Posted on 05/29/2011 12:04:13 PM PDT by UniqueViews
When President Obama announced his support for the establishment of a Palestinian state along the 1967 lines as the starting point for negotiations, he in effect adopted the PLO Phased Plan for the gradual destruction of Israel.
While Hamas adopted the position of destroying Israel in one step through constant armed struggle, the PLO, led by Fatah adopted in 1974 a new political method of achieving that goal through two steps. According to the plan, the first step is the establishment of a Palestinian state in the 1967 borders; the second step is the liberation of all of Palestine by destroying the Jewish state through armed struggle or through the "the right of return" of millions of Palestinians to Israel, thus demographically and democratically causing Israel to lose its Jewish majority and character.
Prime Minister Netanyahu came to Washington hoping to get Obama's help in derailing the upcoming vote in the UN in September recognizing a Palestinian state. But Obama's decision to publicly confront Israel again, with only few hours warning on the eve of Netanyahu's visit, further weakens and isolates Israel internationally, which in turn will help fast forward the vote at the UN General Assembly.
(Excerpt) Read more at ynetnews.com ...
His association with the Muslim Brotherhood can be added to the list, in my opinion. His campaign association with Hamas; e.g., call centers in Gaza in 2008??
Yes. Obama is owned by Arab Muslims and is doing their bidding. We must not let him get another 4 years.
I would quibble with that characterization, since in the United States, a person's religion isn't determined by law, but rather by what a person says he or she is.
The only downside to this is that an American is not only free to follow whatever faith he professes to practice or none at all, but is free to deceive others as to what his faith is. Most often, deceiving others about one's faith is harmless to the society as a whole. But when the electorate is choosing among political candidates, especially the President of the United States, it has a right to know the truth about about all candidates' religious preferences, because of the possible impact that might have on the candidate's policy positions.
Obama said and still says he's a Christian. Since he has lied about so many other aspects of his personal life, many doubt him on that. But still, out of respect for the American tradition of religious freedom, we have to accept him at his word - but only in so far as that issue is concerned.
It's still be possible for one to be a Christian yet have an unusual affinity for the Muslim world.
I agree to disagree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.