Video of the Day: Franklin Graham, Obama Scoffed at Jesus

Video of the Day: Franklin Graham, Obama Scoffed at
Jesus

January 30th, 2011

Not everyone appreciated Barack Obama’s Tuscon shooting
memorial. The Rev. Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham and founder of Samaritan’s Purse, told the Christian
students of John Brown University: “There was no call for God to put His loving
arms around those who were hurting. Why did they leave him out? They scoff at
the name of Jesus Christ.” He added, “The spirit of anti-Christ is everywhere.”
Click here to see the whole
sermon
.

Obama and the Ripple Effect

Leo
Rennert

 

One of President Obama’s weaknesses is that, in foreign
policy, he is not a clever chess player, anticipating moves and consequences
several steps down the line.

This failure to visualize all likely ripple effects of his own words and
actions is again evident in his unsteady reactions to the turmoil in Egypt.
Having failed to anticipate massive protests in the Arab world, Obama first kept
his counsel, then tip-toed toward increasingly harsh criticism of Egyptian
President Mubarak.
With Secretary of State Clinton as his main bullhorn, the President now is
hectoring Mubarak to all but step down.  Through his press spokesman, Obama
threatened to cut off U.S. aid to Mubarak and brushed aside his attempts to
steady his regime with appointment of new faces in top positions.  In many ways,
Obama is squeezing Mubarak to the point of leaving him with no option but to
capitulate to the protesting crowds — with the Muslim Brotherhood only too
happy to pick up the pieces.
However, in toughening his anti-Mubarak stance, Obama doesn’t seem to
realize that he is putting himself into the camp or pro-Iranian radical forces
in the Middle East, including Hamas and Hezb’allah, while parting company with
Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas —  two erstwhile
members of the pro-U.S. camp.
Obama’s pummeling of Mubarak nicely fits the agenda of the Hamas regime in
Gaza, which makes no secret that, in the current Mideast state of play, it is in
full solidarity with anti-Mubarak crowds in Egypt.  By the same token, Obama’s
public flogging of Mubarak represents a 180-degree turn away from Abbas, who
sides publicly with Murbarak. The Palestinians are split right down the middle.
No big surprise.  Except that Obama has aligned himself with Hamas and against
Abbas. That is bound to have some consequences for U.S. peace-mediation efforts
down the line, to say the least.
In the meantime, we are left with a head-shaking picture of Obama suddenly
finding himself in the Iranian/Hezb’allah/Hamas orbit, while leaving in the
lurch his own friend, ally and presumed “moderate” peace partner, Mahmoud Abbas,
who’s working tirelessly to stifle anti-Mubarak demonstrations in the West
Bank.
It’s getting curiouser and curiouser about where this leaves George
Mitchell, Obama’s U.S. envoy and peace-negotiator in chief.
When it comes to U.S. policy vis a vis Egypt, especially during this highly
fluid period, it can be argued that Mubarak doesn’t deserve much sympathy after
29 years of iron rule.  But an American president, when wading into such
turbulent and unpredictable waters, ought to know at least all the ramifications
of his own strategy — something Obama doesn’t seem to have thought
through.
Watching Obama, Hamas must be licking its chops, while the Saudis and Abbas
must be wondering how constant, reliable and predictable a Mideast player the
U.S. really is with Obama in the White House.

 

Barack Obama, the Etch-A-Sketch President

Barack Obama, the Etch-A-Sketch President

Nick
Chagouris

 

This past week it was Ronald Reagan.  This could be seen
coming from a mile away.  It really doesn’t take a Nostradamus to predict these
things in our president’s behaviors. It  was obvious after watching Obama’s
preview video
of his BHO-SOTU address where he posted a ‘trailer’
on his web site.  And even the hardest of hearing heard about Obama reading
Reagan on his Christmas vacation flight to Hawai’i.  No one should be surprised,
despite the juxtaposition.

Everyone from the HuffPo to Breitbart found
this topic irresistible.  But of all the many Reagan/Obama media mentions,
Mark Rudd’s warning
words
, “feint right,
turn left,”
are the most ominous, and to this writer’s mind,
accurate.

And so last week, we witnessed a feeding frenzy from the
media and the blogosphere, discussing the change in Mr. Obama’s
attitude and rhetoric. Some made for juicy, thought provoking, reading. Others
were spin. The Big Three Alphabet Media agreed, Obama was “Reaganesque”.
The problem for Mr. Obama is that we are now on to his character, if not yet his
legal identity.  Chameleonesque is a better description for this
president. Therefore, this Reagan thing, won’t work for him.

Do you
wonder which historical, great leader, Obama and his handlers might choose next
for him to impersonate?

Let us reflect upon some of the absurd, failed,
comparisons from the lost and wandering left-bent hopefuls in search of their
Champion, their voice, and their identity, over the first two years of this
unprecedented presidency:

  • During his campaign, (the pre-election one) Obama was to become the
    next John F. Kennedy
    . In the early afterglow days of the Democrats’ victory,
    People, Time, and Newsweek Magazines, did their best to project that Jack
    & Jackie Camelot fantasy
    on to the Barry and Michelle blank screen
    to entice (propagandize) the population (sheep) to fall in
    love with this most exceptionally beautiful, and brilliant, ruling couple.
    (Must have been Jackie’s and Michelle’s remarkably similar tastes in clothing?)
  • He has been the incarnation of Abe Lincoln  (They are both tall and
    lanky.)
  • He has been called “Jeffersonian”.
    (Aside from sharing the same brand of Teleprompter, we’re at a loss.)
  • Michelle
    Obama compared to Marie Antoinette.
    Like Marie, Michelle mysteriously gave
    up her license to practice law, or was disbarred. (same with hubby)
  • Obama, the next Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Probably because of the
    Beer Summit, combined with the work Obama’s DOJ has done, absolving the
    New Black Panther
    Party of that bogus voter intimidation case
    .)
  • Gandhi: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize for his excellence in reading other
    people’s utopian words from a teleprompter. (One year later, we are in awe
    over the Global Peace this man has singlehandedly created, particularly in the
    Middle East.)
    (Obama
    Bonus Link
    )
  • Here,
    Obama is FDR
  • And of course, everyone’s favorite, Obama
    as Christ
    .
Why does the characterization of Obama’s persona, and therefore his purpose
and direction, as described by his adoring media advocates, change so
frequently?  This is truly unprecedented.  Has any former national leader been
likened to so many former Great figures in world history?  Will the list
continue to increase?  Why would anyone imagine the trend to end here? Why isn’t
the media asking why this president cannot seem stand upon his own
identity?
From Audacity of Hope, credited to author Barack Hussein Obama, he
prophetically writes:
“I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank
screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own
views. As such, I am bound to disappoint some, if not all, of them.”
Ah, the mystique. And quite a prophetic statement, Mr. Obama. Indeed you
have gone far beyond disappointment, but you are no longer “new enough.” In two
short years, this has gotten really old.
Many would love to see you etch a sketch of your best 1974
Richard Nixon
.
Nick Chagouris is a small business owner and the father of
three beloved children to whom he has bequeathed natural born citizenship status
under the U.S. Constitution.  He can be contacted at
mailto:nchagouris01@comcast.net

 

Obama’s 3 AM Moment

Obama’s 3 AM Moment

By Nancy
Morgan

 

One of the issues raised in the run-up to our last
presidential election was the question “Which candidate is best qualified to
handle a ‘3 AM moment’?” America now has a partial answer. It isn’t President
Obama.

Last Friday was Day 4 of the ongoing protests in Egypt, where tens of
thousands Egyptians took to the streets to demand the ouster of President Hosni
Mubarak. As the situation reached a flash point, with a mounting death toll and Egyptian
tanks in the streets of Cairo, President Obama maintained his silence. Well, not
quite. He did Twitter, by proxy.
Around noon Friday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs issued a 22 word statement on Twitter:
“Very concerned about violence in Egypt – government must respect the rights of
the Egyptian people & turn on social networking and internet.” The White
House also informed the media that Obama had received a 40 minute briefing on
the situation. Phew!
After the U.S. markets tanked Friday, a full 4 days after the beginning of
the Egyptian crisis, Obama finally addressed the nation. As usual, our president
first absolved himself of any blame, stating that if only Egypt has instituted
the reforms Obama had been suggesting for the last 2 years, the crisis could
have been averted. He then went on to make a bold statement about human rights,
“…and the US will stand up for them – everywhere.” Period.
By Saturday, the uprising in Egypt had spread to other countries, with waves of Arab protests in
Tunisia, Jordan and Yemen. Saturday night, Obama partied. “The Washington
A-List was
out in force Saturday night at the farewell party
for senior adviser David Axelrod, with a roster of guests featuring Cabinet
secretaries, big shot journos and Obama.”
On Sunday, with the protests turning into a conflagration, the only word
from the White House was that Hillary Clinton, our Secretary of State, was heading to Haiti to “mediate the political crisis.” That’s
right, Haiti.
Meanwhile, the only information available to Americans comes from talking
heads and the few journalists not hung-over from Saturday’s rollicking good time
at the White House. The only “official” information so far from the White House
was Joe Biden’s statement on Day 3 of the protests. Joe said that President
Hosni Mubarak should not step down. He then proceeded to downplay the protests
spreading across the Mid East as generally unconnected.
The world is left wondering what position America, the world’s former
superpower, will take. The only stance our administration has taken to date is a
generic plea for an end to the violence and the oft-repeated call for human
rights. Meanwhile, the world teeters on the brink as a global  crisis with
profound geopolitical implications for the U.S. continues to unfold.
Obama’s 3 am moment has come. And gone. Obama was noticeably AWOL. America
is now officially bereft of leadership, at least until the latest polls come
in.

Under Obama’s leadership, the US has voluntarily ceded its authority
as the world’s super power. After all, according to Obama, all countries and
cultures are equal. America’s voice should be but one of many. This is now
becoming a reality. Egypt continues to burn. And Obama parties and Twitters by
proxy. Welcome to the new world order.

Nancy
Morgan
is a columnist and news editor for
conservative news site
RightBias.comShe
lives in South Carolina.

 

Why We Should Fear the Moslem Brothers

Why We Should Fear the Moslem Brothers

By Karin
McQuillan

As we follow the unfolding story in Egypt, we are torn between hope and
fear, hope that democracy will gain a toehold, fear that the fundamentalist
Moslem Brothers could take control of Egypt.  Perhaps you have heard the Moslem
Brothers are the oldest and largest radical Islamic group, the grandfather of
Hezbollah, Hamas, and al-Qaeda.
What you haven’t been told is this:  the Moslem Brothers were a small,
unpopular group of anti-modern fanatics unable to attract members, until
they were adopted by Adolf Hitler
and the Third Reich beginning in the
1930s.  Under the tutelage of the Third Reich, the Brothers started the
modern jihadi movement
, complete with a genocidal
program against Jews
.  In the words of Matthias
Kuntzel
, “The significance of the Brotherhood to Islamism is comparable to
that of the Bolshevik Party to communism: It was and remains to this day the
ideological reference point and organizational core for all later Islamist
groups, including al-Qaeda and Hamas.”
What is equally ominous for Jews and Israel is that despite Mubarak’s
pragmatic co-existence with Israel for the last 30 years, every Egyptian leader
from Nasser,
through Sadat, to Mubarak, has enshrined Nazi
Jew-hatred in mainstream Egyptian culture
, out of both conviction and
political calculation.   Nasser, trained by Nazis as a youth, spread the
genocidal conspiracy theories of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, making it
a best seller throughout the Arab world.  On the Ramadan following 9/11, Mubarak
presided over a 30-week long TV series dramatizing
the Elders
and its genocidal message.
It is impossible to assess the danger posed by a takeover of Egypt today by
the Moslem Brothers without knowing that Nazism
launched the Brothers and is still at their core
. This response to modernity
and to Jews was not predetermined by Egyptian history or culture.  It was
Germany under Hitler that changed the course of history for Egypt and the Middle
East.
How do we know all this?  We know it because the Third Reich was a
meticulous keeper of records.  We have the memos, the
planning documents, the budgets, even photos and films of the Reich’s
spectacularly success campaign, implemented by the Moslem Brothers, to turn the
Middle East into a hotbed of virulent Jew-hatred.  We have the minutes, the
photo and the memo
of understanding
, when Hitler and the head of the Moslem Brothers in
Palestine, the Mufti of
Jerusalem
, shook hands on a plan for a Final Solution in the Middle
East.

We have the records of this meeting, in which Hitler and the head of the
Moslem Brothers in Palestine shook hands on a Final Solution for the Middle East
– years before the creation of Israel.
The
Moslem Brothers helped Hitler succeed
in genocide by slamming shut the door
to safety in Palestine. This was a key part of the success of the Final
Solution.  The anti-Jewish riots in Palestine that lead the British to cave to
Arab pressure and shut off Jewish escape are well known — how many of us know
they were funded by Hitler?  Winston Churchill protested the closing of
Palestine to the Jews in the House of Commons, arguing against the appeasement
of Nazi-funded Arab violence :
“So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and
multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry
could lift up the Jewish population. …We are now asked to submit, and this is
what rankles most with me, to an agitation which is fed with foreign money and
ceaselessly inflamed by Nazi and by Fascist propaganda.”
Who knows how many Jews would have escaped Hitler if the Jewish National
Home in Palestine had remained open to them?
We do know that without the work of Hitler’s allies, the Moslem Brothers,
many signs indicate that Israel would
have been a welcome neighbor
in the Middle East, but this path was closed
off by Moslem Brotherhood terrorism.  This is not ‘ancient history.’  According
to Prime Minister Netanyahu,
Yasser Arafat (born Mohammed Al-Husseini, in Cairo) adopted the name Yasser to
honor the Moslem Brothers’ terror chief, who threw moderate Palestinians into
pits of scorpions and snakes, eliminated the entire Nashashibi family of
Jerusalem because they welcomed Jews into Palestine, and drove forty thousand
Arabs into exile. The corpses of their victims would be left in the street for
days, a shoe stuck in their mouth, as a lesson for any Arab who believed in
tolerating a Jewish homeland.  Arafat as a member of the Moslem Brothers was
directly trained
by Nazi officers
who were invited
to Egypt after the fall of Hitler
in Europe.
Like the pro-democracy demonstrators out in the streets of Cairo this week,
immediately after World War I, Egypt was filled with hopes for developing a
modern, tolerant society. The Egyptian revolution of 1919 united the country’s
Moslems, Christians and Jews around the slogan, “Liberty, Equality,
Brotherhood.”  The constitution of 1923 was completely secular, establishing a
constitutional monarchy. It took Western democracy as a model and worked for the
equal status of women.  Jews were an accepted part of public life.  There were
Jewish members of parliament.  The Zionist movement was accepted with
“considerable sympathy,” because the government’s priority was to maintain good
relations between the three most important religious groups – Moslems, Jews and
Christian Copts.  Today the Jews are gone and the Copts are viciously
persecuted.  But in 1919, there was even an Egyptian section of the
International Zionist Organization.  Its founder, Leon Castro, a Jew, was also
the spokesman of the largest Egyptian political party, the Wafd, related to the
largest opposition party taking part in this week’s demonstrations.
When in March 1928, the charismatic preacher Hassan al-Banna founded the
Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt, it was a flop.  It promoted world domination by
Islam and the restoration of the Caliphate, focusing on a complete subjugation
of women.  In its first decade, the Moslem Brothers attracted only 800
members.
Then Hitler ascended to power.  A branch of the Nazi party was set up in
Cairo.  The Egyptian government was told that if they did not begin to persecute
their Jews, Germany would boycott Egyptian cotton. When the government caved and
began a press campaign and discriminatory measures against Jews, they were
rewarded by Germany becoming the second largest importer of Egyptian goods.  The
Egyptian public was impressed by the propaganda about Germany’s economic
progress and impressive Nazi mass marches.  The pro-fascist Young Egypt movement
was founded in 1933.  Abdel Nasser, later Egypt’s most famous leader, was a
member and remained loyal to Nazi ideology for the rest of his career. During
the war there was a popular street song in the Middle East, “Allah in
heaven, Hitler on earth
.”
In the 1930’s, the Third Reich poured men, money, weapons and propaganda
training into the Moslem Brotherhood.  It was the Reich that taught the
fundamentalists to focus their anger on the Jews instead of women. By war’s end,
thanks entirely to Hitler’s tutelage and direct support, the brotherhood had
swelled to a million members and Jew-hatred had become central
to mainstream Arab culture.  Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini listened daily
to the Nazi propaganda broadcast from Berlin by Moslem Brother Haj Amin
al-Husseini.  So did every Arab with a radio, throughout the war, as it was the
most popular programming in the Middle East.  Thanks to Hitler, the Moslem
Brothers enshrined antisemitism as the main organizing force of Middle East
politics for the next 80 years.
Egyptian society has lived in Hitler’s world of hate ever since.  According
to leading expert on the Third Reich’s fusion with Islamism in Egypt, Matthias
Kunztel
, “On this point (Jews), the entire Egyptian society has been
Islamized.  In Egypt the ostracism and demonization of Jews is not a matter of
debate, but a basic assumption of everyday discourse.  As if the
Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty had never been signed, Israel and Israelis are
today totally boycotted…be it lawyers, journalists, doctors or artists…all
Egyptian universities, sports associations, theatres and orchestras.”  “If there
is one theme in contemporary Egypt which unites Islamists, Liberals, Nasserites
and Marxists, it is the collective fantasy of the common enemy in the shape of
Israel and the Jews, which almost always correlates with the wish to destroy
Israel.”
In launching the Moslem Brother’s modern jihadi movement, Hitler did far
more than enshrine antisemitism in the Middle East.  As if some kind of divine
punishment, the creation of jihadism also sabotaged the move towards modernity
and representative government, ruining hopes for freedom and prosperity for the
Arab people.  The Brothers were the excuse for Mubarak’s 30 years of emergency
rule.  The Brothers were central to both PLO and Hamas, killing all hope for
peaceful coexistence and prosperity for the Palestinian people.  They had an
early role in founding the Ba’ath
Party
in Syria and Iraq, turning those countries over to kleptocratic
tyrants.  Moslem Brothers taught
Osama bin Laden
, and their philosophy is considered the foundational
doctrine of al-Qaeda.
Will history repeat itself?  Or will the Egyptian people take back their
country, throw off Hitler’s long shadow, and begin again on the hopeful path to
democracy and a decent life that they began at the beginning of the modern
era?

Obama and the Ripple Effect

Obama and the Ripple Effect

Leo
Rennert

 

One of President Obama’s weaknesses is that, in foreign
policy, he is not a clever chess player, anticipating moves and consequences
several steps down the line.

This failure to visualize all likely ripple effects of his own words and
actions is again evident in his unsteady reactions to the turmoil in Egypt.
Having failed to anticipate massive protests in the Arab world, Obama first kept
his counsel, then tip-toed toward increasingly harsh criticism of Egyptian
President Mubarak.
With Secretary of State Clinton as his main bullhorn, the President now is
hectoring Mubarak to all but step down.  Through his press spokesman, Obama
threatened to cut off U.S. aid to Mubarak and brushed aside his attempts to
steady his regime with appointment of new faces in top positions.  In many ways,
Obama is squeezing Mubarak to the point of leaving him with no option but to
capitulate to the protesting crowds — with the Muslim Brotherhood only too
happy to pick up the pieces.
However, in toughening his anti-Mubarak stance, Obama doesn’t seem to
realize that he is putting himself into the camp or pro-Iranian radical forces
in the Middle East, including Hamas and Hezb’allah, while parting company with
Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas —  two erstwhile
members of the pro-U.S. camp.
Obama’s pummeling of Mubarak nicely fits the agenda of the Hamas regime in
Gaza, which makes no secret that, in the current Mideast state of play, it is in
full solidarity with anti-Mubarak crowds in Egypt.  By the same token, Obama’s
public flogging of Mubarak represents a 180-degree turn away from Abbas, who
sides publicly with Murbarak. The Palestinians are split right down the middle.
No big surprise.  Except that Obama has aligned himself with Hamas and against
Abbas. That is bound to have some consequences for U.S. peace-mediation efforts
down the line, to say the least.
In the meantime, we are left with a head-shaking picture of Obama suddenly
finding himself in the Iranian/Hezb’allah/Hamas orbit, while leaving in the
lurch his own friend, ally and presumed “moderate” peace partner, Mahmoud Abbas,
who’s working tirelessly to stifle anti-Mubarak demonstrations in the West
Bank.
It’s getting curiouser and curiouser about where this leaves George
Mitchell, Obama’s U.S. envoy and peace-negotiator in chief.
When it comes to U.S. policy vis a vis Egypt, especially during this highly
fluid period, it can be argued that Mubarak doesn’t deserve much sympathy after
29 years of iron rule.  But an American president, when wading into such
turbulent and unpredictable waters, ought to know at least all the ramifications
of his own strategy — something Obama doesn’t seem to have thought
through.
Watching Obama, Hamas must be licking its chops, while the Saudis and Abbas
must be wondering how constant, reliable and predictable a Mideast player the
U.S. really is with Obama in the White House.

 

Obama Erases Christianity from the American Founding

Obama Erases Christianity from the American
Founding

January 28th, 2011

Ben Johnson, FloydReports.com

In the State of the Union Address, Obama said: “We are the first nation to be
founded for the sake of an idea – the idea that each of us deserves the chance
to shape our own destiny. That is why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have
risked everything to come here.” In Obama’s telling, this is the reason “why our
students don’t just memorize equations, but answer questions like ‘What do you
think of that idea? What would you change about the world? What do you want to
be when you grow up?’”
That is perhaps the most underwhelming description of freedom ever uttered by
a president.
It is rendered less impressive by the fact that later in his speech, Obama
called on more Americans to study equations and stop
telling him what they think of his ideas
. This lack of vision manifested
throughout the SOTU is one of the reasons so many Americans considered this
address drab and uninspiring.
The president’s presentation of America’s founding lacks its most important
cause: Christianity….
Read
more
.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers