Where WAS Barack Obama Born?
Breitbart wrote on May 17:
“Breitbart News has obtained a promotional booklet produced in 1991 by Barack Obama’s then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, which touts Obama as ‘born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.’… The biography does… fit a pattern in which Obama–or the people representing and supporting him–manipulate his public persona.
“David Maraniss’s forthcoming biography of Obama has reportedly confirmed, for example, that a girlfriend Obama described in Dreams from My Father was, in fact, an amalgam of several separate individuals… Obama has been known frequently to fictionalize aspects of his own life. During his 2008 campaign, for instance, Obama claimed that his dying mother had fought with insurance companies over coverage for her cancer treatments. That turned out to be untrue, but Obama has repeated the story–which even the Washington Post called ‘misleading’–in a campaign video for the 2012 election… Regardless of the reason for Obama’s odd biography, the Acton & Dystel booklet raises new questions as part of ongoing efforts to understand Barack Obama–who, despite four years in office remains a mystery to many Americans, thanks to the mainstream media.”
The Telegraph wrote on May 18:
“Whatever you think of Breitbart.com’s punishing vetting process, it has exposed just how little work the mainstream media did in investigating candidate Obama back in 2008… Obama’s old literary agent has issued a terse statement to the effect that the wording was all her fault and she never consulted her client. If that’s true, she’s a bad agent. A different agent, quoted by Breitbart.com, disagrees. He told the website ‘that while “almost nobody” wrote his or her own biography, the non-athletes in the booklet, whom “the agents deal[t] with on a daily basis,” were “probably” approached to approve the text as presented.’
“If we accept that Obama didn’t provide the biography, it would seem highly unlikely that he didn’t get a chance to vet it. Accepting that he didn’t do that either, it’s incredibly strange that the literary agent approached by Breitbart.com does not remember Obama calling the agency to register a complaint and make a correction. My mother spent a lot of her childhood in Grenada. If my literary agent told people I was born in the Caribbean, I’d at least pick up the phone to set the record straight.
“Look beyond the sordid details and the big story here is that this nugget wasn’t part of the wider discussion had back in 2008 about Obama’s background and credentials. And why not? The documents were easy to find – the one that showed that ‘born in Kenya’ was still being used in 2007 was on the Internet.”
What is puzzling is that in light of this damaging evidence, both Breitbart and the Telegraph insist that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii. For example, the Telegraph wrote in the same article:
“Today, the President has satisfied all right-minded folk that he was in fact born in Hawaii. Breitbart.com itself has always rejected the absurd cult of birtherism. In fact, this story is really the opposite of birtherism – Breitbart infers that in the past Obama encouraged people to think that he was born abroad in order to establish an identity as an authentic, exotic voice in the debate on racial politics.”
And Breitbart wrote in their article:
“Andrew Breitbart was never a ‘Birther,’ and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of ‘Birtherism.’ In fact, Andrew believed, as we do, that President Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961. Yet Andrew also believed that the complicit mainstream media had refused to examine President Obama’s ideological past, or the carefully crafted persona he and his advisers had constructed for him.”
ABC News even went a step further, fantasizing the following on May 18:
“A possible source of the so-called ‘birther’ issue–or at least a potential cause of the rumors that have dogged President Barack Obama–has been identified. Obama’s former literary agency misidentified his birthplace as Kenya while trying to promote the then-Harvard Law grad as an author in 1991. According to a promotional booklet produced by the agency, Acton & Dystel, to showcase its roster of writers, Obama was ‘born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.’ Miriam Goderich edited the text of the bio; she is now a partner at the Dystel & Goderich agency, which lists Obama as one of its current clients. ‘This was nothing more than a fact checking error by me–an agency assistant at the time,’ Goderich wrote in an emailed statement to Yahoo News.”
Strange and very difficult to believe, because ongoing investigations question that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, and an affidavit by his grandmother claims that she was present when he was born in Kenya. Either way, Mr. Obama’s veracity is on the line. Either, he fabricated or helped fabricate a story in 1991, when he was the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, claiming that he was born in Kenya, or he fabricated or help fabricate a story later, when running for the office of American President, claiming that he was born in Hawaii. To reiterate, only if he WAS born in Hawaii would he be legally qualified to hold the office of American President.
Both Obama and Romney Trample All Over 10th Amendment
The Washington Post wrote on May 20:
“The 10th Amendment, the amendment supposedly reserving for the states all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government, gets a lot of rhetorical love on the campaign trail. But on issues from medical marijuana to voter-identification laws to malpractice reform, both President Obama and presumptive GOP challenger Mitt Romney have shown few qualms about trampling all over the 10th Amendment.
“Earlier this month, Mr. Obama cited a respect for states’ rights as he announced his personal ‘evolution’ to support of gay marriage, but has repeatedly deployed his Justice Department to challenge states over their voter-ID and immigration laws, and medical marijuana use policies.
“For his part, Mr. Romney has repeatedly invoked the 10th Amendment to defend why he signed a state-level health law mandating coverage as governor of Massachusetts in 2006, only to oppose a similar program now at the federal level. But he has also called for overriding state laws to enact national tort reform, and has declined to say whether he would halt federal raids on dispensaries in states that have legalized marijuana for medicinal uses.
“Mike Maharrey, of the Tenth Amendment Center, said this kind of fair-weather federalism illustrates an inconsistency running rampant in both major parties. ‘That’s one of my greatest frustrations with the political process, not just with Obama and Romney, but both sides of the political spectrum tend to kind of turn to the 10th Amendment when it’s convenient,’ Mr. Maharrey said.”
This is the gist of politics–adopt positions which might be popular, and drop them when they could backfire. Hypocritical inconsistency seems to be the name of the game. Knowing this, why would any true Christian who is to stand up for and defend the TRUTH get involved in politics or grant their vote of confidence, support and approval to ANY of its political representatives?
Section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA Held Unconstitutional—For Now
The Associated Press reported on May 17:
“A day before Congress weighs an amendment to end indefinite military detentions in the U.S. [Note: This amendment did not pass], a federal judge Wednesday ruled the law that allows the practice unconstitutional.
“Saying the measure has ‘chilling impact on First Amendment rights,’ U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest, of New York’s Eastern District, found that a group of reporters and activists who brought the lawsuit had no way of knowing whether they could be subjected to it. That makes it an unconstitutional infringement on the First Amendment’s free speech right and the Fifth Amendment’s right to due process, Forrest said in a written opinion.
“The lead plaintiffs — Pulitzer Prize winner Chris Hedges of the Nation Institute and Tangerine Bolen, who runs the website RevolutionTruth — argued that they conceivably could be grabbed under the law because they deal with sources that U.S. authorities may deem to fall under the law, Section 1021 of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.
“The law defines the suspects who can be detained as a ‘person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces.’ Forrest found the language too vague, and repeatedly tried to get government attorneys to say that the reporters’ fears were unfounded. The lawyers declined.
“At the hearing on this motion, the government was unwilling or unable to state that these plaintiffs would not be subject to indefinite detention under [section] 1021,’ Forrest wrote. ‘Plaintiffs are therefore at risk of detention, of losing their liberty, potentially for many years. An individual could run the risk of substantially supporting or directly supporting an associated force without even being aware that he or she was doing so,’ Forrest wrote. ‘In the face of what could be indeterminate military detention, due process requires more.’
“‘We dealt a pretty big blow to two branches of Congress and President Obama,’ Bolen told The Huffington Post. Bolen got involved in the lawsuit because she worked extensively on the Wikileaks and Bradley Manning cases, and used her website to expose where the war on terror has gone tragically wrong, including interviewing Iraqis and Afghans with damning tales to tell. ‘Given that I engage in those two activities and I have an entire team around the world, I really felt that under the vague language of the NDAA, someone like me could easily get in trouble,’ Bolen said…
“The author and activist Naomi Wolf said watching the judge question administration lawyers repeatedly on the issue of who might be detained under the law — and the lawyers not answering — was downright chilling. To have the judge find that state of affairs unconstitutional was a profound relief, Wolf said in an interview.
“‘To hear those words — it’s so true, it’s so obvious — it puts in glaring relief the hideousness, the unconstitutionality, the darkness of this legislative effort and others like it,’ Wolf said. ‘She is so completely, obviously right. It’s nothing short of treason to have put forward legislation like this, let alone to have had most of the people who represent us and our president sign off on this clearly, obviously criminally unconstitutional — unconstitutional is inadequate. It’s anti-constitutional. It’s dictatorial. ‘I’m so happy as a mother. It’s so profound. All of us were put in danger by this law.’
“The White House had no comment on the ruling Wednesday night… The government has 60 days to decide whether to appeal.”
This law is indeed very dangerous and appears to be unconstitutional for the reasons stated in the article. The fears expressed in the article are also very real, especially in light of the evasive conduct of the government lawyers. However, it will remain to be seen whether the Obama Administration will appeal, and how a higher court might rule on the matter, given the politically charged surroundings during an election year.
Why To Be Concerned About Homosexuality?
On May 21, 2012, CNN published an interesting opinion by R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Although being dead wrong on his idea that we are no longer required to abide by God’s dietary laws, he does set forth succinctly why homosexuality is wrong in the eyes of God. We begin with quoting his erroneous conclusions regarding clean and unclean food:
“An honest consideration of the Bible reveals that most of the biblical laws people point to in asking this question, such as laws against eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabrics, are part of the holiness code assigned to Israel in the Old Testament. That code was to set Israel, God’s covenant people, apart from all other nations on everything from morality to diet.
“As the Book of Acts makes clear, Christians are not obligated to follow this holiness code. This is made clear in Peter’s vision in Acts 10:15. Peter is told, ‘What God has made clean, do not call common.’ In other words, there is no kosher code for Christians. Christians are not concerned with eating kosher foods and avoiding all others. That part of the law is no longer binding, and Christians can enjoy shrimp and pork with no injury to conscience.”
This conclusion is totally false. Peter’s vision in Acts 10 has nothing to do with declaring unclean animals to be clean. Rather, Peter gives the meaning of the vision in verse 28, stating: “But God has shown me that I should not call any MAN common or unclean.” God never allowed the consumption of unclean food, and He will punish those in the end time who disregard His dietary laws (compare Isaiah 66:17). For more information, please read our free booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…”
At the same time, Mohler’s comments regarding the biblical teaching on homosexuality are correct:
“Are conservative Christians hypocritical and selective when it comes to the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality? With all that the Bible condemns, why the focus on gay sex and same-sex marriage?…
“The Old Testament clearly condemns male homosexuality along with adultery, bestiality, incest and any sex outside the covenant of marriage. The New Testament does not lessen this concern but amplifies it… The New Testament condemns a full range of sexual sins, and homosexuality is specified among these sins. In Romans, Paul refers to homosexuality in terms of ‘dishonorable passions,’ ‘contrary to nature’ and ‘shameless.’ As New Testament scholar Robert Gagnon has stated, the Bible’s indictment ‘encompasses every and any form of homosexual behavior’… Jesus made clear that marriage was always meant to be one man and one woman…
“Why are Christians so concerned with homosexuality? In the first place, that question is answered by the simple fact that it is the most pressing moral question of our times. Christians must be concerned about adultery, pornography, injustice, dishonesty and everything the Bible names as sin. But when my phone rings with a call from a reporter these days, the question I am asked is never [about] adultery or pornography. It is about homosexuality.
“Christians who are seriously committed to the authority of the Bible have no choice but to affirm all that the Bible teaches, including its condemnation of homosexuality… In other words, we understand that the Bible condemns all forms of sin because our Creator knows what is best for us. The Bible names sins specifically so that each of us will recognize our own sinfulness and look to Christ for salvation and the forgiveness of our sins. Christian love requires that we believe and teach what the Bible teaches and that we do so with both strong conviction and humble hearts. The Church must repent of our failures in both of these tasks, but we must not be silent where the Bible speaks.
“Are Christians hypocrites in insisting that homosexual behavior is sin? We, too, are sinners, and hypocrisy and inconsistency are perpetual dangers. The church failed miserably in the face of the challenge of divorce. This requires an honest admission and strong corrective. At the same time, this painful failure must remind us that we must not fail to answer rightly when asked what the Bible teaches about homosexuality. Love requires us to tell the truth.”
An Unfathomable Divine Mystery?
The Catholic News wrote on May 17:
“The Catholic Church’s relationship to Judaism as taught by the Second Vatican Council and the interpretations and developments of that teaching by subsequent popes, ‘are binding on a Catholic,’ said the Vatican official responsible for relations with the Jews. Swiss Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews and a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, spoke to reporters May 16 after delivering a speech on Catholic-Jewish relations in light of Vatican II’s declaration ‘Nostra Aetate’ on the church’s relations with non-Christian religions…
“The declaration highlighted the Jewish roots of Christianity and took ‘an unambiguous position against every form of anti-Semitism,’ he said… ‘God’s plan of salvation for humanity began with his covenant with the Jewish people and if Christianity ignores that, he said, ‘it is in danger of losing its location within salvation history.’ While Catholics profess that, in the end, all salvation will be accomplished through Jesus Christ, ‘it does not necessarily follow that the Jews are excluded from God’s salvation because they do not believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel and the son of God,’ the cardinal said. ‘That the Jews are participants in God’s salvation is theologically unquestionable, but how that can be possible without confessing Christ explicitly is and remains an unfathomable divine mystery.’”
The Bible says that there cannot be any salvation except through Jesus Christ. This means that no one can and will be saved unless he or she accepts Jesus Christ as his or her personal Savior and believes in His Sacrifice. However, the Bible also teaches that today is NOT the only day of salvation. To understand this “mystery,” please read our free booklet, “Is That in the Bible? The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.”
Major Earthquake Hits Italy
BBC News reported on May 20:
“Thousands of people left homeless by a powerful earthquake in northern Italy are spending the night in shelters as aftershocks continue to hit the region. At least seven people died and more than 50 were injured when the quake struck in the early hours of Sunday. The magnitude six tremor, centred north of Bologna, destroyed or badly damaged many historic buildings… A 5.1 magnitude aftershock struck Sunday afternoon, destroying several buildings already weakened… Sunday’s earthquake was the worst to hit Italy since the L’Aquila tremor killed nearly 300 people in 2009.”
According to the Bible, more powerful earthquakes will strike around the world, and an extremely strong one might affect the city of Rome.
G8—Many Talks, No Solutions
Deutsche Welle reported on May 18:
“The leaders of the G8 group of the world’s most powerful countries did not show any new political paths at Camp David. They described problems well enough, but did not solve any…The big question after the two-day G8 summit at Camp David was, of course: did it bring any results? Did the eight government leaders, as well as their African guests, change the world – in any way at all? Well, no, they didn’t, is the answer. Well-known points-of-view were exchanged, both on the debt crisis in Europe and on the various flash points around the world. The initiative to strengthen Africa, which was brought to life three years ago, was once again emphasized over lunch with the African leaders. And that was pretty much it…
“The situation in Europe is getting trickier and trickier and turning German Chancellor Angela Merkel into the culprit for the crisis because she insists on budgetary consolidation. It borders on the absurd. Without painful reforms of state finances, which still loom for many countries, including that of the G8 host and its president, Barack Obama, there will not be a lasting exit from the debt crisis. While new French President Francois Hollande and Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti cozy up on the common ground they share with Obama, who is in the midst of an electoral campaign, it’s the facts that will count most at the end of the day. It’s a fact that financing stimulus programs with new debt would be a mistake. The chancellor is right – even if she is isolated in the exclusive club of eight leaders…
“There was at least one good thing to come from the summit: the commitment that Greece belongs in the eurozone. The country cannot and must not be left to its own devices. The offer being made to the Greeks is clear. Aid comes with strings attached. Now the Greeks will have the final say. The election in June will even be interesting for Barack Obama. If the attempt to keep Greece in the eurozone fails, the ensuing recession in Europe could pull down the world economy – and with it the United States. That is the last thing Obama needs right before American voters go to the polls in November. In a globalized world we are all Greeks, Europeans and Americans because we all depend on each other.”
Man has proven to be utterly incapable of finding true solutions and of ruling himself, and the most recent developments, as described above, are no exception. It will require the return of Jesus Christ to establish the Kingdom of God here on earth to bring lasting peace and prosperity to this war-stricken planet. See also the next article.
NATO Goes Ahead with European Missile Shield
The Local wrote on May 21:
“NATO leaders on Sunday gave the go-ahead for the new European missile shield, provoking anger in Russia. The US air base in Ramstein, western Germany, will host part of the system. The decision was made by 28 of the world’s most powerful leaders at the NATO summit in Chicago. It should be up and running before 2020 and protect Europe from missiles fired up to 3,000 kilometres away – roughly where Iran is. [Our comment: Deutsche Welle clarified on May 21 that “The White House says it expects initial operational capability by 2015, while the system will be fully functional in 2018. All 28 members of the alliance will participate in the financing.”]
“Initially a US warship carrying missiles will be installed near Turkey in the Mediterranean, followed by an early-warning radar system at the US air base in Ramstein [Germany]. Further bases are planned for Spain, Romania and Poland… The decision was not greeted warmly by Russia though, as Moscow fears the system could neutralise its own nuclear shield. The country’s government quickly called for joint control over the system and for NATO to sign a legally-binding guarantee that it is not aimed at Russia. But NATO rejected both demands, insisting on keeping two separate systems and refusing to sign a legally-binding document… analysts have questioned whether the shield is a full-proof defence against incoming rockets from rogue states.”
Paradoxically, the European defense shield will ultimately end up in complete European control, and it WILL help and encourage, to an extent, the Europeans to attack Russia and other Asian nations, as the Bible clearly reveals. However, the Asian power bloc will retaliate swiftly and brutally. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy,” and watch Norbert Link’s new video-recorded message, “The Seventh Trumpet.”
