Sunday, September 12, 2010 v 19.0

Debate on the Mosque At Ground Zero
©2010 By David Talbot

(This opinion is a rebuttal to a recent article by Newt Gingrich, on his website,, July 21, 2010)

I respectfully disagree with Newt Gingrich's thesis on the subject of the mosque at Ground Zero. I do agree the mosque should be built in another location. But that's on moral, not legal grounds. And I totally disagree with his demand that until churches and synagogues are allowed to be built in Saudi Arabia, or any other country before we allow a mosque, any mosque, to be built in this country. That kind of logic will get us in trouble here in America with unintended consequences.

It is not our business to demand how other countries conduct their internal affairs. In my opinion, it is totally inappropriate to tie a religious denomination of any kind that operates within the United States, to a specific action of a religious group within another sovereign nation, operating within the scope of that nations legal structure. It is precisely this kind of arrogance and ethnocentrism, that got us where we are today. It's reminiscent of the spoiled brat with a ball demanding the team play by his rules or he's taking his ball and going home. That doesn't work with kids and it won't work with sovereign nations around the globe.

Mr. Gingrich is attempting to inflame Americans to behave exactly like those he despises. His comments about the "double standard" that allows Muslims to demand our submission and weakness, is a vailed assault on two of our most precious freedoms: Freedoms of Speech and Freedom of association. Once we slide down that slope of identifying and then isolating a specific religious organization, who's next?

When you demand to know the funding of a specific project to determine the source of the funding, you imply the information will initiate some legal course of action. Who will decide the parameters of the action and the outcome of the legal proceedings? Who determines the standards of appropriate funding sources? When has any religious organization become the target of such draconian measures in the history of this country?

It is unconstitutional for congress to pass a law that targets a specific person or group of people. If this mosque is required to divulge it's source of funds, so the donors can be identified and investigated, isn't any donor to any religious project in America, or around the world, just one tiny little step away from being investigated as well?

This is all election year politics tapping into certain American’s fear and hatred to achieve a political agenda. The consequences of following ideologues, such as Newt appears to be, could result in the United States becoming the exact duplicate of those countries he's trying to repudiate.

Anyway, that’s my opinion. What’s yours?


David Talbot

Thursday, September 02, 2010

Peace Talks
©2010 By David Talbot

September 2, 2010. Another day of Peace talks, another attack on Israeli civilians -- this time along route 60, a road that the Israeli Supreme Court and the IDF just re-opened saying they have full confidence they can control access. No one was killed today, just wounded--a miracle because the terrorists used a Kalashnikov rifle on full automatic hitting the drivers door with 9 bullets. The passenger in the car was not wounded by the gunfire but suffered minor injuries when the car rolled down an embankment.

Did you happen to notice the wild celebration in the West Bank last night? The peace loving Palestinians were celebrating the death of the 4 Jews (One of whom was pregnant), ambushed and killed in the first attack on Wednesday.

These so-called peace talks are a joke and will cause the fall of Benjamin Netanyahu and his Government. Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defense Minister, should resign now. U.S. President Obama promised no more unilateral deals, pledging an engagement with many nations in building a peace agreement between the PA and Israel. See any other European nations around the table? England? France? Germany? Italy? Anybody? And, Abbas is no longer the PA President ---not since he lost in January. So what credentials does he possess to legitimize his representation of the Palestinians?

Abbas reiterated today: no settlements, lift the Gaza blockade, all Jews out of East Jerusalem and the eventual Palestinian State.

No Settlements? Since when does the looser in a military contest get to dictate terms?

Lift the Gaza Blockade? Just what is being blocked? From the CIC Scene website: “Over one million tons of humanitarian supplies were delivered by Israel to the people of Gaza in the past 18 months – that’s equal to nearly one ton of aid for every man, woman and child in Gaza.” The most amount of aid, per capita, of any relief effort in the world. So, the only items being blocked by Israel are weapons. And, who rules Gaza? The PA? No, it’s Hamas, sworn to wipe Israel off the map.

Israel should give back Jerusalem to the PA as soon as Washington gives back New Mexico, Arizona, California & Texas to the Mexican Government; Puerto Rico to Spain; and, most of North America back to the Indians.

It makes me sick to see what Israel has become, so dependent on the American teat that they have become emasculated and, I fear, unable to fight themselves out of a wet paper bag.

Peace talks? I don't think so.

Anyway, that’s my opinion. What’s yours?


David Talbot

David can be reached at:
Follow him on Facebook: