In terms of teachings I think the term is meaningless because Judaism is based on following the law where as Christianity believes in salvation through Christ.

In terms of historical relationship the word is an oxymoron for obvious reasons.

When conservative commentators use the term they are reall talking about modernity in opposition to islam.

Its all fake piety among insecure american protestants. You’ll never hear an Orthodox Rabbi use the term.

“British hostility toward Israel and the Jews should be set in the context of this wider assault on the Christian values of its society. And behind these Christian values are Jewish values. It is the Jewish moral codes constraining human appetite in the blueprint for the values of Western civilization that are now under attack in the culture wars. It is therefore no coincidence that the people who gave the West its moral codes now find themselves at the very heart of the firestorm of hatred now engulfing Britain and Europe.”

So according to her people attack israel because they are anti-christianity?

And what exactly are these principles of Judaism that the west is built on?

I don’t understand why she’s allowed on mainstream programming when she’s blatantly an advocate of jewish uniqueness.

The Ikhwan have similar “liberation” (anti-colonial) roots but in a different setting: Egypt. It was Qutb who took the movement into the direction it is now most commonly associated with.

But all this need not concern Phillips et al. because ‘they all look alike’.

Like the late prof at Columbia…

I’m not sure why the Muslim Brotherhood is entering into alliances with communists: when conservatives of the Salisbury Review ilk might prove better allies.

Like the late prof at Columbia…

Well, you’re the second person to comment - somebody assumed a previous commentator was called Safiyyah Said. I’ve fixed it.