Watch: Former Muslim Goes On Fox News And Issues Chilling Warning To Americans

Author and former Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali appeared on Fox News’ “Hannity” on Monday  and discussed the threat of radical Islam- and its growing presence in the United States.

She spoke about her upbringing in Saudi Arabia: “I cannot describe to you what kind of a place Saudi Arabia is. It is apartheid–gender apartheid. It’s a place where using modern tools and modern money…they actually enforce 7th century rules.”

Saudi Arabia’s sharia law system is similar to that used by ISIS. The exception is that Saudi Arabia is considered a key U.S. ally in the region.

Ali said that she was amazed to hear U.S. authority figures say that “what we see, these terrorist acts, the subjugation of women, the hatred of Jews and Christians, has nothing to do with Islam.”

She criticized Obama’s approach toward radical Islam, saying, ” I just think it’s a strategy that has failed. He’s not the only one who’s tried it.”

While she says it is true that we are not at war with Islam, she also says that we have “hundreds of thousands of people who are at war with us”: Radical Islamists.

On a positive note, Ali insists that there “millions of peace-loving Muslims.”

However, she chillingly warned: “Even for Muslims who are already here…there is an active Islamization process going on in the United States of America. We’ve been in denial about it for a very, very long time. It is time that we wake up, and see who is behind this.”

Listen: Guest Tries Debating Hannity On Syrian Refugees – Big Mistake

In the wake of last week’s terrorist attacks in Paris and subsequent reports that at least one of the militants involved entered Europe as a Syrian refugee, many Americans have expressed renewed opposition to the Obama administration plan to introduce about 10,000 such refugees into the U.S. over the next year.

GOP presidential candidates, a majority of U.S. governors, and even some less obvious critics have joined forces to call for an end to the Syrian influx already in progress. Newly elected U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan reacted to pressure within his party by calling on Tuesday for a halt to the program.

Syndicated radio host Sean Hannity echoed the security concerns being voiced by millions of Americans during a recent interview with Muslim commentator Amer Zahr.

Citing an increasingly popular alternative to bringing refugees from the Middle East to America, Hannity asked: “What’s wrong with setting up a safe zone within Syria if they have the world’s support?”

Zahr proclaimed the proposal “not feasible,” to which Hannity responded that his guest “underestimate[s] the United States military” and the coalition of nations anxious to eradicate ISIS. The host went on to elaborate on his preferred course of action.

“I’m talking about creating a no-fly zone,” he said, “where neither ISIS nor anybody else – a safe zone for Syrians who want to escape war. I would provide food, medical assistance, I would provide water and I would provide at least a safe place for these people. Because I don’t think Europe and the United States can absorb the populations of Syria and Iraq and all the people in the Middle East who would like to leave because of what is happening there.”

Zahr responded by insisting that such an effort would put soldiers stationed in the Middle East in danger, a fate he said “is much more of a risk than maybe one or two or three terrorists coming in here.”

Hannity pointed out that there is no way anyone could know how many of the purported refugees were actually radical Islamists.

“Well,” Zahr continued, “I don’t know if I drive in my car today if a drunk driver is going to hit me, but I still drive my car.”

Hannity did not find the analogy convincing.

“That’s a cute argument,” he scolded his guest, “but the reality is America already has 1,000 – according to the FBI – ISIS probes going on within our country. I think that’s fair enough, don’t you?”

h/t: Hannity

Watch: Hannity Panel On Race Explodes With Rage: ‘Let Me Answer, Sean!’

A tense exchange between Fox News host Sean Hannity and three black panelists reached a fever pitch when one guest asserted that Hannity intentionally relegated his point of view. In a segment focusing on the racial tension engulfing college campuses across the country, the first two panelists largely agreed that protests currently underway are imprudent.

“A lot of people at the University of Missouri school system are embarrassed by this,” said author and radio host Kevin Jackson, “including black students. And they find it as nonsensical as probably most of America.”

Milwaukee County, Wis., Sheriff David Clarke went on to identify an almost invisible victim at the heart of the turmoil.

“These are tax-supported schools,” he said. “That president that resigned and these professors, they don’t work for the students, they work for the taxpayers of Missouri. And the taxpayers ought to stand up and demand that their money stop being spent to fund these laboratories of liberal indoctrination.”

Hannity asked attorney Eric Guster about “racism on the other side,” specifically citing an incident at Yale University in which students attending a free speech event were spat upon by protesters.

“Well,” he replied, “let’s talk about Missouri.”

Hannity attempted to ensure that his guest answered the question at hand, prompting Guster to cry foul.

“You let Sheriff Clarke rail on about some nonsense,” he complained. “I would love to answer, to reply to that.”

Pressed to come up with some sort of response, Guster finally acknowledged that he does not “agree with spitting on someone or that type of behavior.”

The concession led to continued protestation:

You let super-conservative people run on, Sean. And you always try to put me in a box on what I want to debunk.

He dismissed Hannity with a wave of his hand as the host moved on to Jackson. A moment later, however, Guster interrupted Jackson as the latter suggested the events that sparked recent protests might have been manufactured.

As the two guests talked simultaneously, Hannity tried to cut them off.

“Let’s bring back Sheriff Clarke,” he said.

An animated Guster shouted: “Let me answer, Sean! You never give me a chance to reply.”

“Why are you complaining?” Hannity shot back. “You just had the floor.”

Watch: Trump Just Issued An INTENSE Warning To Every Other Republican Candidate- This Could Get Messy…

In recent weeks, it seemed as though Trump was dialing back his bellicosity on the campaign trail. But if his warning to the other GOP candidates this week is any indication, Mr. ‘Nice’ Trump is no more.

When Trump first jumped into the GOP primary race, the Old Media establishment instantly criticized him for his sharp comments about other candidates as well as some members of the media. In the face of the criticism, his attacks lessened, but this week he issued a warning that the less confrontational style is over.

Appearing on Fox News’ Sean Hannity Show, Trump warned that his opponents should not start airing attack ads and expect him to remain silent. Trump says that he’ll reply in no uncertain terms.

“Anybody who hits me, we’re gonna hit them ten times harder,” Trump told Hannity. “If, as an example, Bush or Rubio or any of them come after me, we’re going to dollar-for-dollar go after them.”

Trump added that he thinks that harsh attack ads hurt everyone. “I think the negative ads are gonna hurt the Republicans much more so than it’s gonna hurt me. I really believe it’s going to be bad for a lot of people,” he said.

Do you support Donald Trump? Like the page:

Trump also informed Fox that he will start airing his own ads in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina in the next few weeks.

Trump went on to joke about how, unlike the other candidates, he hasn’t spent much money yet on his campaign.

“So far, I was going to have spent $25 million by this time. I’ve spent nothing. I feel guilty because I’ve spent nothing, because we haven’t needed it,” Trump quipped. “But we are going to start spending a little bit of money over the next three or four weeks.”

Trump also made news this week by announcing that from this point forward he is going to negotiate directly with whatever entity or TV outlet that is holding the various debates. Trump says he is no longer going to allow the GOP to negotiate for him when it concerns the debates.

The Real Reason Trump Didn’t Go After Carson At The GOP Debate Could Be This

Only days after launching verbal assaults against Ben Carson, Donald Trump appears to have backed off and is singing his praises. One commentator thinks he knows why.

Last Friday, following poll numbers coming out showing Carson with a substantial lead in Iowa, Trump described the former neurosurgeon to a Hawkeye State crowd as having “super-low-energy” and being “weak on immigration.” He joked that media outlets sought a response from Carson regarding his move into the lead in Iowa, but he was “sleeping.”

However, by the time of the Republican debate on Wednesday, Trump had nothing but good things to say about Carson and chose only to go after Ohio Gov. John Kasich after the candidate attacked him.

He told Sean Hannity during an interview after the event: “Ben is standing right next to me, and he’s a terrific guy. He’s right over here. Hey, Ben you’re a terrific guy. So that’s the story.”

The Fox News host joked, “Why don’t you bring him over, we can have a group hug on Hannity.” 

The Real Clear Politics average of polls still has Trump in the lead nationally, with the following breakdown of percentages: Trump-26.9, Carson-22, Rubio-9.3, Cruz-7.3, Bush-6.8, Fiorina-6.3, Huckabee-3.5, Paul-3.0. The other candidates follow at approximately 2 percent and below.

Seth Millstein, writing for Bustle, notes:

Trump and Carson collectively command about 49 percent of the support of Republican voters. That fact, in conjunction with the huge number of candidates in the field, has made it nearly impossible for any other Republican to get more than single-digit support for any extended period of time. Rubio’s performance on Wednesday has been widely praised, but guess what? If Jeb Bush dropped out of the race and all of his supporters got behind Marco Rubio, Rubio would still only be in third place. You can add Carly Fiorina’s supporters into the mix, too; Carson and Trump would still dominate.

Millstein believes the two are in effect boxing out the more traditional candidates (keeping them in single digits), and Trump and Carson have a mutual interest in each other continuing to draw a large percentage of the primary electorate. The writer concedes that at some point, they will have to train their guns on each other; but for now, they are allies against the establishment, with both having different appeals to voters.

As reported by Western Journalism, the two campaigns worked together a few weeks ago to force CNBC to keep its debate to two hours. Neither candidate particularly shines on the crowded stage anyway, compared to say a Rubio or a Cruz, so it was in both campaigns’ interest to work together to limit the time.

“It’s still possible that one of them will implode (although it’s hard to imagine how),” writes Millstein, “but until that happens, this is the Trump and Carson show, and neither Trump nor Carson have any incentive to change that.”