-By Warner Todd Huston
Trevor Hill owns what was once a blighted, rundown building in Knoxville, Tennessee. Hill has upgraded and repaired the building and built a restaurant there that he’s christened The Hill restaurant. It’s a full service restaurant and that means it is to serve alcohol. And that last fact seems to be causing a conflict with the folks that own the neighboring building: the Anoor mosque.
Apparently one of the mosque board members, Nadeem Sidiqqi, is upset that an American property owner could possibly serve alcohol in his own business. Sidiqqi thinks he should be able to tell the owner of The Hill restaurant that he shouldn’t be allowed to serve alcohol so close to his mosque. He thinks that the city should invent a law that would mandate a “buffer zone” so that his religious tenets can be enforced on his neighbors. Sidiqqi wants to prevent neighboring property owners from doing as they wish with their own property.
So, is this America or Saudi Arabia?
Muslims Try to Shut Down Property Rights of Tennessee Neighbor”
Reuters published a story today, April 4, detailing some nonsense from a Taliban terrorist who has claimed “responsibility” for Friday’s shooting rampage in Binghamtom, New York. The question that comes to mind is why? Why did Reuters imagine this idiotic claim, this obvious lie, was worth reporting to the world? Does Reuters not have the good sense God gave a door knob? Why would Reuters pass this Taliban propaganda off as news?
We are sonorously told to respect the “Palestinians,” that their “government” is one we must work with to solve the ages old conflicts of the Middle East. We are also told by those advocating realpolitik between the west and the Muslim world that their system based on Islam is just as good as anyone else’s, just as we are so often assured that all governments deserve equal consideration merely because they exist. 
Dear President Obama, 
On March 9, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on one of Barack Obama’s latest nominees. This time it was to assess the suitability of Tony West, Obama’s nominee for the assistant attorney general in charge of the U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Division. Things went “smoothly” according to the 
We all remember the drubbing that conservatives took during the campaign when they openly worried, and even directly charged, that Barack Obama was a far left radical. Pointing to the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the domestic terrorist William Ayers and wife, and several others of Obama’s close friends and associates conservatives sounded a clarion call to alert the country that we were about to get one of the most extremely leftist presidents ever.
One has to wonder about the thought process of some people. Dan Gilgoff, Faith reporter with U.S. News and World Report and Huffington Post writer, is a perfect example of what I am talking about. After a 
Kudos must go to the Wall Street Journal for standing by its principles. 
During the campaign, Barack Obama maintained that he would focus on intervening between Pakistan and India over their disputed Kashmir region. Obama repeatedly claimed that settling the Kashmir question was a 
Sadly, we are used to the anti-Semitism of Europe. After all, that is where anti-Semitism has historically thrived in a most virulent form and does still today. We are also used to the Jew hatred of the illiterati of Europe’s universities having seen so often the petitions they’ve raised to denounce Israel and give succor to Hamas and Fatah — and any other terrorist group that comes down the pike, for that matter. Of course, this infection of hate, racism and self-destructive terror worship is increasingly appearing at our own universities in the U.S. Nothing is more representative of that than the example of the “U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel” recently emanating out of several California Universities.
Terrorists, murders, oppressors and Islamofascists understandably were not very fond of George W. Bush. Neither were the fellow travelers of the aforementioned lowest rung of the human ladder in Europe, those in the offices of the ACLU and the Democratic Party fond of our late president. This is well understood. But what does the ascension of Barack Hussein Obama mean to them? More importantly, what will what it means to them mean for us? 
An extremely liberal co-worker of mine — he’s in the past said that the “rich” should be killed, for instance — asked me a serious question by which he felt he could gauge whether or not I was a “real” American in his eyes during the rise of the age of Obama. He wondered whether I wish success for Barack Obama as our president. After a few seconds of reflection I had to honestly give a qualified “no” in answer to his query. Naturally this fellow went off about how it was unAmerican to wish the president to fail and how it would damage the country. But, after he briefly calmed down, and brief calm is usually all we can expect from him, I gave him a fuller explanation.