as it doesn't take much to assume someone would notice that and suggest a meaning tied into that in a negative way.

His arguments in a whole work because he keeps an element to them that I think it is hard to disagree with without taking up an unreasonable position - you can't refute his whole argument, it forces you to pick it apart bit by bit. Then get accused of trying to spin it and nit picking.
His arguments don't really counter any of the objections raised but dodge them and distract -

If the people behind the Cordoba House were serious about religious toleration, they would be imploring the Saudis, as fellow Muslims, to immediately open up Mecca to all and immediately announce their intention to allow non-Muslim houses of worship in the Kingdom.

He does have a point here - moderate Muslims should speak out against the intolerance on Saudi Arabia. And Newt should speak out about the other forms of it - against gays and women, otherwise I think he is setting a double standard.

Umm, way more islamic states are US clients than US enemies. See Morocco, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Deliberately attacking the religion of our allies for minor political gain when such behavior undermines the winning of hearts and minds is depraved.

America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization.

Well, he can run on this and get alot of sympathy because of September 11. And undoubtedly there are plenty of people in the muslim world who do wish our destruction.

But others (and they would be rabid, pinko commies so they don't count anyway) would point out that the US has also done its share of destruction in muslim lands in recent years.

And they lecture us about tolerance.

Ah, now we come to the shining gold nugget of hypocrisy. Because the assumption here is that we are more tolerant.

Well, some of us are. But tolerance means you accept differences. Tolerance means that you undersand that a large country - such as the US - is composed of people of different political, social and cultural outlooks, different abilities, different religions, different races and that all of them are actually American.

Even people who do not own guns.

So I would argue that many people in this country are not tolerant at all.

And therefore it is hypocritical of us to judge another nation on standards that we ourselves do not live up to.

And I would like somebody to point out to me examples of Mr. Gingrich's own tolerance, just so I can be fair here.

The Umayids invaded Spain. Cordoba was an islamic breakway state in Spain that was famed for its intellectuality and tolerance, I believe Mamodedies was a rabbinical scholar of the period. Its an ecumenical gesture. Newt knows this.

you can't refute his whole argument, it forces you to pick it apart bit by bit. Then get accused of trying to spin it and nit picking.

Yeah you can. Gingrich is practicing religious intolerance which is against what the US was founded on.

He does have a point here - moderate Muslims should speak out against the intolerance on Saudi Arabia. And Newt should speak out about the other forms of it - against gays and women, otherwise I think he is setting a double standard.

Okay, then moderate christians need to condemn the fanatical christians that bomb abortion clincs, kill doctors, cause suffering by their opposition of stem cell research, and wage war on countries on false premises. They should call for the resignation of slimeballs like Pat Robertson for saying things like the people of Haiti deserved the earthquake.

Gingrich is kind of a fascinating character. He intimidates people because he makes historical references. Back in the 90s, he liked to compare the Democrats to the Romans in the Punic Wars or something like that, the third one I suppose, and of course nobody in Washington had any idea what the hell happened in the Punic Wars and so people thought, gee, he may be really right wing and very incendiary, but clearly he's deep, we should really listen to him...What I do know is that Palin beat him to the jump on this one, but now he's really doubled down with the whole Saudi argument. And it's very clever. It seems like logic. It has logickiness. But it's totally demagogic and borderline clinical, which is what Gingrich is, albeit that he is also clever. I deary hope he runs, and I have a feeling that depending on the mood on the right at the time, he might do fairly well.

rofl - absolutely true! :-) I expect he's trying to bill himself as the 'intellectual Palin'. However, I remember what happened the last time he 'explored' running for President. No money came in.

The right wing in the US is happy to advocate diversity in Saudi and call for religious tolerance but they would never call for the US to stop propping up US-backed dictators in the Middle East. Democracy is a prerequisite for diversity and freedom of expression.

Do I prefer a conservative opponent like Gingrich, with at least enough of a grasp of history to distort it in order to manipulate the more gullible of his constituents (or at least those more willing to be fed misinformation to justify their established bias?), to a knee-jerk, anti-intellectual puppet like Palin or George W Bush? Yes, if only because it makes the debate more interesting.

Does it change the fact that Republican rhetoric has the same goal as terrorism, to stoke fear and encourage xenophobia in the population for naked, short-term political gain? No.

snoopster

He does have a point here - moderate Muslims should speak out against the intolerance on Saudi Arabia. And Newt should speak out about the other forms of it - against gays and women, otherwise I think he is setting a double standard.

As much as you may want him to speak out I don't think he will - why should he ? His reply to Democrats/Liberals who try to take him on on this issue will make it look like they are for the mosque.

Cordoba:

In the 10th-11th centuries Córdoba was one of the most advanced cities in the world, as well as a great cultural, political, financial and economic centre. The Great Mosque of Córdoba dates back to this time; under caliph Al-Hakam II Córdoba received what was then the largest library in the world, housing from 400,000 to 1,000,000 volumes.

iow, when Islam was known for being in the forefront of modernity and discovery. Only Newt, with his unwavering focus on wars (clue: history is more than a series of wars!), would assume the Sufis are trying to conquer the U.S., one community center at a time. ;-)

btw - that community center includes a swimming pool. I recall reading something where I live about the desire of some local Muslims to have their children enjoy swimming, but feeling uncomfortable about taking them to a pool or beach with all the bikinis around. They were looking for something more 'Midwestern Fifties', iow. Probably true of a lot of other sports (beach volleyball, anyone?), hence the desire for a Muslim community center. Just a thought.

Although back to the "conquering Sufi" thought...I keep getting this picture in my mind of everyone in the U.S., on the Fourth of July, celebrating with "whirling dervish" dances of celebration. With a background of fireworks, and patriotic songs accompanied by Middle Eastern musical instruments. The mind boggles. ;-)

Never ever underestimate the appeal of those who say it is moral and just to listen to our meanest instincts. It's safer to stand back and watch as they race toward the bottom, wishing to use the same rulebook as those with whom we are ideologically opposed. We can claim no high round by appealing to the lowest common denominator.

The Cordoba Initiative is an organization which seeks to improve Islamic Relationships with the West. This is an idea which should be applauded by those whose talking points consist of responses to terrorism. The "Mosque" also includes a community center which can be used by anyone. When Sarah Palin insisted that "peaceful Muslims" should "pls reject" these plans, what she was saying was that she felt that there were no "peaceful Muslims" and that all Muslims should feel responsible for 9/11.

This is hardly in the spirit of healing.

Why don't we start by banning intolerant fundamentalists of all stripes and creeds. Then the Sufi cultural center can go ahead, and Gingrich, well... he'll have to go live Saudi or some place that goes in for religious intolerance.

What happened to freedom of worship in his view? Are Muslims excluded? Where does it say that in the Bill of Rights?

I would find it wildly amusing if the KSA turned around and said "I'm sorry, you find us intolerant? Well have fun buying your oil from Chavez and Putin, dorks."

Does anyone have any idea when this recent fad of holding the KSA up for moral guidance came about? It seems to have suddenly come from nowhere but is everywhere.

Umm, way more islamic states are US clients than US enemies. See Morocco, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia

Not to mention Indonesia, which is the world's most populous Muslim nation. And pretty moderate. Wait a second... didn't Obama spend some time in Indonesia? WHY HAS NOBODY INVESTIGATED THIS. I dare say Journolist have been supressing the name of his madrassa.

The former Speaker disgraced & forced by his own caucus to resign more than a decade ago is back. What a piece of work Newt is, no matter how awful and pathetic Republicans behave they just wait a spell and then come back because Americans have such short memories. No one should care what this jack ass says.

We really do need to be clear that Gingrich knows that he is behaving disgracefully here. For him, it's just a style of politics.

To the extent that we owe a debt of civility to the not especially well informed non-Muslim people among us, we should be precise with our contempt here. These folks are Gingrich's intended victims: he knows perfectly well that he isn't causing Al Qaeda the least possible discomfort. He is all about stirring up the Judeo-Christians. He does it for his personal gain; he's made quite a career out of it. But we should leave them alone. Mocking them for being susceptible to his unctuous manipulation isn't kind and it really, really isn't smart. Gingrich is not only firing up the uninformed - he's baiting us to sneer at them. And damn is it tempting!

Even quite a few emphatically non-trollish people who regularly post on this site seem unaware of the extent to which it is common for people in the US - Muslim people, by Gad! - to regularly visit their, ah, community centers for activities related to their, er, Muslimness. This leads them to think that there is something unusual about Cordoba House; maybe it's unusual enough that it really is reasonable and proper to question whether a right exists to worship Allah in certain neighborhoods in New York...

Fine, But a perennial presidential candidate, a former Speaker of the House, knows that he is engaging in the very lowest kind of demagoguery to suggest that the free exercise of some religions is contrary to our traditions.

This guy is as delusional as another idiot who suggested tearing down some big ole Wall back on June 12, 1987. We all knew it would never happen. The guy was a nut and a warmonger.

Showing tolerance to people who do not practice it themselves is seen by them as weakness, which encourages them to push harder. Non-Muslims are under attack in many parts of the Muslim world - Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan. I think we are entitled to ask Muslim countries to do more to protect their own religious minorities in exchange for the tolerance we show to them.

Is this bloke a moron?
He takes as read that there's a meaningful connection between a)the decision to build a mosque in Manhattan and b) religious tolerance in Saudi Arabia. The link just isn't there (or he hasn't bothered to make it).
Further, his message is essentially 'tolerance is good but we won't be tolerant until they are'. The second bit makes no sense by itself, and the mixture of the two is a massive double standard. Ironically, he seems to think that he is the one fighting the double standard (as they aren't being tolerant, but are asking for tolerance.)
And he seems to think that muslims are essentially interchangeable. From @RenaissanceLady's descripiton, the Cordoba initiative couldn't be further away from Saudi Wahhabism.

My. Well, he's definitely running for president, there would seem little doubt about that. Gingrich is kind of a fascinating character. He intimidates people because he makes historical references. Back in the 90s, he liked to compare the Democrats to the Romans in the Punic Wars or something like that, the third one I suppose, and of course nobody in Washington had any idea what the hell happened in the Punic Wars and so people thought, gee, he may be really right wing and very incendiary, but clearly he's deep, we should really listen to him.

This made me chuckle, Bush too dumb, Gingrich too smart, I guess just right is, I don't know Smart enough not to ever question the democratic party?

@Rutene

I think we are entitled to ask Muslim countries to do more to protect their own religious minorities in exchange for the tolerance we show to them.

You think it's only fair to ask people living in Egypt to be tolerant to other people living in Egypt, as a trade-off for the tolerance you show to people in the US/UK? How does the tolerance shown to people in the US/UK benefit people who live in Egypt? There's no connection there, and that equation implies that it'd be okay for us and Egypt to have the same level of tolerance, irrespective of that level.

Of course Egypt should be tolerant, but that's because everyone should be tolerant, not as a trade-off for the tolerance we've shown people who have nothing to do with Egypt.

Michael sees it backwards.

When someone says no Mosque in NY until Church in SA, that actually means SA should be like the US not the other way around.

So nice try wouldn't fly.....

Anyways, that SA comparison is still silly. This is not about Mosques in general, which pose no issue in NY or elsewhere.

It is about a Mosque next to GZ opening on Sept 11, 2011.

That is why there is opposition to this. It is an obscene abuse of American tolerance and a sick insult to the dead and damaged.

Regardless of whether the mosque will succeed or not, the protests leading up to it and the protests which will follow should this second NY atrocity succeed, will unite Americans and NY in ways unseen since 911.

Muslim terrorism united America on 911 and Muslim arrogance will unite it 10 years later.
Ironically the mosque project will be a gift in disguise because of the unity it will create across party, racial and regional lines.

Under the Muslims, there was freedom of worship in Cordoba. You can still visit the old synagogue - one of the few pre-Reconquista synagogues in Spain that is still standing. There is also a statue of Moses Maimonides, the great Jewish philosopher who was born in Cordoba. (Then again, he had to flee the city after it was taken over by the not-so-tolerant Almohad Dynasty.) Still, I guess that for moderate Muslims, "Cordoba House" is meant to evoke the image of Cordoba as a melting pot of cultures and religions, a cosmopolitan center of religious and scientific thought, presided over by benevolent Muslim rulers. For Newt Gingrich, I guess it signifies Muslim invasion and conquest - I believe that there are a few Muslims who believe Andalucia should still be under Muslim rule.

What does the nationality of the flyers that have to do with anything? He's just ginning up the base for 2010. Newt and Palin are activists, they are not candidates for the simple reason that neither Newt nor Palin could win a general election. Palin might not understand this, but Newt certainly does, and has said as much on TV.

beeftruk
22 Jul 2010, 6:05PM

Yeah you can. Gingrich is practicing religious intolerance which is against what the US was founded on.

you think that has convinced a lot of his suppoerters? I don't

Okay, then moderate christians need to condemn the fanatical christians that bomb abortion clincs, kill doctors, cause suffering by their opposition of stem cell research, and wage war on countries on false premises. They should call for the resignation of slimeballs like Pat Robertson for saying things like the people of Haiti deserved the earthquake.

you are right, they should.

Hey, who could possibly argue with that? Perhaps those people who bravely extend olive branches, rather than taking them away.

Just about everything he calls weak is a sign of strength, and compassion, if you just bend your worldview a little bit towards the point where all people count as real, and important, and you are NOT the sole master of the universe.

But sure, let's go with it being a sign of weakness to treat people decently. That's what every warlord in history has said. Must be right, right?

harryboy
22 Jul 2010, 6:22PM

As much as you may want him to speak out I don't think he will - why should he ? His reply to Democrats/Liberals who try to take him on on this issue will make it look like they are for the mosque.

No, I don't think he will either. That is why I think he is a hypocrite - he doesn't care about rights, he just cares about what will make him popular.

Let's keep something in mind. The city in which all Muslims should visit, towards which all practising Muslims pray, is Mecca. This is a city where it's illegal not to be Muslim. There is a connection there, a very clear connection.

As Armaros said, this isn't about mosques. This is about Muslims in NY showing some sensitivity by saying 'You know what, we understand this may not be the best place for a community center at this time, maybe never. We hope that some day we'll be able to build a mosque here. But the wounds are still fresh, and we know, rightly or wrongly, that this will inflame passions of a community dealing with a traumatic event.'

@WATW

But the wounds are still fresh, and we know, rightly or wrongly, that this will inflame passions of a community dealing with a traumatic event.'

Muslims in NY aren't spectators to the common trauma of 9/11: they're suffering from it in the same way that NY's Jews and Christians are. To deny them a part in that is to deny that they're a part of the city.

My father grew up in Saudi Arabia and attended mass every single week. My grandfather passed away in Saudi Arabia and before they shipped his body home on ice, they had a Christian mass in Saudi Arabia. There are very many Western expat communities in The Kingdom; they have churches.

Newt should get that recto-cranial inversion looked at.

Muslims in NY aren't spectators to the common trauma of 9/11: they're suffering from it in the same way that NY's Jews and Christians are. To deny them a part in that is to deny that they're a part of the city.

That's a very good point. But unfortunately they are also a tiny minority of that community which seems to be pushing for something they know people are simply not ready for. I think one of the problems is that they aren't considering people's feelings outside of their community, never mind the fact that there's no evidence that all Muslims would support the mosque at this time anyway. They are diverse in many ways, some more conveniently ignored than others.

There is no justification for seeing this construction as a priority. The first priority goes to community relations. And there is no way anyone can say this is something which is bringing the community together. There is no need to start this kind of controversy. It is already being seen as a provocative act whether it actually is or not, and is unwise to support at this time.

Truebluetah
Showing tolerance to people who don't show tolerance to others isn't a virtue, it's weakness. All I am saying is that we should be pressing Muslim nations to show tolerance to their own religious minorities. When all the concessions are made one way, I think it's fair to say that we are looking at appeasement based on fear rather than true tolerance.

There was a giant Mosque planned for London to open during the Olympics.

Public opinion killed the project.

Was that intolerance?

What if (G^d forbid) terrorists should destroy the Eiffel Tower, does anybody here believe the French would allow a Mosque to be built on its ruins?

Seriously.

The Muslims of France would not even try. Yet they are a more significant minority in France than in the USA.

The fact that these arrogant idiots are trying this in America is because they know America is so proud of its tolerance that they would even let something so vile to pass just so that nobody would call them "intolerant".

Americans are ignorant of the world.

On the Right, they believe they can fix it and dictate it, on the Left they believe tolerating everything in the name of liberalism would make the world love them.

They seriously need a meeting about this.....Seriously.....

WeAreTheWorld

In a couple of years, the American Right will owe a letter of thanks to Imam Rauf and the "Cordoba initiative".

"Thank you for galvanizing our base and thank you for uniting American under our new leadership....Peace be with you..."

Signed :

Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Rudy Giuliani (and 140 Republican Congressional freshmen)

Oh the irony.....

Rutene

So should the U.S. ban freedom of speech until the people of Burma have freedom of speech?

Should the U.S. ban private ownership of handguns until everyone in, say, Britain is allowed to own a handgun?

What does freedom of worship mean to you? Freedom to worship only in the way you find acceptable?

Where does anyone get off suggesting that the attacks on 911 had anything to do with the Muslim religion anyway, much less Sufism? That's like saying Hiroshima was done in the name of Jesus, because the crew of the Enola Gray said prayers to Him before they took off.

Ossama Bin is not Islam. He's not even a good Muslim. He and his organization have violated just about every tenet of the Muslim faith. They are bad men who do bad things. I can think of a very long list of bad Christians who have done, if you count up the bodies, far far worse things. We are not at war with Islam and anyone who thinks so, and says so, and tries to make it so, is as bad as Ossama and his gang of thugs.

Jesus repeats: mote, eye, beam

wikipedia
22 Jul 2010, 8:48PM
Weren't you informed this was an atheist paper? You are surely offending somebody here quoting some Christian prophet.

Here's something no one's yet brought up - from Wikipedia's entry on Saudia Arabia's King Abdullah interfaith dialogue:
In March 2008 King Abdullah called for a “brotherly and sincere dialogue between believers from all religions.”[9]
Abdullah held a conference at Mecca in June 2008 to urge Muslim leaders to speak with one voice with Jewish and Christian leaders.[10] He discussed and took approval of the Saudi Islamic scholars and the world's renowned Islamic scholars to hold the interfaith dialogue.
In June 2008, Saudi Arabia and Spain agreed to hold the interfaith dialogue in Spain.[11] The historic conference finally took place in Madrid in July 2008 where religious leaders of different faiths participated.[12]
Abdullah had never earlier made any overtures for dialogue with eastern religious leaders such as Hindus and Buddhists. The Mecca conference discussed an important paper on the dialogue with the followers of monotheistic religions highlighting the monotheistic religions of southeast Asia including Sikhism in the third axis of the fourth meeting titled "With Whom We Talk" presented by Sheikh Badrul Hasan Al Qasimi. The session was chaired by HE Dr. Ezz Eddin Ibrahim, Adviser to the President of the United Arab Emirates for Culture.
The session also discussed a paper presented on coordination among Islamic institutions on Dialogue by Dr. Abdullah bin Omar Nassif, Secretary General of the World Islamic Council for Preaching and Relief and a paper on dialogue with divine messages, presented by Professor Mohammad Sammak - Secretary General of the Islamic Spiritual Summit in Lebanon. The session ended by Sheikh Al Fadel Alzafzaaf, Under Secretary-Azhar and Chairman of the Committee for dialogue among religions formerly, Cairo discussing the futuristics of dialogue in the light of repeated abuse to Islam.
King Abdullah and his government were responsible for the 'Peace of Culture' which took place on November 2008 at the United Nations General Assembly. It brought together Muslim and non-Muslim nations to eradicate the preconception of Islam and Terrorism. It brought together leaders including former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, Israeli President Shimon Peres, George W Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan.
Is that what Newt Gingrich is afraid of? He certainly didn't mention the terrorist attacks AGAINST the Saudi government:
Since May 12, 2003, Saudi Arabia has faced several serious attacks from organizations that Saudi Arabia officially has declared terrorists, targeting primarily Western expatriates and also Saudi security forces. The attacks have included car and truck bombings as well as raids by gunmen against civilians.
Several international groups, such as al-Qaeda, have been linked to the attacks, with the common motivation being resentment of the perceived pro-Western stance of the King and royal family, and their encouragement of Westerners residing in Saudi Arabia. The militants believe that the Islamic prophet Muhammad commanded that non-Muslims should be expelled from the Arabian peninsula. The militants are especially outraged at the presence of the U.S. military in Saudi Arabia, which they see as sanctioned by the royal family.
The response of King Abdullah's administration to the insurgency has been a series of crackdowns including raids by security forces, arrests, torture[13] and public beheadings. King Abdullah has vowed to fight terrorist ideologies within the country.
On the second anniversary of the September 11 attack on the United States, the then-prince wrote a letter to then U.S. President George W. Bush, which ended with:
"God Almighty, in His wisdom, tests the faithful by allowing such calamities to happen. But He, in His mercy, also provides us with the will and determination, generated by faith, to enable us to transform such tragedies into great achievements, and crises that seem debilitating are transformed into opportunities for the advancement of humanity. I only hope that, with your cooperation and leadership, a new world will emerge out of the rubble of the World Trade Center: a world that is blessed by the virtues of freedom, peace, prosperity and harmony." [14]

From the Financial Times this spring:

King Abdullah, who is popular for his perceived austerity and integrity, has been credited with efforts to modernise the country. But analysts note that he must strike a balance between conservatives and reformers. In September, he opened the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, the first co-educational institution in the country. But in Riyadh he is also building the Princess Nora University – for women only

.

I really did do blockquoting more than once above! (Sorry it's hard to read.)

ngavc, I appreciate your humor, you've been misinformed. The Guardian has an entire Cif Belief section. They've certainly had plenty of journalists and commentators over the years who are believers, my favorite being the late Hugo Young. I think you've confused 'tolerant of all' with 'atheist'. ;-)

The Cordoba Initiative is trying to meet Christianity half way?

What a sneaky, low-down-as-a-snake thing to do!

Do the decent thing an' reach fer yer gun, varmint.

Bluthner
You are trying to obfuscate what I said. I don't think we should block any Muslim house of worship. I think we should begin to pressure the Muslim world to show more tolerance to non-Muslims. Otherwise, they think we are a group of wimps who can be pushed around. There are signs that point to Islam having entered into the same type of aggressive phase as Christianity went through in the 1500s when it subjugated and decimated the peoples of the American continent. That was deplorable. I don't see how anyone could use that as a sort of excuse for bad behavior now. I'm not a Christian, and my guess is that you aren't either. i don't see anything in Islam that is in accord with my liberal values, so I am am not going to defend it.

Bluthner said:

Where does anyone get off suggesting that the attacks on 911 had anything to do with the Muslim religion anyway, much less Sufism? That's like saying Hiroshima was done in the name of Jesus, because the crew of the Enola Gray said prayers to Him before they took off.

This is possibly the dumbest thing I ever read on CIF.

Information about that 2008 Interfaith Dialogue from Arab News

And you know what? Even The Jerusalem Post reported on it:

Saudi King opens interfaith dialogue initiative
06/04/2008 13:27
King Abdullah has opened a three-day Muslim interfaith conference that the kingdom hopes would pave the way for a wider dialogue between Muslims and adherents of monotheistic faiths. Over 500 Muslim delegates from about 50 countries have gathered in the holy city of Mecca for the event, including Hashemi Rafsanjani, former president of mostly Shiite Iran. Abdullah walked into the hall Wednesday with Rafsanjani, who later sat on the king's left on the stage, sending a message that the Sunni Muslim kingdom does not have a problem with moderate Shiites like him. Participants say they hope the gathering will culminate in an agreement on a global Islamic charter on dialogue with Christians and Jews.

Makes you wonder why (I suspect) very few in the U.S. ever heard of it (rhetorical question). Does Newt Gingrich know about this, and is trying to deflect attention away from it because it doesn't play into his meme? Or he's not interested in anything not involving a war, Punic or otherwise? Hey - I report, you decide. ;-)

And here I thought it was supposed to be conservatives who are ignorant (both sense of the word) of the nuances surrounding 'the west v islam'.

Cordoba marks the high point of Islamic expansion into the West.

Intentionally or not, it's a remarkably provocative choice of name.

But you know, 'whatever'.

Gingrich's demagoguery is inexcusable. Palin's is ignorant and instinctive (except when, as Todd put it, "She'd not the one making the decisions."). This guy is doing this very deliberately and in a calculated way.

His repudiation of US constitutional principles should disgrace him.

Well, America does have a choice. It IS America that is propping up Saudi Arabia as it is and without America the feudal kingdom would collapse and be replaced by something else, quite possibly altogether more modern. Women might even be able to drive!

The US has sold out its constitutional principles already, entirely for oil. Gingrich thinks America should have its cake and eat it? Hmm.

Wikipedia - do you think you have some sort of point by posting the "interfaith dialogue" in Saudia Arabia two years ago?

How many thousands of Muslims have been killed by Saudi financed and inspired Wahabbis in Pakistan alone since 2008? Let alone Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa and SE Asia?

Do you really think this one conference even comes close to erasing the ledger of the Wahabbi cancer that Saudi Arabia has spread all over the Muslim world?

Face it, Islam (certainly as practiced by the majority in Saudi Arabia) has a looooong way to go to prove that they are tolerant and respect pluralism that the vast majority of the world's religions figured out over a century ago.