Video: Mark Levin channels Leo Amery on Hannity

It's very important to intuit what took place in this interview. For starters, Sean Hannity rarely, if ever, criticizes elected Republican officials. Second, it is common knowledge that he is close friends with Mark Levin, another radio talk show host. Third, Levin has a history of being very overt in his criticism of elected Republicans if he thinks they deserve it.

Last night, Levin appeared as a guest on Hannity's television show and was asked about House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican Levin has skewered on the air many times over.

With that as a backdrop, one is left to conclude that Hannity's reticence to criticize Republicans is more strategic than it is based on ideological alignment. What we very well may be seeing here is Hannity allowing Levin on his television show to do what Hannity doesn't like to do - throw down the gauntlet with House Republican leadership.

After watching this interview, I couldn't help but think of the words of British MP Leo Amery in 1940. Amery enunciated, almost perfectly, the frustration felt by those who knew Neville Chamberlain was the wrong man to stand against Hitler. Here is what Amery said in the spring of 1940 about Chamberlain, via the Guardian:

Somehow or other we must get into the government men who can match our enemies in fighting spirit, in daring, in resolution and in thirst for victory. Some 300 years ago, when this house found that its troops were being beaten by the dash and daring of Prince Rupert's cavalry, Oliver Cromwell spoke to John Hampden. In one of his speeches he recounted what he said. It was this: "I said to him, 'Your troops are most of them old, decayed serving men and tapsters and such kind of fellows'… You must get men of a spirit that are likely to go as far as they will go, or you will be beaten still."

It may not be easy to find these men. They can be found only by trial and by ruthlessly discarding all who fail. We are fighting today for our life, for our liberty, for our all; we cannot go on being led as we are. I have quoted certain words of Oliver Cromwell. I will quote certain other words. This is what Cromwell said to the Long Parliament when he thought it was no longer fit to conduct the affairs of the nation: "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go."

It will be interesting to see if Levin's appearance and stance on Hannity last night is a leading indicator that Hannity himself may be a step closer to adopting Amery's view about Chamberlain and applying it to Boehner, which Levin has apparently already done.

Via Daily Caller:

Documents on Libya show Sean Hannity was right, John McCain was wrong

Back on September 13th, Senator John McCain appeared on Hannity, the television program of the popular conservative talk show host, to discuss the recent 9/11 attacks. When the topic turned to Libya, the Senator from Arizona was quick to accuse Sean of having been wrong about Islamists taking control of Libya. Hannity appeared to be slightly taken aback as McCain did everything but stick his tongue out at those (Hannity included) who had expressed concern that Libya had fallen into the hands of the Islamists, saying, "You were wrong about Libya... I know you were... you were wrong."

Documents recently obtained and translated by Walid seem to demonstrate that McCain is the one who is wrong and Sean Hannity was the one who was right.

A common complaint of westerners who try to read about the Middle East is the sheer volume of Arabic names they must sift through to reach a modicum of understanding; they lose track and often move on. There's one name that such westerners should grok and it is Abdel Hakim Belhaj. As we previously reported, Belhaj was officially put in charge of Tripoli from August 30, 2011 thru at least May of 2012. He is radical and has been identified as a 'brother' of al-Qaeda by Ayman al-Zawahiri.

In Walid's most recent report, the evidence against Belhaj is even more damning:

Several documents officially tie Belhaj to the leadership in Libya, to the support of him by Qatar and Saudi Arabia, to his funding of the rebels in Syria, and more. As we reported previously, Belhaj is a known terrorist who was also in U.S. custody at Guantanamo. The Obama administration allowed him into Libya during the war to oust Gaddafi. Obama seemed to have no objection to Belhaj’s leadership position after the revolution. The classified documents reveal that Belhaj actually controls most of the Libyan government, which are puppets under the control of the Islamists. The Obama administration is knowingly supporting Al-Qaeda control in Libya and North Africa.

When the Libyan elections took place last July, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate was a woman who aroused suspicion among the populous, according to the Boston Herald, via the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report:

Nijad Sharfeddin was the face of the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya’s historic parliamentary elections. Featured prominently on campaign posters in her hijab and glasses, sans makeup, she was the image of both modernity in Arab politics and conservative Islamic values. But voters suspicious of the Brotherhood, which has no real history in Libya, often asked her to name a Libyan on her ticket whom they would have heard of. She couldn’t. Those suspicions and a lack of an identity in the Libyan street were some of the many factors that led to the Brotherhood slate’s distant second-place finish in Saturday’s vote, experts and everyday Libyans said.

So, the Muslim Brotherhood, which eschews the idea of placing women in power (unless in a support role such as the Muslim Sisterhood), decided to make a woman its face in Libya?!

As candidates like Sharfeddin were going down in flames, Islamists like Belhaj were rising from the ashes.

McCain remains indignantly ignorant.

The September 13th exchange between Hannity and McCain is below. If it seems that McCain had a 'thou doth protest too much' moment, it's because he did.

Via MediaIte:

Are John McCain's chickens coming home to roost?

When it comes to the Arab Spring, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has been on the wrong side far more often than not. Last year, he referred to the Libyan rebels as his 'heroes'. He continues to support arming the rebels in Syria despite mounting evidence that they make up a contingent that is far worse than Bashar al-Assad.

Earlier this summer, he not only defended Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin when legitimate questions were raised about her background but he smeared the woman who raised those questions - Michele Bachmann - from the Senate floor. Now, he's pointing to State Department culpability in the attack / mishandling of the aftermath in Benghazi.

Last month, during an interview with Sean Hannity, McCain attempted to have an 'I told you so' moment with the Fox News host when he all but stuck his tongue out at Hannity while saying he was right about Libya. He pointed to what he said was the election of a moderate government there.

Now, according to Bill Gertz, al-Qaeda appears to be plotting an overthrow of that government.

Via Washington Free Beacon:

Pakistan-based al Qaeda is secretly setting up sleeper cells and a clandestine network of jihadists to destabilize and take over Libya while hiding under a new cover name to prevent exposure and attacks, according to an internal Pentagon report obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

“Al Qaeda has established a core network in Libya, but it remains clandestine and refrains from using the al Qaeda name,” according to the report produced jointly by the Library of Congress and the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office’s Irregular Warfare Support Program, a unit under the assistant defense secretary for special operations.

The report concludes that al Qaeda poses “a significant threat to the state-building process in Libya.”

The 54-page unclassified report describes al Qaeda—which President Barack Obama recently declared to be in decline—as “seeking to create an al Qaeda clandestine network in Libya that could be activated in the future to destabilize the government and/or to offer logistical support to al Qaeda’s activities in North Africa and the Sahel”—the Sahara desert region stretching across northern Africa.

Read it all.

Here is the exchange between McCain and Hannity in the days after the attack on Benghazi.

Hannity stakes his (weak) public position on Islam

There are several reasons why high profile individuals do not speak the truth about something. It can be tactical or it can be for career preservation. Wikileaks all but proved it is rarely out of ignorance. Enter Sean Hannity. He has publicly stated his position that Islam is not the problem. Instead, it is "RADICAL" Islam.

Logan's Warning at Right Side News got into a twitter battle with the talk show host and made this patently apparent. Interestingly, it was Hannity who ultimately blocked LW because he apparently wasn't prepared to logically defend his position after LW quoted very specific verses.

Hannity ducked the verses, told me there are “different interpretations” and threatened to block me on Twitter.

I told him that is leftist talk, and asked him to show me just ONE version that does not call for the dominance over non-Muslims. Of course he did not respond.

He definitely did not like being challenged. But I was not going to bow to him because he is on TV. The truth is more important! The argument ended with Hannity ignoring all the facts I had sent him, and him stamping his feet as he stated he will NOT say Islam itself is the problem.

Then he blocked me.

Yes, Logan's Warning doesn't have the public profile that Hannity does so it's definitely more difficult for Hannity to take such a position. It was also difficult for Winston Churchill to take the position he did against the Nazis; he took it anyway - at great expense - until the time was right. Just because doing the right thing may be more difficult for Hannity than it is for LW doesn't make it any less right. Churchill stated very uncomfortable realities from a much higher public position than that held by Hannity.

We're rapidly approaching the point where everyone will have to choose sides. If you're not on the side of Islam, you will have to be on the side of Neville Chamberlain or Winston Churchill. Hannity has historically been very critical of Chamberlain. Considering his stance on Islam, Hannity may need to stop doing that if he is to avoid justified charges of hypocrisy.

Here is Hannity's recent interview with Feisal Abdul Rauf, who is promoting a book. If Hannity had Rauf on his show to expose the imam's true intentions, it would have been a good move. Instead, the talk show host only helped the radically deceptive imam sell more books while pushing his deceptive agenda.

Hannity has unfortunately staked his very Chamberlain-esque position.

It's really kinda sad. It's also tragically ironic because Hannity has said countless times that journalism died in 2008.



h/t Free Republic

Video: Did Bob Beckel flush his career down the toilet on Live TV?

For a long time, I've wondered why Bob Beckel gets so much air time. He started off as a novelty that wore off very quickly but for some reason, those with decision-making ability decided to give him his own show on Fox.

Coming back from a break on Hannity's television show, Beckel thought he was arguing with talk show host Neal Boortz off the air and dropped an "F" bomb. When Hannity demanded that Beckel apologize, the liberal - in typical liberal fashion - became indignantly childish and refused.

The best part came a short time later, when Beckel was assured that he did indeed curse on live television. He apologized and then quickly blamed Hannity for not doing a better job of letting him know they were on the air.

**LANGUAGE WARNING**
There are several clips of this exchange out there but MediaIte has the best one because of its length. The entire exchange is worth watching.



That clip reveals the typical liberal mind. Beckel did wrong and blamed Hannity. If you want to know why no Democrats voted to throw Bill Clinton out of office after impeachment, Beckel's mindset explains it perfectly. It was the Republicans' fault for demanding accountability.

Take note of Boortz spinning the football.

h/t Mitch

Video: Hannity Interview with Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison

Sean Hannity interviewed Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) on his television show. To his credit, Hannity challenged Ellison, one of only two Muslim congressmen, on several points. At one point, Hannity asked Ellison about radical Islamists being at war with America and Ellison lumped all 'terrorists' into the same pot, including abortion clinic murderers. That's pathetic when the disparity between the number of radical Islamists and abortion clinic murderers are tallied. Ellison also used the same talking points that the Muslim Brotherhood uses when having to demonstrate to westerners they're well-intentioned; he targets al-Qaeda.

Hannity didn't appear to catch that and didn't ask Ellison about his ties to CAIR or Hamas. Such questioning, if rooted in a premise that al-Qaeda, Hamas, and CAIR are all part of the Muslim Brotherhood would have really put Ellison in a box. That said, it's worth watching. It gets contentious at several points and Hannity did a good job overall.

Here's Part 1 via Freedom's Lighthouse:



Part 2

Video: Robert Spencer Smacks Down Islamist on Hannity

What do you get when you pair up a radical Islamist and an expert on the Qur'an who happens to be a Christian? The answer is a smack down of the Islamist with the truth. Check out this exchange between Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch and Michael Ghouse of the America Together Foundation. Watch the whole thing if you can. Fast forward to the 4:00 mark if you can't. The debate starts out with the two guests debating the merits of the Egyptian uprising.

Ghouse maintains it's a good thing; Spencer and Hannity cite a 2010 Pew Research poll that shows the overwhelming majority of Egyptians want Sharia law incorporated into any new government. At that point, Ghouse shifts gears entirely and attacks Spencer for spreading lies and hate. Spencer then lands a haymaker by citing the Qur'an. In particular, he references Chapter 3, verse 28 which commands Muslims to smile in the faces of unbelievers and curse them behind their backs.

Sit back and watch.

Video: Hannity Smacks down Radical Islamist, calls him 'Evil SOB'

The most well known Islamic scholar in Great Britain is Anjem Choudary and he has an inconvenient habit of communicating the true Islamist agenda that groups like CAIR, ISNA, the MSA, and other Muslim Brotherhood groups want to keep hidden. He wears on his sleeve what the likes of CAIR's Nihad Awad prefers to keep up his. The good news here is that when Choudary speaks, a little bit more of the proverbial cat is let out of the bag. For some reason, Fox's website did not include the best part of this exchange, which happens at the very end but Gateway Pundit did.

If pressed for time, watch the last video but if able, watch all three. Remember, what Choudary expresses outwardly is what the Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S. believe inwardly.

Part 1


Part 2


Hannity calls Choudary 'One Sick Miserable Evil SOB'



h/t Gateway Pundit

VIDEO: BAM! MICHELLE MALKIN SLAMS KARL ROVE

The best quote in this exchange between Malkin and Hannity comes at the end, when Malkin delivers the money line; it had to do with the choice between 'progressive wolves in elephants' clothing' and true conservatives. If there was a mild disappointment, it came from Hannity, who seemed to interrupt Malkin in the middle of her ripping Rove in an apparent attempt to get her to re-direct her anger toward Mike Castle. Malkin seemed to get the hint and do so. It was likely that Hannity didn't want to disparage a Fox News contributor he has a good relationship with so it's understandable.

That said, I would have liked it better if he let Michelle go. If you'd like to view more on what started the feud between Karl Rove and Tea Party conservatives, CLICK HERE.

Via Gateway Pundit

VIDEO: BRIGITTE GABRIEL VS. JUAN WILLIAMS ON HANNITY

Sent in by Barrackaid #7. Juan Williams needs to look up the word, "Dhimmi". He is heading toward being one. Based on the apoplectic look on his face as ACT for America's Brigitte Gabriel slapped him with cold hard facts, we now see Williams in another realm he completely doesn't understand. Williams has been getting utterly punk'd in every debate he engages in lately. He used to get by with his smooth, congenial arguments but no more.

He's exposing himself as completely misguided on a lot of things, not the least of which is Islam. Hats off to Hannity for having Gabriel on his show.

VIDEO: CNN COVERS FOX COVERAGE OF OBAMA

Not sure what the bigger story is here. The Obama administration singling out Fox News in true Alinsky Rule #8 style (keep the pressure on) or CNN actually discussing how great Fox News Channel's ratings are.

What's more amazing than all of that is the fact that CNN and others are making absolutely NO EFFORT to follow the winning formula Fox News has discovered. Instead, they apparently want to do play by play and color analysis of the battle between FNC and Obama. Perhaps they should stop fact-checking Saturday Night Live skits directed at Barack Obama as a start.

Interesting to watch, though. The overwhelming sentiment seems to be that going after FNC publicly is a bad move by the Obama White House. Obviously, their biggest beef is with Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly (probably in that order). However, instead of answering the questions posed by those hosts (Beck in particular), they stonewall and cry foul.

Pretty pathetic........and pretty telling.

Beck and company must be onto something.



h/t to HOT AIR

RECOGNIZE THIS GUY? MARC LAMONT HILL IS BAD NEWS

Perhaps you've seen Dr. Hill on Hannity, Greta, or Huckabee. Odds are better that you've seen him on the O'Reilly Factor, where he makes the majority of his appearances. In any case, Hill is a paid Fox News Contributor who should perhaps be out of a job soon.

David Horowitz and Cliff Kincaid have uncovered a multitude of very disturbing things about Hill, not the least of which involves scrubbing his website after he's been busted.

It all started when David Horowitz posted on his NEWSREAL blog that Hill was severely underqualified to discuss American foreign policy relative to Iran. Hill apparently took issue with this and responded to Horowitz via Twitter. In reading Hill's response, Horowitz noticed something very disturbing about Hill's wallpaper - it included several photos of Assata Shakur, a convicted cop killer who ended her victim's life by shooting him "execution style" in the head two times. Shakur was convicted but escaped thanks to help from both Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army. She is currently in Cuba, thanks to being granted asylum by the Castro government.

As is quite common, Cliff Kincaid has picked up the ball and is running with it, exposing far more disturbing facts about Hill. So far, Kincaid has written three articles on Hill and Fox News continuing to retain him as a contributor. In Kincaid's SEPTEMBER 28 article, he provides the details of an interview he conducted with Hill:

While Hill disputed reports that Shakur shot Foerster in the head, the website of America's Most Wanted, a Fox program, describes what happened this way: "On May 2, 1973, New Jersey State Police Troopers James Harper and Werner Foerster were patrolling the New Jersey Turnpike in the East Brunswick area. They stopped a car with three occupants and began to question them. The female passenger, JoAnne Chesimard, was a member of the Black Liberation Army. She suddenly pulled out a semi-automatic pistol and opened fire. Trooper Foerster was struck twice in the chest and Trooper Harper was hit in the shoulder. Chesimard then picked up Trooper Foerster's service weapon and shot him twice in the head, execution style, while he lay in the road."

Yet, Marc Lamont Hill seems to revere Shakur based on Horowitz' claim that his Twitter wallpaper consists of several pictures of her. Uh, well, that was before Hill was outed. According to Kincaid, Shakur has been taken down and replaced by the rather innocuous photos of Muhammad Ali.

In Kincaid's September 30th article titled, FOX NEWS HAS A VAN JONES PROBLEM, we learn a bit more about Hill.

In the same way that Van Jones was exposed originally by New Zealand blogger Trevor Loudon by using Internet search engines to look into his controversial background and writings, over the course of just a few days Accuracy in Media has been able to determine the following about Hill from public sources:

He called the notorious anti-white, anti-Jewish Khallid Muhammad a "mentor, teacher, and revolutionary hero," and believes that the black racist died not from a brain aneurysm but was assassinated. Muhammad was so extreme that he was ousted from the Nation of Islam because of his hatred of Jews.
He gave a lecture on "The Importance of Ideological Training in the New Millenium (sic)" at the Polymathematic University's "Political Education Program for the Poor Righteous Communist Party."
He declared on a "MySpace" page that the people he'd like to meet personally include Assata Shakur, Louis Farrakhan, Fidel Castro, and Mumia Abu Jamal, another convicted cop-killer.
He speaks on "The Importance of the Nation of Islam to Hip-Hop Culture" and says that he once belonged to something called the Ansaaru Allah Community, an Islamic sect with doctrines similar to the Nation of Islam that has been accused of being a religious cult.
Hill's "MySpace" page features a slide show of such figures as Assata Shakur, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, and Ella Baker, who just happens to be the namesake of the Ella Baker Center, founded by Van Jones.
The Marc Lamont Hill website includes a graphic and obscene "Sex With Timaree" segment that features advice from a "Sexpert" on how to enjoy the "Land o' Anal" or anal sex.

Hill also spoke at Polymathematic University according to Kincaid and this is easily verified. What's quite disturbing about PU is a link on its website under the heading of "Comrades". When you click on that link, you are directed to the website for the POOR RIGHTEOUS PARTY OF THE BLACK NATION, which has photos of Mao Tse Tung, Malcolm X, Nicolai Lenin, and some other really sweet dudes.

Be sure to check out Kincaid's OCTOBER 2ND ARTICLE as well.

The most telling things about Hill are his actions after being confronted about his allegiances. Among things deleted or altered include his My Space page, Twitter, and Homepage.

Fox News in general and Bill O'Reilly in particular need to denounce Marc Lamont Hill and do so publicly while pledging never to allow him to set foot inside the Fox News Channel again. To this point, O'Reilly deserves the benefit of the doubt. He will be severely tainted if he continues to provide Hill with a forum.