I hope I haven’t flummoxed you in any way by my response. It was the only way I could faithfully answer your question. As I pondered my reply, the only thing that came to mind was Obama on the campaign trail last year, trying to “get back his Mojo” after Sara Palin entered the race:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/10/campaign.lipstick/

http://www.slate.com/id/2199805/

I remember being incensed at the time. Not for Palin since the way he used it only highlighted her femininity. “If only I had my old job back with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, I could point out the obvious about b. Hussein o.!,” I fumed, thinking about the material I shared with you previously (the origins of “pigs and monkeys”).

As far as I can tell, though, Liberation Theology doesn’t address your question head on. In and of itself though, it is still an interesting topic, especially as it deals with the megalo-manic b.h.o..

For Example, Question #1: “What figure in human history is second only to Barack Obama when it comes to ‘community organizing’?” Jesus Christ

Question#2: “What role does Sara Palin have in the above mentioned scenario? She’s Pontius Pilot

I’m not exactly sure where the little happy face dude with the surfer smile came in.

Maybe Obadiah/Danny was identifying there or something.

BTW, there actually is another watchman. Of course, that office is not limited in anyway. It is a ” if whosoever will” qualification: “If you will walk in My ways and if you will perform My service.” But it has in the Hebrew Scripture the same shorresh as the prophet Daniel. Proof for that is found in Zechariah 3:7

“tah-deen et bay-tee”

“you will also govern My house”

Just like Daniel did in exile in Babylon…

since you brought the ‘neo-Islamic, strutting conman of limited intelligence – a third-rate intellectual mediocrity’ into this zoological question, I guess we’ll have to consult what animates the man. I base this claim on what I see as his basic belief system as seen by his actions but a few hours into assuming his office as POTUSA. Even before he started issuing the legion of fait accomplis from the White House (aka, “Executive Orders”), he felt compelled to visit “Al-Arabia” TV and share his own personal testimony. He even got a little emotional when describing the effect he felt growing up in either Kenya or Indonesia whenever his ’skull full of mush’ processed the call to prayer he heard 5 times a day. My point is that his appearance here on United Arab Emirate TV was like appearing on the Islamic version of the 700 Club. Given that the preacher who married him to the First Lady was a black muslim from the Nation of Islam before becoming pastor Jeremiah Wright, I have to wonder how our president feels today when he hears the same call coming from the loudspeakers of the Mosques of the World of which he is a self-professed Citizen.
All that to say that normally, (in fact, this will be a first for me on this forum) I don’t ever reference the so-called word of islam. But here goes:

164. “When some of them said: “Why do you preach to a people whom Allah will destroy or visit with a terrible punishment?” Said the preachers: “To discharge our duty to your Lord, and perchance they may fear Him.”
***please note here: the preachers say that they are only doing their duty and it is to make the objects of their preaching to fear Allah. While the Western mind thinks, ‘OK, to help the sinner along and see the error of his way.’ (e.g. Ezekiel 33), the text doesn’t say that. Fear like what happens when jihad is exercised instead of preaching, is a better sense here of the idea behind, “fear Him.” As the text that follows vividly illustrates.

165. “When they disregarded the warnings…we visited the wrongdoers with a grevious punishment.

166. “When in their insolence they transgressed (all) prohibitions, We said to them: ‘Be ye apes. Despised and rejected.”

That is taken from Al A’raf (The Heights), Surah 7.

Now before you jump to conclusions, remember that I am just flying by the seat of my pants here and working within the parameters you have given me, hence the reference to one of the notorious passages in the quran that get people like Salman Rushdie in trouble. As you know, it is very easy to blaspheme allah and the guy they blame for writing this stuff. Actually, they blame people like me for quoting it. For I (you said it, ‘as a “person” of the Book’) do not even know, according to Abdul Yusuf Ali (the editor of the copy of the quran I was given and just quoted from) “…their own true Scriptures, but read into them what they wanted, or at best their own conjectures. They palmed off their own writings for the Message of Allah.” By inventing books “with no divine authority” Ali said that such people have not only “lost their own souls” (Matt. 16:26) but as infidels such actions “indulge in dishonest traffic in the ignorance of the multitude.”

Now the reason I seem to digress here involves this man’s commentary in another infamous passage about calling certain people “apes”. So follow my thread. I won’t quote it but it is in Sura 2:65. Just like 7:166 ends with the curse of becoming despised and rejected apes, this one quotes the exacts same words verbatim.

Hang in there with me if you will. Time to shift your incommodity around and get comfortable. In Surah 5:60 you see the word swine mentioned in the context of infidels like us. I am assuming you’re joining me in that category of unbelief. You’ll have to read it yourself but the general idea is that allah disapproved of the “People of the Book” and therefore turned them into apes AND swine. I think Ali’s commentary on 5:60 is important here (to answer your question) and so I copy it exactly as it appears on the bottom of page 267, “The Meaning Of The Holy Quran”:

770. For apes see 2:65. For men possessed by devils, and devils being sent into swine, see Matt. 8:28-32. Or perhaps both apes and swine are allegorical: those who falsified Allah’s scriptures became lawless like apes, and those who succumbed to filth, gluttony, or gross living became like swine.

***As far as falsifying and corrupting and replacing ‘Allah’s scriptures’ goes, I notice he is not shy about referencing them to prove his points***

So that brings us to what does that make us, a pig or a monkey
?. Monkeys, being less that human but resembling them was attributed by islamists to Judiasm and it’s people. Pigs were the christians, people like myself since we didn’t follow Kasrut (personally I follow the biblical dietary code and stay away from the unclean animals). Mohammed instituted his own version of proper eating habits which he patterned after Judiasm.

I know that doesn’t answer your question though, so I’ll give you my opinion, based on my observations of you. You are a watchman. There are three that I know of in the Hebrew scripture and you can be one of or a combination of all three. The shomair (Isaiah), the tsofay (Ezekiel), or the word used today in Israeli hebrew to identify a christian – the notzree (Jeremiah).

As such you warn and protect with your exalted position (Isaiah 62:6,7). Or you can see in microscopic detail (Ezekiel what others think is hidden and at the same time telescopically into eternity, past and future (Ezekiel 1). Or maybe you’re just like me, a non Jew with the heart of an Israelite, trying to get back home (Jeremiah 31:6).

What would Obama call you? Hopefully over for lunch, although in his case, maybe in for a Coors lite. You’ll have to decide on that one, bro’ (;~))

my hope is that there is enough residual spirit in the Western world (that was sparked into a flame by British evangelist George Whitefield during the Great Awakening in Britian and America before the War of Revolution) to blow up one more time. May Obama’s Liberation Theology (a not so subtle form of Replacement Theology that has never met a Marxist it could not love) continue to awaken my country and all people of the Book everywhere…

Kind of a reverse, perverse form of George with the same effect…~))

Carter is an old-fashioned liberal who is simply anti-Semitic, his opposition to Israel and Zionism being the manifestation of an emotive Judeophobia, most probably inherited from his roots in extreemist Protestantism and is, thus, theologically Christian in its ultimate origins.

Obama is consistently ideologically Arabist and anti-Zionist but – as were Mussolini and Franco before him – not an anti-Semite, anti-Semitism not being integral to Fascism. He is the more dangerous, given that he is (a) in power and (b) systematic in his intolerance toward Zionist aspirations, irrespective of their intellectual or pragmatic worth.

Likewise, our own dear Hillary is not anti-Semitic but ideologically opposed to Zionism in that her Fascism is of the left-wing, rather than the right-wing variety. (We have the curious phenomenon in Europe of the various and sundry neo-Fascist and neo-Nazi parties of the extreme Right now supporting Israel and Zionism whilst remaining as anti-Semitic as ever they were… notwithstanding the fact that with France the only major exception, Western Europe is effectively Judenrein.)

Carter dealt with Israel as a reality because he had no other alternative – Israel exists – but in retrospect we can see his Judeophobia by, inter alia, his closeness to the Polish and anti-Semitic Zbigniew Brzezinski and apparent personal liking for the mass-murdering Yasser Arafat. His anti-Semitism was and remains emotive, not intellectual.

Carter won his Nobel Prize for his genuinely but natively liberal meddling on the world stage.

Obama, on the other hand, is an over-schooled yet under-educated pseudo academcian who has hoodwinked the world into thinking that processessing the platitudes of received wisdom around his mind like a middle-ranking bureaucrat shuffles paper in a clock-wise direction around his imitation mahogany desk somehow makes him a genius. Or the Messiah. Or both. He has done this by the intellectual intimidation of the American educated elite, followed by the American middle classes, by bullying them into accepting him as a genius out of residual liberal guilt over racism that renders them incapable of calling him what he truly is – a third-rate intellectual mediocrity. And he will get his Nobel Prizes – and any heap of worthless international awards – because the Swedes will use him as a member of the mutual admiration soceity that the international liberal establishment has become to demonstrate to the world that they are not the erstwhile, Nazi-sympathizing anti-Semites that they remain to this day, but ever so nice, fair-minded and reasonable democratic liberals whose only sin is sexual smugness.

Obama is an outrageous, posturing, strutting conman of limited intelligence – and all the more dangerous for it. And his chums on the world stage will reward him endlessly for his hubris.

If the analysis that both socialism and fascism, whether democratically mitigated or in their purest authoritarian forms, share the same roots on the Left – the former retaining the vestiges of Marxist ideology, the latter adopting populism whilst remaining true to its revolutionary aspirations – we can see clearly how the West (including many Israeli politicians) are at a loss, and have also been so, to know effectively how to treat with the Arab regimes of the Middle East. There is ideological lip-service amongst the Ba’athists to socialist doctrines, whilst the former Iraqi regime remained until the end, and as does the present Syrian regime remain, defiantly incapable of a true pan-Arabism that would have properly expressed their so-called Marxist internationalism within their collective culture. The main obstacle to such collectivism was a nationalism mistaken by the West as a natural stage in the institutional evolution of an emergent nation-state, rather than an example of intitutionalized fascism exploiting an artificial pseudo-state.

“Palestine” represents the pseudo-state status of most Arab polities par excellence, its institutions, whilst naturally allying themselves to the Left on the world stage, only do so because the Left itself, since the demise of the Soviet Union, has lost the vestiges of Marxism per se and become Marxist-lite… whilst retaining its revolutionary rhetoric and ideological intolerance (to which we may add anti-Semitism in the guise of anti-Zionism, which is not integral to Fascism at all, as Mussolini’s and Franco’s legacies bear witness). We thus see a former Marxist Left on the world stage metamorphose into the populism that the fascist wing proper evolved into in the 1920s and ’30s – catching up with it, if one will. The political institutions and behavioural mindset of the “Palestinians” is thus, now, indistinguishable from the mindset of the new international Marxist-lite Left. Fascism was never defeated in the Arab world, it became the norm of Arab national administration. And Fascism was never, really defeated in the West, once the Soviet Union threatened the democracies with territorial occupation, they gradually lost their Marxism whilst retaining the revolutionary, collectivist impulse. So, we’re all fascists now.

There is no doubt that had Nazi Germany triumphed over the democracies, the Holocaust would have continued in the Arab world. It nearly did so, as the well-nigh one million of Jewish refugees fleeing to the newly established Israel under measures reminiscent of the Nuremburg laws bear witness. There is also no doubt that the present Arab regimes remain fascist in both their mindset, behaviour and institutional form.

It is no wonder, then, that Palestinian Arabs should be deeply patriarchal and xenophobic – such are the hallmarks of a fascist society.

To this heady revisionist mix, we must now add the conflict between differing ideological/theocratic deposits of Sunni and Shia Islam, which have opportunistically come to replace the remaining traces and vestiges of Marxist and Fascist ideologogy inherent in the various and sundry Arab pseudo-states. As much as the Second World War can, in the light of this analysis, come to be seen as a struggle between the two opposing wings of the same initial ideological impulse in that Communism and Fascism shared the same, ultimate origin (having the French Revolution as their first empowered manifestation, though tracing their ultimate roots to the theological and ideological intolerance of the Catholic Church and the creation of the Inquisition to combat “heresy” – i.e. ideological impurity), so can Israel’s plight be seen as the first enactment of a self-same conflict between Sunni and Shia Islam, empowered as it has been by the revolutionary impulse inherited by both as Fascism (with a heavy dollop of anti-Semitism to help it on its way).

The carving up of Mandate Palestine represents nothing more than the disgrace of Munich, which saw the Sudetenland “returned” to a fictitious Germany. The Czechoslovaks – who then had three million men under arms confronting a still re-arming German Reich – could have risked war but did not. Twenty years later, the Israelis did, forestalling the outbreak of the Third World War which will ulimately be over the question of whether it is Sunni or Shia Islam that re-establishes the Caliphate by means of a national socialist expansionist war.

The only way to avoid such a conflagration is to persuade the democratic-fascist and neo-Islamic administration of Obama not to cosy-up to its non-democratic, fellow Islamic Arab counter-parts in the Middle East in acts of appeasement the likes of which we saw in the 1930s by the Old Democracies of Europe. Some fat chance.