Mom4Truth

One can really tell that the International Herald Tribune is the sister publication of the New York Times. Like the New York Times, the IHT never saw a liberal it didn’t love or a conservative it didn’t hate – or a fact its editors couldn’t spin.

The Times generally uses the IHT as its international hit man, reserving its own pages to advance the policies of the Democrat Party.

The IHT ran a story entitled “Is Global Rebranding What Israel Needs?” The piece opened by recognizing Israel as the world’s pariah state:

Its sports teams have met hostility and violent protests in Sweden, Spain and Turkey. Mauritania has closed the Israeli Embassy. Relations with Turkey, an important Muslim ally, have suffered severely. A group of top international judges and human rights investigators recently called for an investigation into Israel’s actions in Gaza. “Israel Apartheid Week” drew participants in 54 cities around the world this month, twice the number of last year, according to its organizers. And even in the American Jewish community, albeit in its liberal wing, there is a chill.

Having established that everybody hates Israel (even liberal Jews), the columnist, Ethan Bronner, went on to build his case that Israel deserves it:

Of course, for Israel’s critics, including those who firmly support the existence of a Jewish state, the problem is not one of image but of policy. They say that four decades of occupation, the settling of half a million Israeli Jews on land captured in 1967, the economic strangling of Gaza for the past few years and the society’s growing indifference toward a Palestinian state are all reasons Israel has lost favor abroad, and that no amount of image buffing will change that.

Does anybody remember how Israel ended up “occupying” the land it “captured” in 1967? Israel captured it after beating back the combined forces of the Arab world that had launched a war of annihilation against Israel. And this wasn’t the first pan-Arab war aimed at annihilating the Jews – it was the third.

Israel fought them off in 1948. And again in 1956. And then again in 1967. And once again in 1973. This strip of land, so coveted by the Arab world, amounts to less than one-sixth of one percent of the Muslim Middle East.

While we’re on the subject, does anybody remember what it was that spurred the Jews to return to their ancestral homeland in the first place? It was the Holocaust.

The Holocaust wasn’t personally perpetrated by Adolf Hitler. Hitler never killed a single Jew. It was perpetrated by the Germans – aided by Frenchmen, Italians, Romanians, Ukrainians, Arabs, et al, while the Allies did their best not to notice.

The Palestinian State that the rest of the world insists that Israel owes the Palestinians could have been theirs in 1947. They turned it down in favor of a war of annihilation.

Does anybody recall exactly why Israel went back into Gaza? It was because Palestinian terrorists fired more than six thousand rockets into Israeli cities and towns.

The reason that Israel is a pariah nation has absolutely nothing to do with Israeli policies. Israel was a pariah nation before it even had time to formulate national policies. As already noted, long before there was an Israel, the world tried to exterminate the Jews.

After there was an Israel, the Arabs tried to exterminate the Jews. It isn’t the Israeli state – it is the Jews that the world finds so offensive. But what has really caused this race of people to be so hated? This kind of racial hatred is unprecedented in history.

The true reason is this: Israel stands, as God intended, a sign to the nations. Israel was created as a visible proof of the true God’s existence.

Israel’s God of Love and mankind’s redemption stands in sharp contrast to the gods of other religions. Islam’s God is one of war and conquest. Conversion to it is at the point of sword. Its goal is to force the world into submission.

As the Bible declares, Israel was created to receive, write down and preserve God’s Word. It was created to be the race through whom the Savior of the World would be born. Even their failures and disciplines were predicted in order that it would be a proof of the truth of God’s Word. Their ultimate restoration to the land promised their forefathers was predicted in detail. These prophecies have been fulfilled before the eyes of our era.

All of this is lost on the liberal media, just as it apparently has been on the liberal Obama administration. The World Tribune reported this week that Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi cut short his visit to Washington after getting an “extraordinarily cool” reception from the new U.S. administration.

General Ashkenazi reportedly attempted to arrange meetings with President Obama, Vice President Biden and intelligence czars Bob Gates, Dennis Blair or Michael Mullen. None of them would see him. He had valuable intelligence information about Iran to share with them.

The Tribune quoted an unnamed diplomat who told them, “The administration is sending a very clear message to Israel, and this is we want to talk about Palestine and not Iran.”

When an Iranian-made atomic bomb hits the U.S., they may wish they had never said this.

And Israel Today is reporting that the Obama administration is not just cool to Israel. It alleges that President Obama “is about to break America’s long ties of friendship with Israel, and maybe even take steps toward the dissolution of the Jewish state.”

If true, America is in even more serious trouble than even the most pessimistic assessment can reflect. If America betrays Israel, then America is rejecting the Word of Israel’s God.

The Bible warns, “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:31) Fearful? That is an understatement of Biblical proportions.

I used to quote a wise saying: “History teaches us that man learns nothing from history.” That doesn’t really apply today. This generation doesn’t even know history – and the liberal media reports the news counting on that.

Another great post by Hal Lindsey…

The Democrat reaction to talk-show host Rush Limbaugh’s comment that he hopes President Obama “fails” reminds me of the classic line from the movie “Casablanca.”

As Inspector Renault pockets his winnings from the gambling tables, he orders “Rick’s Place” closed. When Humphrey Bogart’s character, Rick, protests, Renault (Claude Raines) exclaims loudly, “I’m shocked, shocked, to find that gambling is going on in here.”

The Democrats are shocked, shocked to find that Rush Limbaugh doesn’t want the socialist agenda of the most liberal president in American history to succeed. Shocked, I say!

It isn’t that Rush Limbaugh’s comments need defending – they don’t. America is not a monarchy or a dictatorship. We still have freedom of speech – at least, for the time being. What American president in our history has been above criticism?

America is a constitutional republic, not a socialist democracy. Obama has made no secret of his desire to advance socialist democratic principles. So he and his cohorts should expect vigorous objections from those who know and believe in the U.S. Constitution.

I don’t want to see Obama succeed in turning America into a socialist worker’s paradise, either. Socialism has been proven wrong in every place it has been tried.

The president is not the State. Wanting Obama to fail is not the same as wanting America to fail. Indeed, from Rush Limbaugh’s perspective, it is the equivalent of wanting America to succeed.

The outrage being ginned up by the Democrats is therefore phony on its face. It would be ridiculous to the point of humorous if it weren’t so revealing.

First off, it reveals the degree to which many Americans still regard President Obama as “The One.” They are evidently incapable of separating what is good for Barack Obama from what is good for America.

It is this group that scares me the most. Barack Obama is not America. He is America’s current and temporary leader.

The next president could reverse any or all of Obama’s policies as quickly as Obama reversed those of President Bush, which brings us to the second point about this phony outrage.

Entire factions of the Democrat Party not only announced their desire to see President Bush fail, but proclaimed their intention to actively work toward the failure of the Bush presidency.

There was no Bush policy too important to the country to be permitted to succeed, and no price too high to pay if it ensured his failure.

Even though young Americans were spilling their blood on foreign soil to win in Iraq, the phonies at home were arguing for their failure, so long as it meant President Bush’s failure.

The Democrats were so effective in convincing the public that it was possible to support the troops while hoping that they lose that they made losing the war part of their campaign strategy. As late as last year, Democrat James Clyburn admitted his fear that a favorable report from Gen. Petraeus about the Iraq war “could be a real problem for democrats.”

In August 2006, just before the mid-term elections that crowned Nancy Pelosi America’s first queen, a Fox News Opinion Dynamics Poll asked the question: Would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not?

Ninety percent of Republicans wanted him to succeed. Sixty-three percent of Independents wanted him to succeed. Fifty-one percent of Democrats said they did not. That’s a majority. A slim one, but a majority is a majority.

If wanting a presidential agenda to “fail” because you disagree with it is somehow un-American or disloyal, doesn’t that make the 51 percent of Democrats in this poll guilty also?

The most frightening thing about this whole Limbaugh smear campaign is how seriously many Americans are taking it. It shows that they must think Barack Obama is America. Seig Hiel!