The Hypocrisy of Sean Hannity, Human Events and MSNBC

It saddens me to say this.  I am a fan of Sean Hannity, but Sean Hannity is a HYPOCRITE.  He bashes President Obama for wanting to have discussions with Iran and gives as his reasons that Iran denies the Holocaust and wants to destroy Israel. Yet on the first week of his new show who does he have as a guest ? Pat Buchanan a Holocaust denying, Israel hater, who believes that Israel was behind 9/11.

Buchanan has challenged the historical record that thousands of Jews were gassed to death by diesel exhaust at Treblinka:

"Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody." -New Republic, 10/22/90

Pat Buchanan's website espouses views that most Americans would find distasteful. Not only does he blame AIPAC (his code word for Jews) for pushing America into the Iraq war but he also blames Israel for 9/11:

So here it is again for those of you unaware, that on 9-11, the largest foreign spy ring ever uncovered in the US was in the process of being rounded up, and that evidence linking these arrested Israeli spies to 9-11 has been classified by the US Government!

Of course that statement is not different from previous statements which blamed American Jews for the Iraq war

In Buchanan’s essay, “Whose War” where he blames the Iraq war on a bunch of mostly Jewish public figures such as Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Max Boot and Richard Pearled. Buchanan has charged those public figures with” colluding with Israel to ignite those wars and destroy the Oslo Accords. We charge them with deliberately damaging U.S. relations with every state in the Arab world that defies Israel or supports the Palestinian people's right to a homeland of their own” he goes on to say:

“For whose benefit these endless wars in a region that holds nothing vital to America save oil, which the Arabs must sell us to survive? Who would benefit from a war of civilizations between the West and Islam? Answer: one nation, one leader, one party. Israel, Sharon, Likud....Moving through Congress, powered by the Israeli lobby, is House Resolution 362, which demands that President Bush impose a U.S. blockade of Iran, an act of war.Is it not time the American people were consulted on the next war that is being planned for us"

Israel Lobby is the PC way of saying JEWS. In July 2006, during Israel's conflict with Lebanon, he accused President Bush of "subcontracting U.S. policy out to Tel Aviv, thus making Israel the custodian of our reputation and interests in the Middle East." Further, he said that when Bush was asked if he would urge Israel to restrain air strikes, he "sounded less like the leader of the Free World than some bellicose city councilman from Brooklyn Heights." (TheAmericanCause Where are the Christians, by Patrick J. Buchanan, Tuesday, July 18, 2006)

Sean, you dont want to believe me then believe the William F Buckley Jr.  In Search of Anti-Semitism" December 31, 1991, subsequently made the cornerstone of a book, William F. Buckley, Jr. concluded, that Buchanan was indeed an anti-Semite:

I find it impossible to defend Pat Buchanan against the charge that what he did and said during the period under examination amounted to anti-Semitism, whatever it was that drove him to say and do it: most probably, an iconoclastic temperament.

Please don't tell me he is only Anti-Israel...Buchanan doesn't perceive a difference between Israel and the Jews:

There is a legitimate grievance in my view of white working-class people that every time, one very issue, that the black militants loud-mouth it, we come up with more money.... If we can give 50 Phantoms  to the Jews, and a multi-billion dollar welfare program for the blacks...why not help the Catholics save their collapsing school system." (Boston Globe, 1/4/92)

MSNBC Has much to be ashamed of, not the least of which is their Hypocrisy. Don Imus got fired for making a racial remark, yet their chief political correspondent Pat Buchanan is a racist.

In 1969, Buchanan urged Nixon not to visit King's widow, Coretta Scott King, because he felt, "It would outrage many, many people who believe Dr. King was a fraud and a demagogue, and perhaps worse. ... It does not seem to be in the interests of national unity for the president to lend his national prestige to the argument that this divisive figure is a modern saint memo dated April 1, 1969, quoted in AP wire story: Buchanan's Positions ... In His Own Words Charleston Gazette March 03, 1996.

Back in 1991 he accused the former head of the KKK of theft.

"David Duke is busy stealing from me. I have a mind to go down there and sue that dude for intellectual property theft." (Manchester, NH Union Leader, December 15, 1991).

In a memo to President Nixon, Buchanan suggested that

"integration of blacks and whites -- but even more so, poor and well-to-do -- is less likely to result in accommodation than it is in perpetual friction, as the incapable are placed consciously by government side by side with the capable." (Washington Post, 1/5/92)

Shame On Human Events. A usually fine website, but on Holocaust Remembrance Day it published the usual anti-Jewish venomous column by Pat Buchanan which inferred that the Jews living in the Middle East have no right to defend itself:

In 2006, Ehud Olmert used the border ambush of an Israel patrol and the kidnapping of two soldiers to launch a second Lebanon war. Hezbollah lost hundreds of fighters, but its stature soared as it became the first Arab force to fight Israel and emerge unbroken and unbeaten. And the thousands of Hezbollah rockets that rained down on the Galilee destroyed forever the myth of Israeli invulnerability.

USED? Buchanan thinks that Olmert woke up in the morning and said Gee, I hope Hezbollah attacks so I can Start a war? What about the all of the rocket attacks and other Hezbollah terror that immediately preceded the 2006 war?  How about the fact that Israel left Lebanon SIX YEARS EARLIER. And it wasn't until Israel left that Hezbollah gained power.  But of course that would ruin Buchanan's main argument the Jews are war mongers:

Now, in the aftermath of the war on Gaza, which almost all in Israel supported, come the second thoughts. Of 1,400 dead from air strikes and invasion, one-third were Palestinian children. Al Jazeera video of the dead and dying civilians, juxtaposed with video of Barack Obama enjoying a round of golf in scenic Hawaii, were devastating for the U.S. image, as U.S. weapons had been used by Israel to deliver the death and destruction.

As opposed to the Iranian weapons that were used to deliver death and destruction on Israel. Oh I get it he is using the phony "disproportionate response" argument. So you tell me Pat, how many Hamas rockets makes it OK for Israel to respond? Was the A Bomb Dropping on Hiroshima "disproportionate response?"  How many Nazis was it OK to kill in WWII  Sorry I forgot for Pat that one is close to home.

Like Hezbollah, Hamas has emerged more entrenched, while the moderates like Mahmoud Abbas are portrayed as Quislings. Now, a rift has appeared between Obama, who has called for a lifting of the Israeli blockade of Gaza to allow aid and commerce to flow freely, and an Israel determined to maintain its choke hold on Hamas.

Buchanan forgets the fact that the reason for the "choke hold" is to prevent more weapons of terror from getting into Hamas hands.

In none of these three wars was the Israel Air Force challenged or the IDF defeated. In casualties, Hezbollah and Hamas, Lebanese and Gazans, all suffered many times more dead and wounded.

Yet, looking back, were any of these wars necessary? Did any make Israel more secure than when the Lebanese border was quiet? Does the future look brighter today than in 1982, after the peace with Egypt and withdrawal from Sinai, before the war on Beirut?

Lets examine for a second what happened since 1982, Terrorist appeasers Buchanan ruled the day, some appeased because of the taste of Arab Oil, others like this columnist appeased because it would mean more DEAD JEWS.

Three months before launching the Gaza war, Olmert told two journalists that Israel, to achieve lasting peace, would have to return the Golan Heights to Syria and almost all of the West Bank to the Palestinians, and give East Jerusalem back to the Arabs who live there.

"In the end, we will have to withdraw from the lion's share of the territories, and for the territories we leave in our hands, we will have to give compensation in the form of territories within the state of Israel at a ratio that is more or less 1:1."

Like Rabin in 1994 and Ehud Barak in 2000, two of the most decorated soldiers in Israel's history, Olmert had concluded, late in life, that it is either land for peace, with all its risks, or endless war for Israel.

Really.... Rabin and Barak?  Begin Gave Back the Sinai, Sharon left Gaza, NO PEACE CAME. Maybe Buchanan's terrorist friends want a little more than "Land for Peace"

Yet, after that interview, he launched the December blitz and invaded Gaza, killing and wounding 5,000 Palestinians, making of the Strip a zone of permanent hatred and making Hamas, whom he sought to dethrone and undeniably wounded, even stronger.

Folks there above is the inhumanity of the article allowed in Human Events. Not mentioned is the 7,600 rockets/mortars in the three years since Sharon left Gaza. Human Events believes that Israel should not defend herself. Human Events' Message to Jews on Holocaust Remembrance Day is SIT BACK AND DIE.