If Elected Will Barack Husein Obama Abandon Israel?

Rev. Jesse Jackson made this statement a few days ago. Mike Evans has posted an insightful commentary on it. Its worth a read!

The Jerusalem Prayer Team is a Christian ministry dedicated to supporting Israel.

JERUSALEM REPORT 
From Mike Evans the founder of the Jerusalem Prayer Team

Dear John, 

Dr. Jesse Jackson has said: 

"'Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades' remain
 strong, they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters
 the White House. Obama is about change, and the change that Obama
 promises is not limited to what we do in America itself. It is a change of
 the way America looks at the world and its place in it." 

If the Reverend Jackson is correct, the Zionists who will lose their
 clout in standing with Israel are you and me. A vast majority of Zionists
 worldwide are not Jewish, but Christian. 

Please vote today: 

Senator Obama, please stand with Israel.
http://tool.donation-net.net/CTBF/ObamaIsraelVote.cfm?dn=1032&commID=96247627&ID=211981 

Senator Obama, do not stand with Israel. 
http://tool.donation-net.net/CTBF/ObamaIsraelVote.cfm?dn=1032&commID=96247627&ID=211981

Read the entire article by Dr. Mike Evans, below: 

Will Barack Obama Support Israel?

By:  Dr. Michael D. Evans        


Barack Obama's campaign cries of "change" mimic those of Jimmy Carter's
 campaign rhetoric in the 1970s.   Carter chose the Shah of Iran, one
 of America's closest allies in the Middle East, as his scapegoat for
 change.  I can only stand and wonder which American ally will take the
 brunt of Obama's presidential aspirations.   Our only real ally in the
 Middle East is Israel; if elected, would Obama sell Israel down the river
 just as Carter did the Shah of Iran?  

Early in his presidential campaign, Barack Obama added former Carter
 National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski to his own list of
 "advisors." Brzezinski, of course, got himself into trouble early in his role
 as advisor when "he published an essay in the summer issue of the
 journal Foreign Policy, defending a controversial new book about the power of
 the "Israel Lobby" in American politics.  One of Brzezinski's first
 jobs as advisor was to defend Obama's plan, if elected, to meet with Iran
 and Syria:  "What's the hand-up about negotiating with the Syrians or
 Iranians?" asked Brzezinski.  "What it in effect means is that you only
 talk to people who agree with you."  People who agree with you?  I,
 for one, would like to know just why Obama would want to talk with Iran's
 president who denies the Holocaust, has called Israel a "stinking
 corpse," and vowed to wipe it off the map.  

Another man from whom Obama sought advice was Joseph Cirincione,
 president of the Ploughshares Fund.  Cirincione is said to have decidedly
 anti-Israel leanings.  Ed Lasky, writer for American Thinker, wrote that
 Cirincione was "another in a disconcertingly long line of Obama
 advisors, who seemingly have an anti-Israel bias and who would be very willing
 to apply American pressure on our tiny ally to disarm itself in the
 face of its mortal enemies."

I might also add here that Hamas political advisor Ahmed Yousef seemed
 delighted with Mr. Obama: "We like Mr. Obama, and we hope that he will
 win the elections."  Obama also drew a pseudo-endorsement from Iranian
 parliament Speaker Ali Larijani during a stop-over in Bahrain.
  Larijani purported that "Iran would prefer Democrat Barack Obama in the White
 House next year." Larijani also dismissed any idea that the US would
 attack Iran.  "We are leaning more in favor of Barack Obama because he is
 more flexible and rational, even though we know American policy will
 not change that much.." 

Now, why do you suppose a terrorist organization or a rogue state would
 support one candidate over another?  Could it be the knowledge that
 one candidate is likely to be more anti-Israel than the other?   Or that
 one candidate would respond to terrorism more forcefully than another?

During a speech to the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
 in June 2008, Obama "clarified" some of his earlier statements: Yes,
 he is "still in favor of meeting with Iran's leaders...but
 (clarification) only at the suitable levels and at a place and time" of his
 choosing.  He favors a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq...but
 (clarification) it must be gradual.  He prefers diplomatic and economic
 pressure...but (clarification) says the military option "should be left on the
 table."  After all, one must be willing to "clarify" in order to achieve
 the highest office in the land. 

How committed is Obama to Israel's security?  He promised the members
 of AIPAC a "Palestinian ...state that is contiguous and cohesive, and
 that allows them to prosper...[and] Jerusalem will remain the capital of
 Israel, and it must remain undivided...[but that the final solution for
 Jerusalem] must be negotiated between the two parties [Israelis and
 Palestinians], an agreement that they can both live with."  How can this
 be, when the Palestinians have demanded again and again that Jerusalem
 must become the capital of any Palestinian state?    

In his formative years and with a myriad of churches from which to
 choose, Obama aligned himself with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr., a man he
 calls his spiritual mentor.  Wright's stance regarding Israel and the Jews
 became well-known during Obama's campaign.  The pastor, a Black Muslim
 sympathizer is riddled with anti-Semitism.  He has "damned" America
 from the pulpit, and his diatribe following 9/11, an event Wright labeled
 as "chickens coming home to roost," was particularly offensive and
 provoking.  He insinuated that the horrific assaults were godly revenge for
 America's many failures at race relations.

Wright embraces what is called "black-liberation theology," a tenet
 that is often associated with the racial supremacist Black Power movement
 of the 1960s.   Rev. Wright openly supported Louis Farrakhan, Supreme
 Minister of the Nation of Islam.  Farrakhan has labeled the Jews
 "bloodsuckers" and openly endorsed Obama's presidential bid (which Obama
 publicly rejected.)  Farrakhan has likened Obama to the forerunner of the
 Messiah, and points as proof to the candidate's mixed race background.

Was it from his own experience that Obama articulated one of the bigger
 gaffes of his campaign?  He was overheard saying of the people of
 Pennsylvania, "And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they
 cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them..."
  Obama was referring to the Bible-believing, working-class voters.  Does
 he feel the same way about Israel?      

In the first World Policy Forum, held at a French lakeside resort, Rev.
 Jesse Jackson promised "fundamental changes" in US foreign policy; the
 most important change would occur in the Middle East, where "decades
 of putting Israel's interests first" would end. 

Jackson told author and journalist Amir Taheri that he believes
 although "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" remain
 strong they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters
 the White House.  "Obama is about change," Jackson told Taheri in a
 wide-ranging conversation. "And the change that Obama promises is not
 limited to what we do in America itself. It is a change of the way America
 looks at the world and its place in it."   And, in fact, Jesse Jackson
 told me at the White House Middle East Peace Summit in 1993 that the
 multitudes of problems in the Middle East were caused by the Jews.     

On foreign policy issues, Obama's call to eradicate nuclear weapons
 worldwide would leave the West and Israel at the mercy of unscrupulous,
 hate-filled leaders in countries such as Iran and Syria.  Those nations
 would simply go farther underground and continue the secret production
 of nuclear arms.  A part of Israel's firewall against the launch of a
 globally inclusive attack is its nuclear arsenal.  Obama's plan would
 effectively disarm Israel, while making it impossible to police the Irans
 of the world.  Has he considered the danger of beating our collective
 swords into plowshares?  That would leave the world even more vulnerable
 to those who don't follow suit; who, instead, keep their swords at the
 ready.

Jimmy Carter felt that talking with our enemies, i.e. Ayatollah
 Khomeini, in the name of human rights while castigating pro-American allies
 such as the Shah of Iran would make the world a better place.  Apparently
 Mr. Carter still feels that way.  He considers Israel an apartheid
 state and Hamas and Hezbollah human rights movements rather than terrorist
 organizations that need only economic support and understanding.  Does
 Barack Obama embrace Carter's liberal world view? 


Please forward this to everyone on your list and ask them to do the
 same.  


Your Jerusalem World News: www.myjwn.com 

Your Save Jerusalem Site: www.savejerusalem.org