Gaffney: Obama 'Empowering And Emboldening' Enemies With His 'Deep Sympathy' For Islam

Today, Newsmax host J.D. Hayworth hosted a stimulating discussion about the so-called Islamic State with the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney and Jack Burkman, a lobbyist and pundit who famously called for a “relentless” boycott of any NFL team that drafted openly gay player Michael Sam.

Burkman asked Gaffney “whether Obama just has no comprehension of foreign policy” or if “at a more sinister level, does he not see himself as representing the United States?”

“I think the president is of the view that Islam, not radical Islam, but the authoritative version of Islam is in fact a legitimate and desirable and, well, laudable enterprise,” Gaffney responded. “And there are many Muslims who would meet all of those tests. Unfortunately they don’t include, to my way of thinking, the authorities of Islam or those who are following their tenets.”

“The folks who believe in the traditions and institutions of Islam are, I’m afraid, part of the problem,” he continued. “To the extent the president is admiring of them and enabling of them, I think isn’t just a problem of not understanding what’s afoot here. I think it’s a deep sympathy for it. And it translates into an empowering and emboldening of the jihadists who are our mortal enemies.”

Matt Barber Thinks Obama's 'Involvement' In Israel's Election Is An Impeachable Offense

In 2012, Jeremy Bird served as the national field director for President Obama's re-election campaign, after which he co-founded a political consulting firm called 270 Strategies. Recently, Bird and his firm were hired by a nascent political campaign in Israel created to try to defeat the ruling Likud Party in the upcoming elections.

Since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a Likud Party candidate, a defeat for the party would also be a defeat for Netanyahu, and that possibility is an outrage to Matt Barber, who is now logically demanding that President Obama be impeached.

As Barber and Mat Staver explained on today's "Faith and Freedom" radio broadcast, because an organization called OneVoice, which has been involved in the effort to replace the Israeli government, received an unrelated grant from the U.S. State Department last year, that means that American tax dollars are now being used to rig the election in Israel.

To make matters even worse in the eyes of Barber and Staver, someone who worked on President Obama's campaign but is now an independent political consultant is also working on that same effort, which can only mean that President Obama is personally leading the effort to defeat Netanyahu and therefore must be impeached.

"What a slap in the face and it shows our allies across the country that the United States cannot be trusted," Barber fumed, claiming that Obama personally sent his "A-Team propagandist hit squad" into Israel to try to defeat Netanyahu.

"It's unconscionable that he would do this. It's unethical and this president needs to be investigated by the United States Senate," Barber continued. "This president just continues to do one impeachable thing after another":

Right Wing Round-Up - 2/6/15

Right Wing Bonus Tracks - 2/6/15

  • Glenn Beck says that the Tea Party needs to change its name because the movement has become too "maligned." Funny, on Monday, Beck said that trying to change the name of something unpopular was a despicable progressive tactic: "That is the progressive answer. That’s what Progressives do for everything. Change the name."
  • Speaking of Beck, a poll of his audience found that they want Sen. Ted Cruz to be the GOP presidential nominee in 2016. Ben Carson came in third and Allen West was in fourth, so that gives you some sense of how reasonable they are.
  • Rick Santorum says that Christians should welcome persecution:"[T]hey will hate you and persecute you because you stand for Him and what He taught. And that’s a great blessing, not something to be avoided but something to be embraced."
  • Laurie Higgins is not happy about the new "Fifty Shades of Grey" movie.
  • Neither is David Kyle Foster: "BDSM, anal intercourse (sodomy) or anything else that damages the body is a gross defilement of the marriage bed and God's intent. Any proctologist or urologist will tell you that anal intercourse always causes damage to the body of the recipient. It goes against the natural design of the body and is a breeding ground for disease ... Married couples who desire to be defiled in this way (whether by inflicting or in yielding to such mistreatment) need to be healed from an interior self-hatred, condemnation and probably a few other things. They need to seek inner healing and possibly even deliverance ministry. They need to repent of and renounce such activities and to seek God to expose the roots of such unholy desire."

Gary Cass: Avoid Abortion Rape Exceptions By Executing Rapists

Gary Cass, president of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, has a solution for the anti-choice movement’s internal conflicts about including rape exceptions in abortion bans: just execute rapists like in biblical times.

Cass invited Operation Rescue’s Troy Newman to his “Defending a Christian Worldview” webcast last month, shortly after House Republicans cancelled a vote on a 20-week abortion ban because of a dispute over the wording of the bill’s rape exception. Newman lamented that in cases like that, the pro-choice movement was using the issues of exceptions for rape, incest and the health of a pregnant woman “to create a wedge between what would normally be a tight coalition of people that believe the same thing.”

Cass countered that the real issue with rape exceptions is that “we’ve abandoned a Christian worldview as it relates to law.”

“In biblical times, rape was a capital offense,” he said. “So because we don’t treat rape the way God would have us to treat rape, now we have a woman, many women who are suffering because we aren’t doing our job as men protecting our wives and our daughters with the right kinds of law and right kind of enforcement, putting them in a very bad situation.”

He added that “as wrong as the act of rape is,” abortion is an equal or greater “moral catastrophe.”

“It is so devastating that, as tragic as the rape was, to add then the guilt of infanticide and abortion and murder to it is not going to be helpful.”

Later in the program, Cass declared that aborted fetuses have been executed without due process and are only “guilty of being found to be inconvenient by people who want to have sex without consequences.”

“The sexual revolution is drenched in the blood of innocent children and that blood cries out for justice,” he said.

Ted Nugent: Sarah Palin The 'Perfect Example' Of Founding Fathers' Vision

In an interview last month with Lars Larson, National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent blamed President Obama’s election on people who forgot that “Martin Luther King died so that we would someday judge by content of character instead of color of skin.” It seems that Americans missed out on voting for a true American hero: Sarah Palin.

“She is my hero,” Nugent said of the former half-term Alaska governor. “Sarah Palin is the perfect example of what our Founding Fathers envisioned for an experiment in self-government.”

Nugent was especially impressed by Palin’s decision to resign midway through her first term as governor: “She quit because the left hate machine was so overwhelming her with frivolous litigation that she did the most courageous thing in the world and she handed her governor duties to the lieutenant governor while she was taking on this hate onslaught of the left so that Alaska would be properly served by someone who could pay attention to the responsibilities of the office of government while she was fighting off the leftist mongrels. She’s my hero.”

After plugging Palin’s new TV show, Nugent gushed that she is “an amazing American and she brings forth so much good that the general media would not bring forth, she’s a reminder that the heart and soul of working-hard, playing-hard, being-the-best-that-you-can-be America is alive and well.”

Coulter: College Loans Are Subsidy For Teaching Kids To Hate Republicans And White People

Ann Coulter is not a fan of President Obama’s plan to provide tuition-free community college, or of federal college loans in general. Coulter told Florida radio host Joyce Kaufman on Monday that such programs are just a “scam” to “subsidize the most left-wing industry in America, that spends its days indoctrinating kids to hate Republicans.”

“And to hate white people,” Kaufman added. “The whole white privilege thing that’s going on there is killing me.”

“Yeah, and they’re never called to account for it,” Coulter agreed.

In New Video, PFAW Calls Out RNC For Partnering With The American Family Association

People For the American Way released a new video today calling out the Republican National Committee for accepting an all-expenses-paid trip to Israel for several dozen of its members from the American Family Association, an organization with a long record of promoting bigotry against LGBT people and non-Christians.

The trip is being organized by David Lane, an influential Christian nationalist strategist.

Shortly before the RNC trip began, the AFA stripped its spokesman Bryan Fischer of his official title at the organization but retained him as a host on its radio network.

PFAW previously called on the RNC to cancel the trip, but it has moved forward.

WND Pundit 'Exposes' The Obamacare-ISIS Plot

Right-wing activist Bradlee Dean is pretty sure that United States intelligence services started Al Qaeda and even trained ISIS fighters, a theory that he lays out in WorldNetDaily today.

Demanding to know why President Obama is “aiding and abetting America’s enemies,” Dean claims that Obamacare is really just a sly way for the president to distract Americans from the growth of ISIS and his surreptitious work to assist terrorist groups like ISIS, take away Americans’ guns and advance the New World Order.

Dean approvingly cites Pierre-Henri Bunel, a 9/11 truther, to make his point.

I realize that these Islamists are making hundreds of millions through their takeover of Iraqi oil operations, cleaned out Iraqi banks in territories they have control of and have even been funded and trained by the U.S. government. However, I have to ask why the surrounding governments are not squashing these barbaric devils. Furthermore, why is our own government providing the means to empower them while asking us, those they serve, to relinquish our rights to more government control?

ISIS seems to be taking it to a new level of barbarism, due to the fact that beheading men, women and children seems to have very little effect on the American people. These Islamic devils seem to have forgotten that it is the American people who have allowed their own government to sanction the beheading and dismemberment of over 58 million of its own babies in the womb. For this reason, they must come up with a more barbaric method of getting their enemies to submit to their regime (Proverbs 6:16).

So, in changing their tactics, ISIS decides to set a man on fire and then puts the barbaric crime in front of the faces of the world to see.

Why is the response from the president to push Obamacare on the people in this country?

Remember, the message from ISIS to you is “Submit or else.” In fact, Islam means “submission.” So contrary to the claims of Barack Hussein Obama and the other deceivers in Washington, ISIS is, in fact, Islamic to the core.

Who is ISIS? Who is al-Qaida? Who are America’s enemies? Who is creating all of this chaos? Who does this work for?

Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, who mysteriously died of a heart attack, told the House of Commons that al-Qaida is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.

In addition, former French military intelligence agent Pierre-Henry Bunel wrote in the April/June 2004 edition of World Affairs:

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called al-Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the U.S., and the lobbyists for the U.S. war on terrorism are only interested in making money.”

Why are world leaders calling for a “New World Order” at the same time?

Why was Barack Hussein Obama calling for a “New World Order” in Europe before becoming America’s president, claiming that there was “no other way”?

Why is he now meeting with designated Muslim terror groups in the White House? Why is he allied with America’s sworn enemies by appointing them to key positions in governmental positions? Why is he aiding and abetting America’s enemies? Why is he trying to disarm the American people through means of terror? Why is he releasing thousands of illegal felons on the streets of America? Why has he transgressed the U.S. Constitution, lied to the American people, wasted taxpayer money and been involved in cronyism in 900 documented incidents?

Alan Keyes: Gay Marriage Will Lead To The 'Dissolution Of The United States'

Alan Keyes, the Religious Right icon who thinks that marriage equality will lead to Nazi-style tyranny and “the murder of the masses,” took to WorldNetDaily today with a lengthy column on the dangers of gay marriage. In fact, the column is so long that readers are redirected to Keyes’ personal website to read the second half of it.

According to Keyes, a Supreme Court decision in favor of marriage equality “could very well be as momentous as the Dred Scott decision in the 19th century, and just as fraught with potentially fatal implications for the future Liberty and Union of the people of the United States.”

After arguing that same-sex marriages are unconstitutional because such relationships will not lead to procreation and therefore contribute nothing to society, Keyes writes that there is no right to marry. In fact, same-sex marriage, according to Keyes, represents a “humanly fabricated right” that undermines “the unalienable right essential for the natural conception and perpetuation of humanity itself.”

All in all, Keyes concludes that a pro-gay-rights ruling from the Supreme Court will be a reason for a new revolution and civil war.

“This would be an attack on the people of the United States more grievous than that which led the first generation of Americans to declare their independence from Great Britain,” he writes. “If even a significant minority of Americans continue in their attachment to the unalienable right of liberty (as opposed to the licentious freedom that has, in some quarters usurped that name) this attack is likely to produce the separation and dissolution of the United States, for like humanity itself the United States is inconceivable apart from respect for God-endowed unalienable right.”

Over the past several years, I’ve written quite a few articles on the subject of the so-called “right” asserted in respect of “gay marriage. So it is only after much thought that I venture to say that the Supreme Court’s decisions could very well be as momentous as the Dred Scott decision in the 19th century, and just as fraught with potentially fatal implications for the future Liberty and Union of the people of the United States. Many Americans feel that this is so. But when it comes to constitutional law, our feelings cannot be the crux of the matter. Rather we must rely, as the young Abraham Lincoln once said, on “Reason, cold, calculating, unimpassioned reason.”



This observation is not only directly relevant to any Constitutional judgment, it is, by the plain language of the Constitution itself, unmistakably conclusive. For the 9th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution plainly states that “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This language may or may not apply to certain rights under human law (like, for example, the “right” to own slaves in Virginia at the time the Constitution was adopted) but it certainly applies to any and all “unalienable” rights, since they are an aspect of natural law without which the “human” in “human law” would have no distinctive significance.

The way in which this bears upon the issue of so-called “homosexual marriage” is plainly obvious. Whatever else it may or may not be, homosexuality is not an activity inseparable from the concept of humanity itself. On the other hand, marriage between a man and a woman (especially in the true and natural sense of the union of their identities in the child conceived by their commingled information) is not only necessary for the existence of particular human individuals, it is also and especially necessary for preserving the existence of humanity as such.

In this respect, marriage is not a matter of freedom, but of obligation. It goes beyond the tie between particular men and women to encompass the tie between the existence of humanity as a whole and the activity of each and every human being actually capable of procreation. This intersection of the particular and general good is precisely the sphere that calls for the sovereign to exercise the power of civil government. By nature individuals are inclined instinctively to care for themselves and their loved ones. But to care for the general good of all is one of the defining elements of sovereignty. True justice does so with proper regard for each individual’s God endowed responsibility and capacity for right action, but never acts without regard for the common good that each and all are obliged to respect and serve.

This is the main reason the civil institution of marriage exists in the first place. These days people pretend that serving the good of the whole (.e.g, environmental stewardship) and respecting the good of each individual is an either/or proposition. But as endowed by the Creator, the marriage right is the paradigmatic example of just action that serves the whole while care for each individual as a distinctive and particular whole.

But in respect of the premise of unalienable rights, the Constitution makes it plain that this mutual service to humanity takes precedence over subsequent determinations of right in human law.

Whatever this means for the practice of homosexuality without reference to marriage, it certainly means that no humanly fabricated right can be allowed to deny or disparage the unalienable right essential for the natural conception and perpetuation of humanity itself. Such denigration of antecedent unalienable right would not only be unconstitutional, it would explicitly contravene the aim (to secure unalienable rights) for which all governments are instituted in the first place.

This would be an attack on the people of the United States more grievous than that which led the first generation of Americans to declare their independence from Great Britain. If even a significant minority of Americans continue in their attachment to the unalienable right of liberty (as opposed to the licentious freedom that has, in some quarters usurped that name) this attack is likely to produce the separation and dissolution of the United States, for like humanity itself the United States is inconceivable apart from respect for God-endowed unalienable right.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious