Yes or No, Hamas is Terrorist Organization

Obviously the folks at Huffington Post are not Sean Hannity fans and regular listeners of his shows.

On Thursday, Sean Hannity invited Yousef Munayyer — a Palestinian-American who is the executive director of the Jerusalem Fund and who is a frequent guest on cable news — on his show… Hannity went ballistic after Munayyer’s first sentence and spent the entire segment screaming at him.

I followed Hannity’s radio programs when driving in my car before moving to Israel, way before he was on TV. Friends thought he was too loud or too right-wing or too offensive. But I never ever could fall asleep when he got going on a rant.

http://youtu.be/Ud-XBHl0Ong

Trust me this was not screaming.

For Hannity this was extremely tepid for someone who would not answer his simple question.

What do you think?

9 thoughts on “Yes or No, Hamas is Terrorist Organization”

  1. What do I think? I think Yousef should stick with CNN, where he, along with other “Hamas spokesmen”, are given legitimacy, respect, and sympathy by the morally delayed interviewers.

    1. Hard Little Machine

      CNN turned over their studios to actual Hamas people today. No need to use guys like Munayyer.

  2. ruth rosenstock

    I saw this live. and while I’m happy that Hannity wanted to make sure the Palestinian spokesman wasn’t going to weasel out out of answering questions, I do have to admit I thought Hannity was a little over the top.

    he really didn’t let this guy get a word in. personally, I think that when Palestinian apologists are spouting nonsense, we should let them. it just makes them sound stupid. Hannity could have pressed him after hearing his answer.

    1. “I think that when Palestinian apologists are spouting nonsense, we should let them. it just makes them sound stupid.”

      I couldn’t disagree more.
      It only sounds stupid to you, probably (as I don’t know you), because you’re well educated about the facts of the conflict and you aren’t sunken in the quagmire of moral relativism and non-critical-emotional thinking.
      Most people watching news interviews, I am convinced, are ignorant of the facts and are to a greater or lesser degree embedded in that quagmire.
      So, if you let a clean-cut, eloquent spokesperson evade the tough questions and ramble on about thinly veiled justifications of unconscionable crimes, he’s going to convince a lot of people with his smooth smokescreen.
      If you force him to stay on topic and answer the tough questions, he either reveals the truth of his opinions clearly, or makes it abundantly clear that he’s trying to hide something.
      It’s the only thing that really works, and it’s the thing the vast majority of “journalists” refuse to do. Lobbing softball questions and letting apologists pontificate is the new standard of “journalism” for those who are the current darlings of the Left.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top