good or bad?

First, a disclaimer. Joe Farah, the guy who is the editor of WorldNetDaily, is somebody I know. We are not best pals, since he is *exceedingly* conservative, but I have defended his publication and tell my students to read it because it has some of the best ultra-right wing conservative columnists writing for it. If you wanna know what they think in the Red States, you can find excellent examples of it on WND.

That having been said, I understand why Joe wants Hamas shut down. He is a Lebanese Christian and feels that Muslim extremists ruined his country. And as an evangelical, he also holds to the view that Israel must exist and that Jesus will return there. Okay fine, he is entitled to his opinion, but just as I want WND to have the right to speak its point of view, I agree that Hamas should speak its points too-- except here is my problem: Hamas has this tendency to call for the death of Jews, and for obvious reasons, that's not something I can support or encourage. While many of the folks who run WND want the Jews to convert to Christianity, they don't advocate violence against Jews or forcible conversion (I'm so relieved). SO I'm with Steph-- part of me understands why WND, with its well-known evangelical fervour, super-patriotism, and millenialist views, would see Hamas as antithetical to "American values", especially as they are defined under this president. I'd have an easier time defending Hamas if they were espousing religious views that I don't agree with but not saying Jews are deserving of death. I have had my share of debates with WND over how they frame us "liberals" and "secular humanists", but as I said, they aren't saying we should all die (yet). SO, perhaps Hamas should be monitored rather than shut down. It's a difficult decision either way.