When Fox News Might as Well Be MSNBC: Special Report Trashes Geert Wilders
Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier featured a segment tonight on Dutch politician Geert Wilders’ blasphemy trial in the Netherlands. (See some of NRB’s John L. Work’s posts on it here and here.)
The segment featured these descriptors of Wilders:
“A man who inspires fierce emotions.”
“Anger on the streets of London. The object of the demonstration was a recent visit by Far-Right Dutch politician Geert Wilders.”
“His Anti-Muslim rhetoric makes him a target of critics.”
“Wilders says Muslim head scarves should be banned, he’s branded the Muslim prophet Muhammed a pedophile and likened the Muslim Koran to Mein Kampf.”
“Far-Right”?
The “Far-Right” label is meant to smear Wilders by trying to associate him with racist European political parties like the BNP that actually warrant the label.
“Anti-Muslim”? Try Anti-Islam. Wilders’ film Fitna, which you can view at NRB here, exposes how Islam’s first victims are always Muslims. As I’ve written before, to turn a blind eye to those victimized by Islamofacism is to be “anti-Muslim.”
Finally, the report cites three examples of Wilders’ allegedly extreme, “Far-Right” views. While whether head scarves should be banned is a matter of opinion, the last two points — Muhammad’s pedophilia and the Koran’s racist and genocidal injunctions are points of fact. (Not that even Fox News would have the political courage to acknowledge this.)
Later on Special Report they featured a panel in response to the story in which host Jim Angle questioned Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, and A.B. Stoddard. Krauthammer said that Wilders was wrong about Islam — that the Dutch politician did not see a difference between Islam and Islamism. *Rolls eyes.* So those who follow “Islam” ignore passages of the Koran and those who follow “Islamism” actually do what the book tells them to do? Is that right, Charles? Just want to make sure I’m up to speed on the preferred Orwellianisms on the Politically Correct Right.
Stoddard’s comments — she said that Wilders saw no difference between terrorist Muslims and non-violent Muslims — indicate that it’s likely that her first exposure to Wilders was the segment. And Kristol? He dismissed Wilders as a “demagogue.”
This is supposed to be the “conservative” network here and they are unable to present a single panelists who will support Wilders.
RELATED: Pamela Geller also has a related post about Glenn Beck’s show today.
I had Beck on in the background while I was working and thought he mentioned Wilders in a negative fashion. These are troubling developments, though nothing to be particularly surprised about. Despite Fox being on the ball about so many issues and being an important fighter in many political contests, all too often it — like others in the Conservative Movement — has shown a tragic deficiency of understanding when it comes to our war with Islamic Nazism.
Trackbacks and Pingbacks
- Glenn Beck Really Doesn’t Get Europe | NewsReal Blog
- WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT?! Fox News Smears Geert Wilders? UPDATE: A Completely Crazy Idea : The Other McCain
- Heartache: Foxnews opinion shows trash Geert Wilders
- Beck Video Removed — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami
- Going Geert « Theoptimisticconservative's Blog
- Again, What Part of ‘Infidel’ Don’t You Understand? « Left Coast Ledger
- Another Look At FoxNews’ Hatchet Job On Geert Wilders | NewsReal Blog
- Frank Gaffney Needs Our Support In an Important Task: Getting the Right Back on Track in the Battle with Islamofascism | NewsReal Blog
- The Weekly Wilders Round-Up « Defend Geert Wilders
A Memorial to the Victims of Communism
Hope and Death Panels May Be on Their Way
From the Writings of David Horowitz: March 18, 2010
Midnight Snack Dagwood Sandwich: “Animator vs. Animation” – a taste of zany
“Far-Right”?
The “Far-Right” label is meant to smear Wilders by trying to associate him with racist European political parties like the BNP that actually warrant the label.
LMAO the BNP are also smeared as "far right" and "racist" when they are clearly NOT!
Right….
http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/race_reality.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Par...
Gotta say David, they (the BNP) sound pretty reasonable to me here: "India would not tolerate millions of non-Indians taking over that society. Pakistan would not tolerate millions of Hindus or Christians entering that country and changing it from a Muslim society into something else. Japan would not do it; China would not do it – so why should Britain?
Can anyone imagine Saudi Arabia allowing the mass immigration of Christians, so that in a few decades it would no longer be an Islamic country?
Each nation has the right to maintain its own identity. The right of India to remain Indian, the right of China to remain Chinese, the right of Pakistan to remain Pakistani and the right of Saudi Arabia to remain Saudi does not mean that any of these nations “hate” anybody else.
All it means is that they wish to preserve their identity and national existence.
This is all the British National Party seeks for Britain – the right to be British." quote pulled from BNP website http://bnp.org.uk/policies/immigration/
David: Do you deny the right of an indigenous nation to preserve their identity and national existence?
You need to read more about the BNP.
The first link got cut off for some reason:
http://web.archive.org/web/20071010043702/http://...
"However much we understand why miscegenation is fundamentally a bad thing, we must understand that the biggest victims of all when it occurs are the children who so often do not know where they belong or who they are. The second biggest victims are the families who are either torn apart or who have to learn to live with and to make the best of a tragic situation. And third in the list of unfortunates are the race-mixers themselves. Those who preach the wonders of multi-racism would be amazed at the number of people who telephone our contact lines and tell us that they have one or several children by partners of other races, and how, for all sorts of reasons, they now bitterly regret it."
A political party that considers miscegenation a "fundamentally bad thing" is a racist party.
You have avoided my original question here so I will repeat it:
"Do you deny the right of an indigenous nation to preserve their identity and national existence?"
The miscegenation argument, while compelling and needing to be addressed is really a separate issue from the right of a national culture to preserve their historic cultural identity through immigration controls or as another commentator puts it: "Borders, Language & Culture."
David, I will ask again: Do you deny the right of an indigenous nation to preserve their identity and national existence? (please do not change the subject.)
No, I do not deny the right of an indigenous nation to preserve their identity and national existence.
But I think regarding race as part of a country's "identity and national existence" is an intolerable mistake that must be condemned..
Tell it to the Indians, the Japanese, the Chinese, the Arabs, etc. etc.
The distinction you overlook, is that while we want to keep America American, and don't want it turned into an Islamic country, we do it because we love America, not because we hate others.
Saudi Arabia is a BUSINESS, not a nation. The leaders allow as many infidels into the country as they want if they help them get richer, and they're hostile to everyone else because they know that their people hate infidels so bitterly, that they'd soon be out of power if they didn't reflect that part of their public's sentiment.
fs
I also think you are mincing word here. If racial makeup and background is NOT a part of one's identity, then what IS? We've been conditioned to believe that it is distasteful to discuss such topics in polite society, however, ignoring the elephant in the room does not make it go away.
Skin color is as relevant a part as someone's identity as their hair color or eye color. It's the Left that wants to cut us up into different racial groups, not the Right. The Right has taken up the colorblind call of Martin Luther King, Jr. The Left maintains the legacy of Malcolm X and the Black Panthers.
You're talking to someone who's part of a family that's multi-racial. I have little sympathy for those who see skin color as having any intrinsic significance in one's identity. A person's identity is based on the ideas and values they hold, not their physical appearance.
Geert Wilders message is uncannily similar to what Europe heard in the 1930s. Anyone who has absorbed the lessons of the Holocaust can only be worried.
People like Wilders have no business finding fault with Islam. Mohammed cherished peace as do his followers. For example, click on the video at the following link and watch Mohommad’s followers of “peaceful” islam carrying out his instructions – direct from the Quran.
http://somalisforjesus.blogspot.com/2009/01/mansu...
If you censor comments to your posts, what is it exactly that you’re afraid of?
I didn't censor your comment now did I? But I will delete comments from people who violate our commenting guidelines.
Horowitz never censors, he knows too well from personal experience the odious effects that ensue when the enlightened few affect to "guide" the permissible lines of discourse. David Swindle, it seems, proceeds from different premises.
Do you know David Horowitz personally? Are you in daily communication with him? Is he your boss?
Horowitz has no problem with me deleting comments that don't meet our perfectly reasonable, NORMAL guidelines. He's the editor-in-chief, I'm the managing editor. If he wanted me to permit people to drop F-bombs, post spam, post off-top comments, and be general jackasses then I would.
There was peace between the Arabs and the Jews who settled in the Hijaz UNTIL Muhammad showed up! Jews never had a problem in polytheistic "pagan" countries, such as India for example. It's mainly with those who borrowed from our Jewish religious beliefs and then turned and tried to marginalize and even murder us when we refused to go along with their claims of having received new knowledge that superseded our understanding and made our beliefs obsolete. Jews had no problems in India or China nor amongst most polytheistic "pagan" societies that we wandered into while our homeland was occupied by others. That's because Jews did not seek to convert anyone, nor preached that theirs was the only path to salvation, etc. Our people composed some books. Others read them. And took from it what they would, adding stuff of their own. And then despised us Jews if we refused to acknowledge or put our imprimatur on it. Thankfully, today Jews can again live under the banner of David, and are not forced to be marginalized under the Crescent or the Cross. And there are those who don't like that. Tough.
This video is graphic. What did you write that was censored?
What did you write that was censored?
I don't hate muslim religion, but the radicals make them tarnish their image. Really bad.
Fox had been losing me for the last year or so, and I recently found out why. They sold a stake to the Saudis. Beck lost me awhile back, and I can only view him as an intellectual lightweight. He covers some stuff that's not covered elsewhere, and I appreciate that, but tonight he lost me as even an ocasional viewer.
I have always had enormous respect for Kristol and Krauthammer, enjoying their political insight and respecting their opinions. However, I literally feel betrayed tonight. I honestly feel that we have no voice on the television anymore.
I just found your site here, David, and will keep checking back. Thanks for keeping up the good fight.
It wasn't only Fox that sold a stake to the Saudis, your whole country did, didn't you know? If you are in any doubt, please revisit the youtube clip of BHO's bow in front of the SA king from a year ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr6SiXRm6po
Former president George W. Bush (for whom I voted in 2000) also bowed to the Saudis. He kissed them, held hands with them, etc. He or his WH helped some 140 members of the Saudi Royal Family and bin Laden Family escape the US within days of the 9/11 atrocities. These family members were not interrogated by the FBI. Bush and his father have deep financial ties to the Saudis through the Carlyle investment group, etc. Bush redacted some 27 pages of the 911 Congressional report which, some believe, implicated the Saudis in the atrocities. Bush, bowing to demands from then Crown Prince Abdullah, announced he'd work to establish a Muslim terror state in Israel. He did this only days after 9/11. Then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said:
"I call on the western democracy, and primarily the leader of the free world, the United States, do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938, when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for a convenient, temporary solution. Do not try to appease the Arabs at our expense. This is unacceptable to us. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia. Israel will fight terrorism."
I work with one of those 140 members of the bin Laden Family. She is a sweet and innocent young girl who genuinely loves America and the opportunities it presents. Her family does not and has never supported Osama in his radical agenda – nor do other families related to this monster. She genuinely "loves" George Bush, because he "saved" her and her family. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, our government had legitimate concerns that anger among our populace would backlash in unprovoked violence against all Arabs and Saudis in particular, which would have benefited no one. To lump all Muslims, all Saudi's or all Arabs into one category is bigotry as much as it is to lump all Israelis or Christians, or any other group, together and to ascribe to every one the bad actions or motives of a few or even a radical faction. Certainly, the Saudi government leaves much to be desired and Islam has troubling and dangerous precepts – but to make blanket statements that all who come from one place or ascribe to one religion believe the same things is to deny the very individuality we so cherish.
ofcourse there are exceptions, read 'Son of Hamas.' This son of Hamas LEFT ISLAM, and so, the ones who don't leave it do need to be closely watched simply because of what islam produces, jihad.
Welcome, Nolan. Your support is appreciated.
It’s always been the weakness of the right to betray its own. The mentality originates in a need by those stigmatized as in any way “extreme” to demonstrate to their lefty critics that they are in fact quite tame, moderate, and even liberal in comparison to “them,” i.e., all those nuts, nazis and neanderthals to the right of me who am the soul of sell-out conservativism.
I'd be willing to bet the use of "far right" in many cases here is a result of a misunderstanding of how the left/right dynamic differs between America and Europe, but the panel tonight: I guess none of them saw the interview with Yousef on Hannity last night – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx_8zqIOZU4
Sorry guys, but I'm a Christian who has taught world religions for over a decade now, and having actually READ the Quran and studied the history, I can tell you that Muhammad being a "pedophile" is absolutely NOT a fact, and that the text of the actual scripture (laying aside the later additions and commentary by some Muslim sects) is no more "racist" or "genocidal" than the Holy Bible. Wilders may or may not be a facist, but he is using bigoted fear for political gain, and that cannot be anything but a negative for his country.
Mohamed's child bride stated he married her at the age of 6 and when she was 9 she was placed on his lap and she became his wife. He was in his late fifties, he died when she was 19.
This is why child marriage is acceptable in Dar al Islam.
I am not sure what Qu'ran you have read, but I have 2 and I can tell you it is a vile book of hate that chronicles Mohamed's military aggressions on his own people, his massacres of Jews and Pagans, and his appropriation of selected Christian and Jewish rituals and mythologies.
Not only is the Qu'ran not arranged in chronological order it is poorly written, repetitive, and Mohamed himself abrogated the Mecca verses. Those are the "peaceful" ones. Keep in mind that in order to understand the Qu'ran fully, one must read the Hadith and Sunna.
The Qu'ran openly calls for the subjugation and or death of the unbeliever (Kuffar), until Islam and Allah are the only religion and deity worshiped— the Bible does not.
Jesus welcomed all, Mohamed on his death bed decreed that all non believers be driven out of Arabia.
Jesus forgave, Mohamed commanded his critics be assassinated. And they were, one with a baby at her breast.
I suggest you watch Fitna before you judge Mr. Wilders, better yet watch what he has to say on You Tube. Mr. Wilders is not a bigot, he is fighting for free speech, and the integrity of his country.
I suggest you read Ayan Hirsi Ali's book Infidel. She was also a Dutch parliamentarian, and her book is riveting.
I recommend you further your education, read Jesus and Mohamed by Mark Gabriel, visit FaithFreedom.org.
Very well done, IceStar. Bravo.
IceStar, in addition I would add:
Jesus gave His life to save others, Mohammed commands taking others lives to save your own.
WOW, what a fantastic reply! Kudos IceStar!! We could use your input on Infidelsarecool.com
Fancy meeting you here.
Heehee! Thought I should get busy on some other commenting opportunities around here since so many are linked now
You didn't read the same Quran that I did – you need to go back and check your facts – Mo was definitely a pedophile and a racist – where did you teach – at that progressive school in Germany?
World history, the current Islamization of Europe and America's own experience with Muslims proves you wrong. Choose to believe whatever you wish, I will continue to choose reality, which I do not view as optional.
Since you are a Christian, maybe you will join me in prayer for the return of real men, who with courage face the truth, and deal with it. Whether due to the estrogen-like chemicals in our food, or the feminine nature of today's churchianity, the milquetoast males calling themselves Christians today are an embarassment.
Give me a break! I worked for muslim bosses for nearly 10 years. They tried to convert all the Christian women who worked for them. I also studied islam in that time. Mo absolutely WAS a pedophile! A well known islamic scholar says that Aisha was SIX when Mo married her, but in their haste to try to make it seem less disgusting, islam tires to portray her as “older” and having come to puberty. NOT SO! Aisha herself wrote that she took her “dolls” to the marriage bed.
I found in the course of my studies, and in exchanging information with a young woman in Egypt considered an islamic “Theologian” (as IF!) that there is no love in islam.
Mo was a warmonger, womanizer, rapist and pedophile! He broke every code of morality in his own time by claiming the authority to do so was granted by GOD. He used his twisted perverted “dreams” to lay claim to “privileges” against that warring people’s own beliefs. When even his followers questioned, he just told them these things were granted solely to “the prophet”.
Do not even insult our intelligence here by trying to claim that the truth about this disgusting, vile ideology is anything but what it really is. If you had truly studied this sham of a “religion” (It is NOT religion!) you would know that.
Americans must learn once and for all that islam is NOT religion, and can NEVER be safeguarded as one by our Constitution. Every thing about islam is a direct opposite of our Constitution. The two CANNOT co-exist!
To tell people anything different is a lie!
So, marrying a six year old girl and consummating the marriage at nine isn't pedophilia? And what quran are you reading? You are remarkably ignorant if you have been teaching world religion for over ten years. If true, you are part of the problem not the solution. islam has been waging a war of conquest on the non-muslim world for FOURTEEN HUNDRED YEARS!! Amazing that escaped you during all your "study!" Oh by the way, the quran was supposedly the word of allah told to muhammad by the archangel gabriel. There are no later additions to the quran, as only the prophet received the word of allah. Some teacher you are!! Are you sure you're Christian, because it sounds to me like you're practicing taqiyya?
Everything you said was exactly wrong,Halal-boy.Muhammad loved the littlies.He also loved lopping people's heads off.He was a vile piece of work and the world would be immeasurably better if the vile bastard was never born.
The sad story here is that there is so much ignorance about the true nature of
Islam. Yes, there are many Muslims who want to lead peaceful lives. Some
probably don't really know the full teachings of Mohammed or regard them as
ancient and in a different light than what is actually said in the Koran.
The great risk is that this peaceful talk obscures the danger that confronts us.
The goal of Islam is to control the world and bring all people under the teachings
of their Allah.
Islam has no respect for any other religious beliefs, and it is the duty of Muslims
to convert all to their belief system. The very freedom accorded to them in this
country will be used by them – if they have their way – to destroy all freedom.
Wow.You put it in a nutshell!
I think you are RIGHT ON TARGET
Fox does it for money ….Saudi Money …and Fox serves them well .
I nearly choked on my wine when I caught Beck at 2 am. Does he know anything about Geert Wilders?
For someone who prides himself on his research he messed up on this one. Unless of course the truth just doesn't fit in with his preconceived idea abut Islam.
Beck has stated more than once that he read the Qu'ran and insists Islam is a "religion of peace" Fitna points out succinctly, how untrue this is.
I suggest he also watch the short film.
Witness the pendulum swing . . . last week Fox interviewed "Son of Hamas" sans left/right characterizations. This week countering the effect of that interview, perhaps as penance to al waleed, Fox pins 'far-right' and 'fascist' characterization on Geert Wilders. Fox, fair & balanced?
I think the reason Beck may not approve of Wilders is that they are so much alike. Beck is casting too big a net with his end of times theories and in so doing is unraveling himself.
David, I'm sure you've already reported or will report, on both Spencer's (Jihad Watch) and Pamela Geller's (Atlas Shrugs) sites, there is video of Glenn Beck calling Wilders – a supporter of the Jews and Israel – a fascist.
Now you are not going to like my comment here. I repeatedly warned D. Horowitz about George W. Bush, his support for a Muslim-enemy state in Israel; his close ties to the Saudis, etc. David continued to support Bush. Now it is Beck, whom David has stood by. Beck likes to interview Dr. Ron Paul whom I believe to be a dangerous man. That is a red flag! We need to be very careful who we support. I would like to believe D. Horowitz will write Mr. Beck a letter or better, straighten him out the next time Beck interviews him. You cannot allow these things to stand without protest. Steve
I share your concerns that Beck might drift into Paulastinian territory. Trying to prevent further Paulastinian infiltration into the Right is, of course, one of our priorities.
What do you find dangerous about Ron Paul?
His foreign policy which is identical to the Left's.
Ron Paul condemns Israel for defending herself from jihad terrorism. Ron Paul opposes even moral support for Israel when she is under attack by Muslim terrorists, including Hezbollah and Hamas. Ron Paul opposes any preemptive warfare. This would include Israel's preemptive attack on mobilized Egyptian and Syrian forces in June 1967. This would include Israel's preemptive attack on Iran's nascent nuclear sites, even as Iran is breathing threats to annihilate Israel's Jews. Paul's support base consists of racists, bigots, anti-Semites and 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Ron Paul believes America did things to deserve the 911 attacks; particularly US support of Israel. Paul supports international anarchy, disorder and terrorism, in my humble opinion. What do you find safe or secure about Paul's foreign policy?
Beck spends too much time in the shadow of greatness, i.e. Bill O'Reilly. They are both legends in their own minds.
I was shocked when I watched "special report" last evening…esp with the comments by Charles Krauthammer and the lack of comments by Bill Kristol…
I think they owe it to Geert Wilders to have him on the panel!!!
I totally concur with this…I was shocked last night to hear Krauthammer and Krystol too. They have never had this man on to have discussion with, just like they never have anyone on to talk about the natural born status requirement of the presidency. They just throw everyone under the bus. What gives? This is recent at Fox in my experience.
"the Dutch politician did not see a difference between Islam and Islamism. *Rolls eyes.* So those who follow Islam ignore passages of the Koran and those who follow Islamism actually do what the book tells them to do?"
*Rolls eyes* Like every religious text, the Koran is open to interpretation and contains contradictions. How do you think that the Westboro Baptist Church can claim to be Christian, yet so can the Archbishop of Canterbury?
How do you expect anyone to take you seriously, when you ask such crude loaded rhetorical questions?
If you don't want to take me seriously you don't have to Joe. I won't mind. I take it you don't take Robert Spencer seriously either? Have you read any of his books?
How is that even relevant? What is relevant, is that you've stooped to asking misleading rhetorical questions because you felt your point was not strong enough without them.
My views on Islam are most informed by my Freedom Center colleague Robert Spencer. Do you not take his views seriously either? What books have you read on Islam which make you so confident that you can come in here and lecture me so arrogantly and self-righteously. My point still stands.
People like to invoke the Jewish Bible when they claim the Bible also supports or justifies violence and warfare. The difference is, unlike the Qur'an, the Torah concerns itself with a specific piece of real estate, Israel. Unlike the Qur'an the Bible does not command death to "unbelievers."
Who the fascist is can be readily spotted as in the Spot the Fascist post and photo on this blog…they're the ones trying to kill you for disagreeing with them. Geert Wilders does not fall into this category.
Never underestimate the influence of Saudi money. Notice who Fox put on the panel and who they left off.
There was no Spencer, Gabriel, Sultan , or anyone like them. They put on conservatives who do not know or follow Muslim issues.
PS – There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. You are either a practicing Muslim or a non practicing Muslim. A practicing Muslim may not believe in violence but his goals and dreams for Islam are the same as the violent Muslim terrorist.
The "panel" last night was off. The segment about Massa was not what I expected either.
I may be wrong, but I think Beck meant to show concern that a response to what has been happening in Europe may be an extreme swing to the other side (too far). That doesn't mean I think he was correct at all, but I have the feeling he will be hearing about this and will clarify. I'll be interested to see how he follows up on it.
Speaking of Fox, something has definitely been going on there. O'Reilly and his guests were making Massa sound completely insignificant (why?) and what he said about Rahm insignificant. Well, I think they may have to eat their words if more comes out on that. Will Massa show up on Beck's show as scheduled? Should be interesting.
Excellent post David. Keep up the good work.
Thank you, my friend. Keep up the great comments.
I knew Fox was in trouble when O'Reilly said that Saudi investor was a "stand up guy." Too bad he doesn't wear his Saudi garb the next time he's on….he looks too benign in that Western-style suit. Does anybody know…how many wives does he have now?
Islam is the sacred cow that no one, including increasingly in America, can touch. It takes great courage to speak of Islam truthfully, not least because it's adherents are likely to blow you up if you do. The protection of Islam also results from citizens of all countries to bury their heads in the sand when it comes to anything that would assault their notions of peaceful, multi-cultural co-existence. When everything and everyone is the same, nothing is different. Alot of people simply cannot or will not allow the truth of Islam to invalidate that belief. The moment we accepted the notion that western culture was no better than, even worse than, any other culture, and began to insist that everyone believe it, we invited Islam to prove us correct. My concern is whether there are enough people who do not believe it.
Beck in 2007, after claiming he read the Koran : "I can unequivocally say that Islam is a religion of peace."
Beck is intellectually dishonest about the greatest threat we face and that has colored my opinion of him ever since.
I can bet no one told him about abrogation! the last verses (Koran is out of order chronologically) mean the first (the nicer peaceful ones) are wholly IRRELEVANT.
Mohammed tried honey (to gain converts) and when it didn't work he used the sword.
Beck hasn't a clue about KORAN
wonder if he knows all the prophets are MUSLIMS according to ISLAM? and that Ishmael was sacrificed, and not Issac as the Bible says- ISLAMis an insult ot every Chrisitan as their holy days celebrate the fact your BOOK is a lie- they will tell you they respect Jesus but will thell you he never died on a cross andif you believe trinity you are an idol worshipper- Koran contradicts the stories carried for 5000 years before Monhammed perverted them- Mohammed did not write Koran he was illiterate- all the so called identical Korans were burnt b/c none of them said the same thing- the JEWS torah is identical for 5000 years no variances, to the letter, same words same stories written and protected by literate scribes with honor————— Mohammed admits to being duped by the DEVIL-
After watching the Fox News and commentary on Wilders, I am more concerned then ever about the influence of this companies news being swayed by their Saudi influence due to their part ownership of this station. Make no mistake about it, the Saudis are the most influential across the world when it comes establishing Mosques around the world and aiding terrorist organizations. What better way to influence the only source of Conservative television then to buy into their programing. As of late, I have noticed a huge difference in Megan Kelly, Krauthammer, Beck etc. when it comes to Conservative think. Thank God we still have Conservative talk radio where they are able to 'tell it like it is' without qualm! Watch for this administration going after them and the Internet with the Fairness Doctrine!
David, You wrote: "These are troubling developments, though nothing to be particularly surprised about. Despite Fox being on the ball about so many issues and being an important fighter in many political contests, all too often it — like others in the Conservative Movement — has shown a tragic deficiency of understanding when it comes to our war with Islamic Nazism."
While I would agree with you, Fox is on the ball about so many issues, being an important fighter in many political contests, this one(as you term it) "our war with Islamic Nazism" is the most important contest of all. I do not give Fox the benefit of the doubt. I cannot accept, with all the information available that this is a tragic deficiency of understanding of Fox's part. I must believe this is intentional malfeasance on the part of Fox. For what reason, I haven't a clue.
PS: I do not for a moment believe it is a tragic deficiency of understanding by Fox and by others in the Conservative Movement. I believe it is by reason of fear, cowardice, pusillanimity, etc., amongst other reasons people in the Conservative Movement lie about or completely ignore the Islamic threat.
You're probably right.
I stopped watching Fox when Alwalweed bought more of Fox news Parent Corp. – now he owns about 17% and earlier this year was thinking about buying more.
There are too many dimwitted reporters, and commentators, making too many stupid remarks about islam. I cannot trust them anymore. When Glen Beck says he has read the koran and says it is peaceful – that is just dumb. Krauthammer's remarks are just dumb too.
I was firing up the BBQ last night when the panel came on. I had to do a double take when it came to Geert and Massa. I could not believe what I was hearing. I thought somehow my TV had jumped to MSNBC…Talk about being off the reservation. As far as I’m concerned, Geert is a hero.
Oh, dear…just read this:
(AFP)- News Corp chief Rupert Murdoch announced on Tuesday that the Gulf emirate of Abu Dhabi is to become the headquarters of his global media empire in the Middle East.
I'd think it was a joke if it wasn't…
Wilders and the EDL are not racist parties such as the BNP.
Glenn Beck is in sore need of some education in Islam. He should have that contributing Front Page columnist, Pamela Geller, on.
Besides, that woman would be a welcome distraction from his crying.
I do not know and many times even believe that Islam can be reformed. If it is to ever be reformed, they would have to open a school on Islam's greatest philosopher Averros and would he catch on as St. Thomas Acquinas did with Christianity did in Europe.
One can only hope
FOX has sold out to the ragheads or whatever they prefer to be called, raghead works for me today: Raghead O'Reilley, Raghead Beck, etc. all doing their dhimmi thing under their Islam.
Everyone needs to write their former favorites at FOX at 1211 Avenue of The Americas, 2F
New York, NY 10036 and tell them that they have new titles, Seyed Smith the dhimmi, Seyed Krauthammer the dhimmi, and so forth.
why would anyone even consider believing a network partially owned by moslems?
Ya know, I used to like Beck. He seemed so genuine & passionate. But soon enough I realized he's just another tool. Most recent acknowledgment of this is when he had one of our only GENUINE candidates for TX Gov on his radio show, Debra Medina. He actually asked her what she thought about the 9-11 "truthers". She floundered, totally unprepared. The only affirmation she gave was that there were "legitimate questions people have, but she had no stance on it". That was all it took to knock her down far enough to not be a threat to the big boys. What the hell do "9-11 truthers" have to do with governing the state of Texas, Glenn?? TOOL.