July 25, 2010, - 11:58 pm

It’s Islam, Stupid: Newt Gingrich’s, Others’ Kabuki Dance Hypocrisy on Ground Zero Mosque

By Debbie Schlussel

*** bumped up from Friday, July 23 @ 8:31 p.m. ***

You know my views on the proposed Ground Zero mosque a/k/a “Cordoba House.” They haven’t changed.  But the hypocrisy and fraud of many of those who claim to oppose it has gotten louder.  Newt Gingrich is Exhibit A.


Memo to Newt & Co: It’s Not the Mosque @ Ground Zero. It’s Islam, Stupid.

Gingrich put out his statement against the mosque, this week.  It is intellectually dishonest.  He repeatedly talks about “Islamists,” but won’t bring himself to mention Islam, itself–not even once in his statement.  Sorry, but the men who brought down the planes on 9/11 were not “Islamists.”  They were Muslims.  “Islamists” is a phony term invented by those who refuse to attack Islam. It’s a fiction. And if the 9/11 hijackers were “Islamists”–not Muslims–then why be against a mosque at the site? After all, the mosque is not “Islamist.” It’s Muslim (or Islamic). Yes, those who belong to it are extremists. But they are no more extreme than those who run almost every single mosque in America. Islam is extreme. It’s not simply that there is this extremist group within it, called “Islamists.” That’s a fraud, simply denial.

Yet, Gingrich says, “There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia.” Well, why? Why is it that it is okay for him to have mosques everywhere else in America, and still no churches and synagogues anywhere in Saudi Arabia? Why does he limit himself to saying there should be no mosque at Ground Zero? Does he believe that only Ground Zero should go toe to toe with Saudi Arabia? And, again, if he won’t condemn Islam, why does he condemn an Islamic house of worship anywhere in America? The guy is a hypocrite and a grandstander on Islam. That’s why.

And he has quite a bit of company. Neither Daniel Pipes, nor Sarah Palin, nor any of the others who’ve engaged in this intellectual fraud and hypocrisy on Islam will condemn the religion. Yet, they all condemn a house of worship of the religion. Why? Because, again, they are fakes. They’re not consistent. And they refuse to do the right thing and say what this is about.

This is about Islam. And none of these people came out against stopping Islamic immigration. They refuse to. And until they do, they are frauds for saying more Muslims can come to our shores, but we won’t allow them to build houses of worship. Once they are here, it is too late.

And once we have mosques all over America–and we do–condemning only a mosque in one area is smoke and mirrors. And they know it.

When will their many gushing fans?

The problem, America, is not Islamists. It is not a mosque at Ground Zero. It’s Islam. If you won’t admit that, you are part of the problem. Not the solution.

Once the conventional wisdomites wake up to that fact and willingly admit it, we’ll be making progress. Until then, grandstanding exclusively against the Ground Zero mosque is hypocrisy by design. And those who applaud it are hitting their heads against a wall, achieving nothing in stopping the real, larger problem of which the mosque at Ground Zero–that may or may not go up–is a tiny symptom.

Again, the problem isn’t a single mosque. It’s not even a mosque near Ground Zero.

It’s Islam, stupid.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

68 Responses

Well said Debbie. Islam is the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about. Muslims are 1000 years behind the times. The world has moved forward on human rights and responsibilites and Islam is stuck in a time warp.

CaliforniaScreaming on July 23, 2010 at 10:04 pm

His photo ops with Nancy Pelosi and rev Al were all I needed to get ill.

samurai on July 23, 2010 at 10:27 pm

Hi Debbie,

I appreciate your commentary and knowledge of islam,terrorism,etc. and for enlightening the rest of us as we strive to learn more about our enemies.

I would like to know if you feel that Muslim’s born in America to American born Muslim’s are considered ‘safe’ from Islamic extremism? I know some have become home grown terrorists after becoming radicalized online;some who were not even Muslim to begin with ie:the women recently who converted. But aside from those who converted…those who live here&were born here to American born Muslims, do you think they are ‘safe’ or could they become extremists or are they already like ‘sleepers’ among us??

@freedom4usa on July 23, 2010 at 10:42 pm

    freedom4usa on July 23, 2010 at 10:42 pm said:
    “could they become extremists or are they already like ’sleepers’ among us??”

    First of all, they are not extremists, they are simply following the law of their religion (pronounced “satanic cult”).

    And could they?…ummm, they already have, many times over. It’s just that the populace won’t accept the facts. Bush’s “religion of peace” and all that crap.

    The real extremists among Islam are the Muslims who DON’T follow their religion to the letter. Doesn’t matter how “American” these people become, as soon as they really become part of their faithfull, they are, what you would call, extremists. They are ALL ‘sleepers’.

    theShadow on July 24, 2010 at 12:24 am

    freedom4usa, the hard fact is this: Since 9/11 there STILL has not been any significant “mainstream” Muslim protest about Islamic extremism – which answers your question. Indeed, most of the Muslim terrorists in USA and Europe since then have been born in USA and Europe. You can’t trust a religion that can’t trust itself.

    WAKE UP on July 26, 2010 at 12:15 am

I have better names for “Radical Muslims” and “Moderate Muslims.” You might as well just call them (respectively) “Visible Muslims” and “Invisible Muslims.”

“Audible Muslims” and “Silent Muslims” would work even better. The ones who fall into the latter category are alleged to exist, but every time they are asked how they feel about the ideology of the ones in the former, they have this tendency to either clam up or change the subject.

Anyhow, I’ll bet if the Japanese had proposed building a Shinto Temple along the banks of Pearl Harbor back in 1946, out of sheer disgust, President Truman would’ve ordered the dropping of yet another “big one,” this time on Tokyo.

Daniel H on July 24, 2010 at 12:04 am

The notion that modern Islam is a political religion is a Western invention. Islam makes no such distinction between secular and temporal matters. It has never renounced jihad. If you condemn the mosque, you must also condemn the ideology manifested in it. There are no “moderate” Islamists. We have seen that fiction exposed in Turkey. They are all the same and all advocate a totalitarian ideology that involves the elimination of every non-Islamic creed and belief in the world. Merely being opposed to one mosque doesn’t get to the real issue. Muslims have not been assimilated in Europe. They won’t be assimilated here. People have yet to wake up and acknowledge the true character of the creed that represents a danger to our very way of life and to our freedom.

Yes, its the Islam, stupid!

NormanF on July 24, 2010 at 12:07 am

Love your response and also your blunt way of saying it. It takes lot of courage. I too have been Trying to get Indian to get it that problem is in Quran and Muhammad.
Then as more and more people l point towards Islam things will start changing.
It is a step that leaders are taking even when they lie. They at least are coming forward to speak against one Mosque.
Later let the time pass as more and more people get the courage many will come out and speak against Islam.
It is good to hear so many starting to at least speak.
As more common people get to know the truth then leaders will be forced to speak the truth as they will know like themselves to be known as fools in from of their own people.
Keep on exposing the so called leaders and keep up the pressure. These leaders will be one day forced to take a correct stand..Good work

hinduIdf on July 24, 2010 at 12:46 am

The only extreme is your islamophobia.

Jamal on July 24, 2010 at 2:30 am

    Tell us we don’t have to worry when you denounce jihad and Muslims who blow up innocent dhimmis for Allah.

    Like the 9/11 Muslim Al Qaeda terrorists did almost a decade ago.

    And we’re Islamophobes for fearing it again, huh?

    NormanF on July 24, 2010 at 6:56 am


    you should get to know a nice goat.

    samurai on July 24, 2010 at 1:52 pm

    Islamophobia: Inversion of Language and Circular Logic

    “If you accuse me of violence I will murder you.”

    Evil Muslim behavior is imputed by them to its victims.

    Even as Islam tries to control the world and propagate Sharia through jihad it accuses America and Israel of trying to control the world and of Islamophobia for trying to restrain Islam from doing so.

    Islam has mastered the language of political correctness and its use as a weapon.

    Len on July 25, 2010 at 11:29 am

    “Islamophobia” is a bogus expression. Anyone who uses that expression should just as well refer to anyone who disapproves of Nazis–i.e., anyone who abbhors Nazi “philosophy,” or simply hates Nazis as desturctive barbarians–as “Naziphobic.” Of course, it is absurd to use such an expression. Would you call someone who believes in good health and sanitation “diseasiphobic”? That would be more sub-moronic sophistry, just like the expression “Islamophobia.”

    Ralph Adamo on July 26, 2010 at 2:06 am

I will take it a step further. After seeing pictures of parents burying their daughter alive for looking at a boy,
and pictures of children prepared to be shot up as suicide
bombs, and reading of the beheading of people; there will be
no peace, in my view, until Islam is eradicated. With the
exception of those who leave it if they can.

Selma Soss on July 24, 2010 at 3:03 am

Newt Gingrich has referred to our Republic as a Democracy. Since he should know better, being a college professor, he is therefore a traitor to the USA. The US Constitution requires the death penalty for traitors.

Dr Dale on July 24, 2010 at 10:13 am

Folks, I think Jamal is a fellow-travelling al-aqueda operative living in this country, lookit here you schmuck Jamal, we are only condemning “RADICAL ISLAMOFASCISM”, simple as that, we are NOT condemning the whole religion of islam dumbass. To CaliforniaScreaming, your right dude, the islamist haven’t created anything that’s important to society in about 700-800 years, you have to notice that the arabic muslims created algebra, the math numbers (ie, 0, 1, 2, 3, etc.), astrology, etc. They created those stuff to society during the “Muslim Conquest” in it’s hey-day.

Now to the mosque that might be build near Ground-Zero, to all of you leftist left wingers, they can build a mosque anywhere in this country, I know we all have the rights to freedom of religion, but why is it being build at a site where 3000 of our american countrymen/countrywomen where killed by radical muslims? The mosque can be build 5-10 blocks away from ground zero or even a mile from ground zero, noone is saying that a mosque can’t be built anywhere, and another thing, the imam who stands for this mosque is a religious crackpot nutjob, he clearly said that he wants a muslim theocracy to emerge in the US government, that should worry to jackasses like Jamal, and his left wing moronic friends. The truth is that I don’t want NO type of theocracy to emerge in this country, whether it’s a christian theocracy, muslim theocracy, jewish theocracy, hindu theocracy, buddhist theocracy, etc., I think that theocracay from any religion is a major problem in the world NOT the solution!

“A nation is identified by it’s borders, langauge & culture!”

Sean R. on July 24, 2010 at 10:32 am

    Sean R. says: “we are only condemning “RADICAL ISLAMOFASCISM”, simple as that, we are NOT condemning the whole religion of islam dumbass.

    Sean, you should speak for yourself here. I, personally, condemn the whole “religion” of Islam. I do the same for the religion of Nazism. We (collective this time) will either roll back Islam to Arabia and then blow up its temples, or we will always have problems with it.

    skzion on July 25, 2010 at 1:44 pm

    Actually, I know a bit of the history of mathematics. The Arabs contributed pretty much nothing to the field, though there were a few clever ones who picked up others’ (especially Greek and Indian) work and did good things with it. But most of what is attributed to them came from those two sources. Geometry is Greek; Archimedes solved cubics by considering intersections of conics long before any Arab. Our numbering system is from the Hindus, and is still called “the Hindu numbers” among Arabs. Most of what al-Khwarizmi did was to really Indian work, and most of what Khayyam did was Greek. al-Tusi undoubtedly made a real, though small contribution. Note, though, that none of these men was Arab: al-Khwarizmi was from a town near Lake Aral in what we now call Uzbekistan, and Khayyam was a Persian. What were the other glorious contributions of the medieval Muslims to science? I forget…

    Clem Malmborb on July 28, 2010 at 3:38 am

I love you Debbie but I did not actually love your expressed views on the 9/1 mosque b/c you basically said it was a done deal and why were we whining now in NYC and why was there still nothing built and so on. Well, that stung. I still am outraged when bad stuff happens in Michican after all. Yes it may be a done deal and yes, Emporer Bloomberg and the Limo Libs here have been a real thorn about doing the right thing at Ground Zero for a long time. Still – you kinda gave us all the big blow off months ago.

MeNYC on July 24, 2010 at 11:28 am

Oh – and ITA that it is ISLAM. It’s a dangerous cult and will probably destroy the world. Still – I care about your backyard ya know what I mean?

MeNYC on July 24, 2010 at 11:31 am

why are here so many men who stare at goats?

Jamal on July 24, 2010 at 4:22 pm

    So, Jamal, you live in afghanistan, huh?
    Why ask us?
    Ask your fellow muslim brethren why they’re staring at goats.

    theShadow on July 24, 2010 at 7:54 pm

Hey Debbie,

Carl Palidino (R) is running for NY Gov. He is against the mossque, and says he would eminent domain to take over the site and make it a war memorial. Just for that I’ll vote for him!!

codekeyguy on July 24, 2010 at 5:44 pm

Hey Debbie,

Carl Palidino (R) is running for NY Gov. He is against the mossque, and says he would use eminent domain to take over the site and make it a war memorial. Just for that I’ll vote for him!!

codekeyguy on July 24, 2010 at 5:45 pm

NY can’t survive another Cuomo, who naturally supports the mosque and sees no reason to do any due diligence despite the fact that he is the the head lawyer for all NY’ers and many of us want an investigation.

MeNYC on July 24, 2010 at 7:11 pm

Very good Debbie…unless we stop the islamic immigration to our shores (U.S and Canada) we are in for some very disgusting times…why do they want to come here?…if their “religion” is so great they can stay in the deserts where they belong…the ONLY reason any muslim comes to the west is to further the vile, disgusting, intolerant, spread of their sick ideology…read the FN quran – hadiths and see for yourselves!!!!…they (muslims) dont fool me anymore nor do they fool most of the decent people in Canada and the U.S…we are on to you diaper-heads and your sick, murdering, lying, pedophilac prophet mo (pissbeuponhim)…you are not welcomed here and if you think you can take us over you have a nother think coming…

BIG IRISH on July 24, 2010 at 8:05 pm

Carl Palidino is a major troublemaker for the politicians. He hates the stupidity of politics and even aired some commercials using his own money on local radio against some of the crap that’s been going on locally. I’d love to see him in office just to see the fireworks! He’s a very direct, confrontational, in your face, no holds barred non-politician and to top it off, has loads of commonsense. Something the others totally lack.
A vote for Cuomo on the other hand is like a vote for Spitzer or Obama. Big talk but the same old crap as usual.

theShadow on July 24, 2010 at 8:20 pm

Newt is another politician bought and paid for by OPEC.

At least he’s a Zionist.

There is NO Santa Claus on July 24, 2010 at 9:34 pm

    Newt Gingrich is no Zionist, TINSC. He is a new world order globalist. Check into his background.

    Gerald on July 25, 2010 at 4:12 pm

“They are all the same and all advocate a totalitarian ideology that involves the elimination of every non-Islamic creed and belief in the world.”

Really now? I don’t believe that at all and I happen to be Muslim. All of you are so ignorant it makes me sick…and you call yourselves Americans!? Last time I checked America allows freedom of religion, there is nothing required in Islam that is against any laws.

Not all Muslims hate, bury their daughters, are suicide bombers or any of that. Suicide is condemned in Islam, if you commit suicide for any reason you go straight to hell. Burying your daughters? Really all of that has cultural influences mainly Arab Pre-Islam, killing is also a grave sin in islam, muslim, non-muslim whomever. I have never read anywhere in the Quran or AUTHENTIC Hadith that we have to kill infidels, the only time you ever kill anyone is if they are physically attacking muslims.

Also, the word Jihad does not necessarily have anything to do with war. Jihad mean struggle. So anytime you have a struggle because of Islam then you are doing jihad so to speak. So if I’m fasting and I’m in my school’s lunchroom while everyone else around me is eating, then that is jihad. The whole killing aspect comes in when Muslims are ATTACKED. If it is done any other time, well those people are going off the path to try to control the world, which is silly because God does and not people.

Sayeeda on July 24, 2010 at 10:14 pm

    Jihad in all the Islamic schools is military struggle against the non-Muslim World, regarded in the Islamic commentaries as the House Of War. Islam is enjoined to fight against it until only Islam exists. And you mention nothing about the second class status of non-Muslim dhimmis in Muslim lands, who are oppressed and denied full and equal rights. Any honest discussion of Islam has to begin with acknowledging the classical role of jihad and the subjugation of non-Muslim peoples under Muslim rule. And it has to continue with confronting Muslim anti-Semitism, racism, misogynism and xenophobia. The most devout believers in Islam believe mass murder is an acceptable instrument to bring the world under the sway of their ideology. When you can challenge them and reform your faith, only then will you find credibility with the rest of us.

    NormanF on July 25, 2010 at 12:39 am

    Sayeeda, you would be more credible if you lashed out against the almost 16,000 worldwide jihadist attacks since 9/11/2001. Were the people of Mumbai attacking Muslims? How about all the Muslims murdered in Sunni/Shiite strife?

    Len on July 25, 2010 at 11:39 am

    Sayeeda, you would be more credible if you lashed out against the almost 16,000 worldwide jihadist attacks since 9/11/2001. Were the people of Mumbai attacking Muslims? How about all the Muslims murdered in Sunni/Shiite strife?

    Len on July 25, 2010 at 11:39 am

    Well, Sayeeda, at least you use a Muslim name.

    As for jihad being a “spiritual struggle,” I am glad you mention the concept of an “AUTHENTIC Hadith,” as the basis for your claim about “struggle” is a single WEAK hadith. However, jihad as blood-and-death warfare is confirmed innumerable times in Bukhari, Abu Muslim, and in authoritative biographies of Mo, such as Ishaq. Of course, it is also confirmed in the later suras of the Koran, most notably the Verse of the Sword. And, as the whole of the Islamic canon is based on a believer-vs-non-believer framework, there can be no mistake about the “intent.” That is why the main schools of Islam–as NormanF points out–disagree with your claim.

    As for “defensive warfare,” don’t make me laugh. Refusal to submit to Islam is CAUSE for “defense warfare” by Muslims, as the non-Muslims are rejecting Mo and Allah, thus “attacking” Islam.

    You know all this stuff, of course. That you write it here means that you are a PR guy for the “religion” of Amalek and therefore advocate the murder of non-Muslims, or their enslavement, or dhimmitude. In addition, as a believing Muslim, you are Bnei Amalek.

    You need to be expelled from the West, as you will never convert to a real religion. Ultimately, there can be no more Muslims in the world. Islam forced massive conversion; it’s time to do that in reverse.

    skzion on July 25, 2010 at 2:03 pm

With all this commotion about this mosque, lets step back and think for just a moment. Many want to consult the constitution on all matters. Doesn’t this give the right of freedom of religion and the right to peaceful assembly? If i’m not mistaken we also have the right to property and the use of it. I agree that some insensitivity is being shown in the building of this mosque, but isn’t the constitution just as important? This could be a moment to embrace our freedoms and allow others of different views and opinions to express themselves as well.

el paso proud on July 24, 2010 at 10:32 pm

    El Paso Proud,

    I’m sorry that you are so clueless. Muslims already “embraced our freedoms” and “expressed themselves.” It happened on 9/11, the ultimate in Muslim “expression.” Now they want to express themselves again and build a monument to their heroes of 9/11: the suicide bombers.

    Actually, ALL mosques are an expression of Muslim defiance and hatred of freedom. The solution is just to not let any more of these barbarians on our shores and let them suffer in their barbaric countries. If Islam is so superior to Christianity and Judaism, then why are Muslims flocking to the West? Can they not “express themselves” in their own countries?

    JM on July 25, 2010 at 1:42 pm

    el paso proud, you advocate for the Constitution only to undermine it. Because, by its nature, Islam is treasonous (e.g., because it advocates armed warfare against the US government, it can be shut down pretty easily, ideally via RICO.

    So, I say that no, the Constitution does not protect your “religion” because SOME “religious” content is not protected, and your whole religion runs afoul of such restrictions.

    skzion on July 25, 2010 at 2:09 pm

I embraced my freedom a long time ago, I’d also like to hold on to it.
The freedom of expression is greately abused in this country and since islam is not a religion but a cult and a fascist ideology they can keep their ‘different views’ to themselves.
The Constitution is there to protect “We the People” not some moon cult who’s only purpouse is the destruction of our way of life.
Do pedophiles, rapists and murderers have the right of self expression too?

theShadow on July 25, 2010 at 12:19 am

Bravo on your attentive parsing of his hyper-careful words, which he has chosen with great attention with regard to their intentional ambiguity. He tries to appear to be strongly against the mosque, while leaving open the side door of his big windy bar so that continued Muslim discrimination against and shutdown of the rest of the world is just fine. Good job, Debbie.

Dernon Ruton on July 25, 2010 at 12:31 am

Its the duty of the honest man to tell the truth. When we give the enemy an exaggerated sense of respect he doesn’t deserve we are not doing him and ourselves any favors. I don’t have the burden to prove the negative about Islam. Muslims have the burden of proving their values have changed and they can accept our dhimmi values as their own. They have a long way to go in that regards and simply bringing more of them here will change our society in ways we don’t want. Those people, as Debbie wrote, who are unwilling to prevent that from happening, are part of the problem rather than the solution.

NormanF on July 25, 2010 at 12:52 am

In engineering there is a phrase that is applicable to the use of “Islamism”—that phrase is “directionally correct.” Talking about Islamism as a problem is far better than saying Islam is a religion of peace. Since Islamism doesn’t deny that Jihadists tenants are actually in Islam scriptures, I would focus our fire on the people walking around saying “religion of peace.” Bush backed off of using “Islamo-Facism” (which is less accurate than Islamism) after a few utterances of the phrase. I would be thrilled if 10% of the politicians in DC started condemning Islamism.

ChrisF on July 25, 2010 at 12:58 am

Is it true the mosque is now called “51 Park” instead of “Cordoba”? And is it true it was called “Cordoba” instead of the originally intended “Mosque of the Grand Hero at Ground Zero”?

Debbie is right. All the mosques must go. All.

Preposteroso on July 25, 2010 at 1:58 am

it’s definitely an american obsession to stare at goats. i’ve never heard it before finding this islamophobic site.

Jamal on July 25, 2010 at 6:11 am

Hey Asalam walykum

Dear sister I read you though about islam. I believe you aren’t understand it properly. If You really want to understand True ISLAM then please Please dont look at some so call muslims and come to any conclusion. Ready Quran And dont read it as racist. Read it as Human forget what you heard what you know read it like u know nothing read it like Human. If i judge a jew by his act as first sucide boomber in human history then all jews are terrorist. Please correct me if i am worng 🙂
Hope you will keep this comment in your comment box.

come to light dont be in DARK

Anjum on July 25, 2010 at 7:30 am

To Bill, Debbie doesn’t like Pat Condell. See her most recent blog on the anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-everything comedian.

To Anjum, the best choice is to walk away from Islam and find something better than Islam. There is absolutely nothing good about Islam.

Bobby'sBrain on July 25, 2010 at 11:40 am

Bobby Brainless,

the best choice is to accept islam as a peaceful religion.

Jamal on July 25, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    the best choice is to accept islam as a peaceful religion.

    Jamal on July 25, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    Jamal, the Muslim barbarian who worships a pedophile “prophet” and the moon god Allah (what idiots Muslims are) forgot the second part of his threat: “the best choice is to accept islam as a peaceful religion. . .if you don’t, Muslims will kill you.”

    JM on July 25, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    Jamal, the best thing is to insult Islam, its followers, and its “prophet.” There needs to be the same prejudice against Muslims that there was against the Nazis. Nothing REQUIRES Germans always to be Nazis, and so we have no problem with Germans as a whole today. Nothing REQUIRES people to Muslim, and they should be discriminated against until they leave or convert.

    skzion on July 25, 2010 at 2:12 pm


      What you are proposing (harassing Muslims until they leave or convert) is a violation of the Bill of Rights, the 14th Amendment and the 1963 Civil Rights Act. Why do you delude yourself into believing otherwise?

      Gerald on July 25, 2010 at 4:14 pm

        Gerald sez:


        What you are proposing (harassing Muslims until they leave or convert) is a violation of the Bill of Rights, the 14th Amendment and the 1963 Civil Rights Act.”

        Poor Gerald: he knows little about the constitution or American law and therefore feels the need to blather endlessly about it (see his ludicrous comments to Debbie below).

        In fact, the Bill of Rights is SOLELY there to protect the INDIVIDUAL from GOVERNMENT. Get it, Gerald? I, as a private citizen, cannot violate the Bill of Rights. The 14th Amendment relates to intergovernmental arenas of action. Again, irrelevant here. The CRA (1964, not 1963) related to public accommodations, schools, and facilities. Again, irrelevant.

        The Bill of Rights does, however, apply to me insofar as it guarantees me the right to stand up and insult Islam, which I advocate. My hope is that Muslims who try violence can then be arrested. I also advocate being prejudiced against Muslims because they choose to be part of a cult that is inherently murderous, covetous, and treasonous. This, too, is my right. I think the Bnei Amalek need to know that WE know what they are. This is the first step toward our self-defense.

        Anyway, it is, as they say, settled law that simply because something is called a “religion” it doesn’t follow that members of that “religion” can do anything they want just because the religious texts insist upon it. I truly believe that Islam could be effectively outlawed in the US because the actual practice of it would, as I have said already, run afoul of existing law.

        Anyway, Gerald, it is tedious to engage you. I do it only because others might have some use for what I say.

        skzion on July 25, 2010 at 5:59 pm

Yeah Jamal who are we going to believe? you? or our lying eyes?

Drakken on July 25, 2010 at 1:50 pm

maybe it’s a retinoblastoma and you shouldn’t believe your eyes, jerk! and comparing one of the world religions with German National Socialism – that’s really something only a dumb american hillibilly could do.

Bismi All?hi Ar-Ra?m?ni Ar-Ra??mi

Jamal on July 25, 2010 at 3:23 pm

    Hey Jamal, you talking to me?

    Islam is not a religion, as it lacks any developed spiritual core. It’s pretty much variations on, “Mo sez Allah told him that if you do X you will go to heaven and have houris, and if you don’t, you go to hell and suffer torment.”

    It’s a joke of a doctrine, really. That it has spread so far is simply evidence that Mo was a much better military planner than Adolf.

    I hope one day you convert to a real religion.

    skzion on July 25, 2010 at 6:15 pm

“the best choice is to accept islam as a peaceful religion.
Jamal on July 25, 2010 at 12:10 pm”

Jamal (up your S) the goat lover resorts to a muzzies favorite conversion tactic..accept or die.

BTW, if we’re insulting you & your “faith”, Good, ’cause you’re an insult to humanity. Islam should be mocked for the joke of a religion that it is. But than again, it’s not a religion but a fascist pagan cult.

theShadow on July 25, 2010 at 3:36 pm


The First Amendment that gives everyone – including Muslims – freedom of religion is what makes taking public blanket statements against Islam by responsible public figures extremely difficult. Some have taken the position that Islam does not deserve First Amendment protections because it is a violent and subversive political movement in addition to a religion. That is Ann Coulter’s position, and Coulter is not a mainstream figure with influence outside of her tiny sphere of supporters (and the closet segregationist Coulter, a huge fan of the open segregationist and anti-Semite Pat Buchanan, doesn’t want to be).

Debbie, it is very easy to demand that public figures take a hard line on Islam, because you have no responsibilities to anyone but yourself and your advertisers on this site. But public figures who serve in government or who influence those who do serve in government (as Newt Gingrich does) cannot afford to go around pretending as if the First Amendment does not exist. Until you yourself – a lawyer I might add – come up with a legal, political or rhetorical strategy that targets all Muslims while somehow respecting the First Amendment (and presumption of innocence and 14th Amendment and 1963 Civil Rights Act) rights of these CITIZENS, it isn’t helpful raking others over the coals for being just as big a failure on this issue as you are. Look, America isn’t Israel, a quasi-theocratic set-aside for Jews. Our Bill of Rights (not to mention other amendments, federal laws, and court precedents) simply make the line that you, AllahPundit, JihadWatch etc. want to take against Islam impossible. And that is why they say “Islamist” instead of “Islam.” Say “Islamist” and the First Amendment doesn’t apply to people who are trying to use violent or subversive means to harm our country and its citizens. But say “Islam” and the First Amendment does apply. That’s why these knuckleheads going around claiming “if Rudy Giuliani was still mayor he would have stopped this mosque!” are so dishonest. Giuliani can no more stop this mosque than he can stop a church, synagogue, Buddhist temple, Hindu temple, Bahai building or anything else. Unless there are pre-existing zoning laws in place to stop ALL religious structures, the best that Giuliani or anyone else could do is delaying tactics that would expose the city to a zillion lawsuits that they would lose.

Until and unless you are able to come up with a strategy that the Bill of Rights and similar laws doesn’t make unworkable, you are part of the problem instead of the solution, because you are giving the false impressions about what the government can do and what it can’t. Now talking about the fact that the Bill of Rights limits what we can do about the Muslim issue does not make me anti-American, it does not make me pro-Muslim, and it certainly doesn’t make me a liberal. It just makes me someone who knows the law. If you want to make a “Muslim exception” to the Bill of Rights, fine. Go ahead and get it passed. But if promote the idea that it will take anything less than that to get what you want, then you are being just as dishonest and irresponsible than Obama.

Gerald on July 25, 2010 at 4:10 pm

So many sentences, Gerald, but so little content. Oh, and do you regularly tilt at windmills?

Debbie has already said that there’s nothing that can be done legally, at this time, against that house of worship for Amalek. But, there is nothing unconstitutional about political elites denouncing Islam for what it is. A “religion” that advocates and facilitates (via its mosques) the harassment and killing of unbelievers is not protected by the First Amendment, you idiot. Nor are political elites unable to TALK about the evils of Islam. Legislators are not required to let in vast numbers of Bnei Amalek either.

BTW, despite your claims to the contrary, you are indeed pro-Muslim and, perhaps, a Muslim yourself. You should be ashamed of yourself.

skzion on July 25, 2010 at 6:08 pm

Hey Newt, Hey Newt, Where’s Daedalus?, Where’s Daedalus- aren’t you the centaur from the old Hercules Cartoon?

patrick on July 25, 2010 at 6:13 pm

It should be mandatory watching for all Americans what happens in FRANCE every Friday. The public streets are held hostage, made into mosques, stopping traffic and French businesses from their right to make money and stay open open for their customers, They do this not for faith but as protest when they don’t get their mosque. DEMANDS DEMANDS and then accuse us of being unfair to them!!!!!Blackmail (and hostage taking) are primary tactics in their war on our culture and laws.

and I agree we need to stop letting them come here
they don’t WANT TO fit in, they want US to become like them (see jamal for example, oh join us – it’s not phobia when the threat is REALITY)Jamal knows damn well they must offer conversion and if we don’t accept then he has the right to kill us- you’re not fooling anyone on here Jamal or Sayeeda- Muslims love to tell us to know the real ISLAM and sadly WE DO:
they have babies like rabbits, overrrun our social services and politics
are all potential threats, future human bombs, Jihad lawfare, crying whiner victim so attacking us can be justified as “defensive” , sayin gone thing in public and another in private-lying hypocrites

ALLAH is poo you whack jobs
Mohammed —May a Pox be Upon Him

get it through your dumb Muslim brains- if you like ISLAM go to a country that uses it as govt- because WE are not converting to hypocrisy, sickness, perversity ,fascist domination fantasies disguised as religion called ISLAM.
We fought for EQUALITY a concept ALIEN to ISLAM- we are not about to make separate and unequal rules for you- USA has bent over backwards to accomodate a small minority- of traitors- itis a wonder tome that MUSLIM blood did not run inthe streets on 9-12- which only shows the goodness and fairness you have been extended- can you imagine the reverse in any ISLAMIC nation? NO
Americans upon seeing their own government unable to deal with threat, and seeing we have an ADMIN who is favorable towards ISLAM over other faiths in USA- do not thing American people are not armed and will not rise up to get rid of our oppressors

Isahiah62 on July 25, 2010 at 8:38 pm

Islam is a dangerous and controlling cult…I see no difference between its followers and the more recent cult phenomenon of the “Moonies”.
We have to ask ourselves if the religious freedoms we all enjoy in America also apply to a cult that advocates violence against non-believers and basically the over-throw of our government.

Shootist on July 26, 2010 at 8:23 am

Dear all,

finally you opened my eyes. I now see what a dangerous and controlling cult Islam is. Please help me to convert. Judaism or Christianity?

Jamal on July 26, 2010 at 1:58 pm

Ya Bani ‘Isr’aila Adhkuru Ni`matiya Allati ‘An`amtu `Alaykum Wa ‘Awfu Bi`ahdi ‘Ufi Bi`ahdikum Wa ‘?yaya Farhabuni

Jamal on July 26, 2010 at 2:03 pm

Islam is not a cult but rather a poor immitation of Judaic principles but taken to extremes in many respects (e.g. a day of fast is extended to a whole month etc.)
It is also much more violent (eye for an eye etc.) a primitive custom which had been removed from Jewish theology in the era of the Great Sanhedrin.
In judaism women are unequal to men in many respects but they still enjoy most human rights that men enjoy and cannot be subjected to humiliation or abuse as they are in Islam.

RG on July 27, 2010 at 2:16 am

Debbie, could you please remove Jamal’s quotations from the Koran (Sura 48?). They really are intolerably disgusting in the Arabic.

Jamal, I’d suggest Christianity. Better yet, I’d suggest getting out of my country, as I do not think your conversion will be honest.

RG, I used to think as you do. However, just read my summary of Islamic “spirituality” in my previous post (July 25, 2010 at 6:15 pm). I am serious: there is a vast vacuum in Islam where every other religion I know of (Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, and Buddhism) has serious content. Islam really is a cult. It takes pieces of Judaism and Christianity, and the indigenous Arab polytheistic religion that the inventor of Islam, Mo, grew up with. The latter is why Muslims circle that meteorite (kaba) in Mecca.

skzion on July 27, 2010 at 10:24 am


“But, there is nothing unconstitutional about political elites denouncing Islam for what it is.”

Unconstitutional? No. Politically irresponsible? Of course. Skzion, it is the duty of public figures to encourage people to respect the law. Debbie Schlussel knows this, and that is a major reason why she has chosen not to be a public figure who either represents or exerts real influence over our government. For a leading political figure like Newt Gingrich to “tell the truth about Islam” would be no different from the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus stirring up passions against Jews or white people. Even if it is something that you feel, you can’t come out and say it because people that have rights that need to be protected and respected. If it’s your position that Muslims have no rights, fine. But that isn’t the government’s position, so it can’t be the position of anyone who represents the government.

That is why what Schlussel is doing is so unhelpful. Political leaders can’t go around pretending as if the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply to Muslims. The only good way to approach this issue is to figure out one that acknowledges that Muslims have 1st Amendment, 14th Amendment and Civil Rights Act of 1964 protections. The problem is that no one has, including Debbie, because if they had they would be promoting it. The 1st Amendment has us stuck and there is no way around it. This isn’t the dumb debate about “profiling” or something like that. It is about whether a nationally respected political leader can call everyone who adheres to a religion a terror suspect and encourages people to harass them and not respect their constitutionally protected rights.

Skzion, it is a major problem in this country where people on both sides willingly deceive people as to what the government and political officials can do and what they can’t in order to score political points. That is what Debbie is doing. She is telling people to do things that she knows they can’t do, that she couldn’t do if she was in their position. Not even the “we need to slit our wrists and become blood brothers” moonbat Michele Bachmann is out there making blanket statements against all Muslims. It isn’t because she doesn’t feel that way. It isn’t because she doesn’t want to. It is because she is a U.S. Congressman and knows that SHE CAN’T. Now Schlussel could be in Congress just like Bachmann. But were she in Congress, she wouldn’t be able to make those statements either. Which is exactly why she isn’t. Because she chose not to go into politics, she is free to say whatever she wants (so long as it doesn’t cause her advertisers to pull the plug but that is another story). You can deny it all you want, but if you do, then that makes you no different from the drones of Obama and Palin.

Gerald on July 27, 2010 at 1:24 pm


Mayor “Napoleon” Bloomberg and his backstabbing cronies must have a $tupendou$ rea$on which they can’t reveal for wanting a sharia-hugging mosque near Ground Zero!
But the sharia “cobra” they’re toying with can quickly grow its fangs and then say “Smile, you’re on Candid Scimitar and will soon be buried in a scimitary, ha ha ha!” – proving that one good backstabbing deserves another!
God-haters and America-haters may not realize how high the collective temperature has now risen in the hearts of true American patriots – many of whom are now willing to die for America right here in America if they get pushed completely over the line!
Since the nation’s headquarters for treason is the White House, readers can enjoy related material if they Google “Obama Avoids Bible Verses” & “Obama Supports Public Depravity” and also Google “Sandra Bernhard, Larry David, Kathy Griffin, Bill Maher, Sarah Silverman” in addition to Googling “Obama…destined to become a black-slavery avenger.”
And by all means visit Googleland and type in “Government-Approved Illegals” and “Un-Americans Fight Franklin Graham.”
I hope Mayor Bloomberg, dressed as Napoleon, will thoroughly enjoy his mosquerade party!
PS – Since Jane Fonda still loves leftist causes, here’s a one-liner I penned during the Vietnam War era that the big Kansas City paper ran: “I’m not Fonda Jane; her Laosy remarks Hanoi me!”
PPS – Interestingly, many conservative evangelicals have lately given up belief in a “pretribulation rapture” (the 180-year-old, fringe-British-invented, escapist-and-thus-subversive theological aberration behind the rapture bestsellers by Lindsey, LaHaye etc.) and now believe they will be on earth, standing against evil, during at least a portion of Antichrist’s diabolical reign. Widely read Google articles like “Pretrib Rapture – Hidden Facts,” “Pretrib Rapture Secrecy” and “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” have helped to bring about this “pretrib” mutiny.

(I’m Jordan and saw the above article while webbing)

A Kansas Patriot

Jordan on July 28, 2010 at 2:24 am

i really look forward to praying in that mosque for you and you rotten souls.

Jamal on July 28, 2010 at 12:20 pm

Debbie, I was surprised to find my blog post about Newt listed along with yours at Huffington Post. I tracked it down after finding several referrals in Stat Counter. I think you did a better job of pounding the truth home than I did.

To the scoffers: Is there a right to wage war against you, rape your widow, enslave your orphans and seize your property? If not, then there is no right to practice Islam. If there is such a right, then all our rights are nullified.

Dajjal on July 31, 2010 at 2:30 am

dumb ignorant bitch
ps im not a muslim

boo3a on August 3, 2010 at 3:00 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field