May 20, 2013 | 0 comments
May 7, 2013 | 6 comments
May 7, 2013 | 0 comments
May 5, 2013 | 13 comments
April 25, 2013 | 11 comments
In a remarkable bit of television, Sean Hannity brought radical Muslim cleric Sheik Anjem Choudary front and center last night to remind Americans of exactly the problem the world faces with the Egyptian situation. Here’s the link if you missed it.
This could not be more serious, as the events in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East demonstrate.
Choudary, sitting in London, flatly stated the Islamic fundamentalist objective: “Sharia will come and it will remove the corruption of democracy, and freedom, and all of your exploitation.…You are worried because you know Islam is coming to your backyard.”
To his immense credit Hannity bored in on the guy, quoting previous statements and finally getting him to admit that, well, yes…he was a supporter of Osama bin Ladin. As to Israel? “When you occupy someone’s land, and you steal their resources, and you kill innocent, men, women, and children, then of course that needs to be repelled.” Which is to say, as with Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Choudary wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth in a 21st century Holocaust.
As Choudary obscenely danced around whether 72 virgins were greeting the 9/11 hijackers after their deed, Hannity let him have it, as our friends at Newsmax have noted: “The point is, you are radical, murder-supporting fascist, and you want [your ways] to be spread to the rest of the world.”
Surveys have shown repeatedly Americans “don’t know much about history,” so this is apparently the moment to remind of the history between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Nazis. Here’s a thumbnail sketch over at YouTube of the relationship between the Palestinian Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin Al Husseini, and Adolph Hitler. It’s narrated in part by British historian and Churchill biographer Sir Martin Gilbert, and explains the ties between Hitler and the Mufti, showing old film of the two men together. Also on this video is John Loftus, a former Justice Department prosecutor. In a 2004 article at David Horowitz’s Frontpagemag.com, Loftus said:”The grand Mufti of Jerusalem was the Muslim Brotherhood representative for Palestine.”
There was no Israel in 1936, and as is pointed out on the video, there was only one reason why Hitler would deal with the non-Aryan Mufti: they both wanted to exterminate the Jews.
Which brings us back to Sean Hannity’s interview with the radical cleric Sheik Anjem Choudary.
There is an Israel today, and Hitler is long dead. But the essence of the Nazi-Muslim Brotherhood connection — the zeal to murder the Jews — is still alive and well. Let it not be forgotten that it was this kind of thing that led directly to World War II.
Sheik Choudary — who quite openly professed his admiration for Osama Bin Ladin — vividly illustrates the point made so long ago by the Muslim Brother’s Grand Mufti.
As a considerable number of Americans — including some conservatives — fumble for a response to what is going on, they should pay attention when Senator John McCain yesterday pointedly linked Mohamed ElBaradei to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Last night Hannity brought 21st century television’s spotlight to a very old — yet still very dangerous — evil. Hopefully, we’re all paying attention.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online