By Ted Belman
See the Very Controversial Video Below
March 14, 2008
My post Obama will win the nomination but lose the election got a lot of attention and caused quite a stir. It informed about his views on Israel, his church and its connection to SABEEL and Farrakhan, his pastor, his statements in his book and his association with the Palestinian cause and much more.

I got many emails accusing me of conducting a smear campaign, making arguments that were “nonsense” or “bullshit” and so on. Some attempted to convince me he was no different on Israel than the other candidates and was really a good guy.

Today, a new video of Pastor Wright delivering a sermon hit YouTube here: 

In it he said “Barak knows what it means to be a poor, black man in a country and culture controlled by rich white men”. He went on to draw a parallel with Jesus who was a “black man” in a country controlled by white men (Romans). And I thought Jesus was a white Jew.

This sermon, and all the others that we read about, preach the same message. It is enshrined in the mission statement of Trinity United Church of Christ which Wright heads and to which Obama belongs. The mission statement includes the following

There is no denying, however, that a strand of radical black political theology influences Trinity . James Cone, the pioneer of black liberation theology, is a much-admired figure at Trinity. Cone told me that when he’s asked where his theology is institutionally embodied, he always mentions Trinity. Cone’s groundbreaking 1969 book Black Theology and Black Power announced: “The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people. . . . All white men are responsible for white oppression. . . . Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil.’. . . Any advice from whites to blacks on how to deal with white oppression is automatically under suspicion as a clever device to further enslavement.”

ABC NEWS carried the story under the title, Obama’s Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11

WSJ just published a new article by Ron Kessler entitled Obama and the Minister. He draws the same conclusions I do.

It is too late for Obama to disavow such preachings. After all he chose this church twenty years ago and remained there ever since imbibing on the sermons. During this time he wrote two books which provide ample evidence that he shares such views. We set out a number of quotes in Obama: Why are the MSM and his opponents not on to it

“In Indonesia, I had spent two years at a Muslim school” “I studied the Koran..”

“The emotion between the races could never be pure….. the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart.”

“I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites”

This is a church that honoured Louis Farrakhan.

You can decide whether that makes Obama a racist or at least prejudiced. America needs a president of all the people, one who is American first and colour blind. Wright in his sermon said “Obama doesn’t fit the mold”. I agree.

What’s more, Obama’s Church is Connected to Sabeel and Naim Ateek

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is troubled by the United Church of Christ’s continuing partnership with the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, a radicalized Palestinian Christian group whose leaders have openly questioned Israel’s right to exist.

Beyond that, Ralph Nader, who hates Israel, said the Obama was always pro-Palestinian. He raised money for Palestinian causes and was friends with Edward Said.

So under no stretch could I believe that Obama is pro-Israel. At best he advocates “an even handed approach” which, as we know, is a euphemism for favouring the Palestinians.

It is a safe bet that Obama thinks that the Israel lobby is too strong as set out in The Israel Lobby. His crowd generally does. He didn’t hire Samantha Power, who embraces such view, for nothing. In essence the book argues that America should shake itself lose from the lobby’s influence and act in America’s interests rather than Israel’s. It ignores the reality that America supports Israel, to the extent that it does, because it is in America’s interest to do so or because the US and Israel are allies or have shared values.

The Left, of which Power and Obama are part, wants to further abandon Israel so it makes the argument that “the Jews” are controlling the US to create a backlash.

An Obama presidency would also be a disaster for US foreign policy. He wants to remove US troops from Iraq within a year, though he is beginning to fudge on that. He wants to sit down with Ahmadinejad and settle differences. He even suggested invading Pakistan. Like others on the left he is soft on terror and terrorists.

No doubt people of like mind will vote for him. I wouldn’t. McCain recognizes the threats the US faces and is committed to dealing with them though I don’t like his respect for Baker who is a known enemy of the Jews.

At least McCain would be obligated to his base which is pro-Israel, whereas Obama’s base is anything but.

Now Obama’s mantra is “Change”. I shudder to think of what change he has in mind.

His financial dealings and support is now coming to light which may also have a negative effect.

It is for all these reasons, that I don’t believe that Middle America will vote for him. It is also why I wouldn’t vote for him.
SOURCE: Israpundit