Let us take a look at what Ron Fraser said during Obama's rise to power.
- (Ron Fraser, Election Funding Bombshell, October 6, 2008.)
While the McCain campaign’s funding process is an open book by virtue of the complete donor database being made available online, it appears that the true nature of Obama’s election funding process is being hidden by smoke and mirrors. ... To take a leaf out of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, there would appear to be something rotten in the state of Obamaland.Fraser cites an article from Newsmax to insinuate that the Obama campaign was illegally funded by foreigners. He bizarrely scare mongers that donations from Britain and France are really made by scary Muslims. How strange it is that he writes as though Britain and France have been taken over by scary Muslims. His base appeal to xenophobia and Islamophobia is most evident.
The FEC reports that these foreign donations total 11,500 contributions adding up to $33.8 million. The real worry is the source of a good many of these foreign donations. Newsmax reports that 63 of the donors listed their “state” as “UK,” the United Kingdom” (emphasis mine). London is the city of choice for many an extremist Islamic organization in respect of both parking and laundering funds through the UK’s banking system. According to Newsmax, other countries identified by the FEC as the source of Obama campaign donations are “Abu Dhabi, Addis Ababa, Beijing, Fallujah, Italy, and a wide selection of towns and cities in France.” France is a hotbed of disgruntled Islamist extremists, with whole suburban areas identified as no-go areas by local police.Addis Ababa is mainly Christian by the way. But they are African. Maybe that angered him.
Note how Fraser does not bother to note which "whole suburban areas" in France are "no-go areas" in France. This is because it is a myth. It is not true.
Fraser then insists that Muslims all over the world want to see Obama elected. He cites an Egyptian journalist and the late dictator of Libya, Gaddafi, to make this assertion. One can see such claims as being related to the false accusation that Obama is a Muslim.
Predictably Fraser insists that things will get a lot worse soon.
This will be the first American presidential election since the U.S. was toppled from its superpower status by a series of negative events commencing with 9/11 and consummating with the twin phenomena of Russia’s challenge to the West via its August 8 invasion of Georgia, and the recent collapse of the U.S. finance and credit system. If, added to that, we see an incumbent in the Oval Office who feels bound to go, appeasing cap in hand, before the declared enemies of this nation and seek “peace” for a bowl of pottage in return, then we can take it for granted that the U.S. will fall to the state of a third-rate nation overnight.At the very end of the article is the following postscript.
[Editor’s note: This article originally made reference to the Obama campaign receiving contributions from Iran, an assertion that has been challenged. In absence of further proof, the reference has been removed.]PCG's 1% would like to portray Obama as some sort of collaborator with Iran even back in October 2008 it seems.
- (Ron Fraser, Reality Check in Obamaland, November 10, 2008.)
Ron Fraser mocked those enjoying victory in the election as dreaming in "Obamaland" and insisting that they would get a rude awakening at the G-20 summit.
While America dreams on in Obamaland, reality is about to strike at the G-20 summit in Washington this week.Then Fraser insists that perception is more important than actual facts.
America is no longer in the box seat when it comes to dictating policy to the world. That the United States is still by far the largest single national economy in the world, possessing the mightiest military force and dominance in space-age technology, is a given. That American national debt is preposterous both in its size and the nation’s inability to control it is the matter of daily headlines. That the U.S. is to blame for the global financial crisis is increasingly being declared as such by leaders in the world’s greatest single trading combine, the European Union, especially within Germany. That reality, and its consequences, will be vocalized, very stridently, by nations gloating over America’s demise this week at the G-20 summit in Washington commencing Saturday.
What really counts in international relations is not so much the reality of a nation’s power, but the perception by other nations of that power. And perceptions of U.S. power are rapidly changing around the world, especially since the results of the latest U.S. presidential election were posted.So real facts do not matter to Ron Fraser? The fact that the United States is by far the most powerful nation in the world is less important to Ron Fraser than the perception of strength that may not be quite real? He is chasing dreams not anything real.
The U.S. is a drastically divided nation politically. Barack Obama did not win the U.S. election by a landslide popular vote. Thus, there is still a very deep chasm between conservative and liberal voters in the U.S., notwithstanding the impression that the liberal press seeks to tout of a nation caught up in the spirit of Obamamania.
Dream on!In other words Fraser really did not want Obama to win. He quite likely would have had the same reaction if any other Democratic Party candidate had won.
Fraser then scare mongers that the European Union was being more efficient and clever with responding to the financial crisis than the United States. Little did Fraser know that the European Union would embark on a policy of austerity that insured the crisis would be more severe and last longer in certain parts of the EU than in the United States.
The fact is, there has seldom been a more opportune moment this century for America’s enemies to take advantage of its political, social and economic sclerosis to force their own will upon the U.S. ...All wrong. The United States recovered more quickly from the crisis than the European Union which embarked on a policy of austerity.
Over the past month, it has been the EU leadership that has driven the agenda to establish a new system to regulate the global economy. The EU has held numerous conferences on the subject, its leaders have visited the U.S. and China and held talks also with Russian leaders to set the tone for Wednesday’s summit in Washington. Last week, EU states voted unanimously on a course of action they will present to the Washington summit, fully expecting that their lead in that forum will be respected and their recommendations accepted. The EU idea is to establish a new form of global economic governance following EU guidelines on the regulation of the global financial system. The Union is already firmly entrenched as a global leader in the regulation of business and commerce—to the extent that it has already extracted massive fines from global corporations that have infringed its onerous regulations. Thus, the precedents are set on which to further consolidate increasing control by the EU of global business. ...
The most prophetic result of the global economic crisis, relating to the European Union, is the opportunity it is presenting for the realization of a long-sought Teutonic imperial dream: the binding together of old Europe under a single economic government.
Fraser then writes like a hypnotist to tell his readers to "watch" the European Union arising to power to conquer the United States.
Watch the G-20 summit in Washington for a newly assertive European Union to force its way in the outcome of that vital conference.
Watch Germany as it faces a federal election in the coming year, with all state elections being conducted in the lead-up to that national election continuing to swing right as the mood in Germany changes.
And as you watch, remember the words of Herbert Armstrong, who declared that a strong and forceful leader would again arise in Germany amid great social upheaval triggered by the collapse of the global financial and economic system!Previously PCG insinuated that Edmund Stoiber would be the dictator fated to conquer the United States. In late 2009 PCG began to portray Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg in this role.
Three comments were posted in response to this article. One of them was quite critical and accused Ron Fraser of being motivated by "a sense of jealousy" in being so hostile to the European Union. He tried to break through Fraser's bubble of privilege.
Your paranoid vision on the European Union seems to come from a sense of jealousy. Indeed Europe take a lot of action to prohibit a financial breakdown, because the US are not willing (or able) to clean up their mess. Since the US only export lies (about WMD), debt (to be paid by their allies) and greed, it’s not so strange that the rest of the world are more and more ignoring the existing of the US. Since Bush and his cronies are sent away, a sense of relief goes thru the world. I hope that you’ll find the courage (as a country) to look in the mirror and to admit that you have created a mess (national and international). After a while the mistakes will be forgiven. And indeed it’s nice to live on a winning continent.It would seem this commenter is unaware that a paranoid fixation on Europe is a long established dogma in Armstrongism thus indicating that he is unfamiliar with Armstrongism. Of course back then it was impossible to know that the crisis would become more worse in certain parts of Europe because of the austerity policies that were enacted to the misfortune of many especially the poor.
- (Ron Fraser, Obama’s Inaugural Speech, January 20, 2009.)
Anyone who failed to be moved by the strength of language and the clarity of delivery of President Obama’s inaugural speech lacks a balanced perspective. Likewise, anyone who failed to see the glaring lack of some of the most vital elements of the American heritage within that speech is simply ignorant of the nation’s origins, its reason for being, its true history, and its inevitable future.So Fraser says Obama's sincerity cannot be questioned. In 2013 his boss, Gerald Flurry, proclaimed President Obama to be an Antichrist like figure he dubbed "another Antiochus" comparing him with the infamous Antiochus Epiphanes who desecrated the Temple in Jerusalem.
There is no doubting the sincerity of America’s new president. But as Herbert W. Armstrong declared, one can be genuinely sincere, yet be sincerely wrong!
“On this day we come to proclaim an end to … worn out dogmas that for too long have strangled our politics,” declared the 44th president of the United States in his inaugural speech. Yet President Obama has gone public on his determination to redistribute wealth in line with the “worn out” and provably failed dogma of socialism.All this time later has such a thing come to pass? Of course not.
Fraser then bizarrely condemns the idea that Americans earned the greatness of prosperity of the nation.
In reaffirming, as the president did, “the greatness of our nation” and that “we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned,” is to state a very sound truth. Yet, to infer that America’s prior greatness was earned—to imply that such greatness was earned—by the people is to deny the reality that Abraham Lincoln clearly recognized that the greatness of America as a nation was a gift of Almighty God!Fraser accuses Obama of being detached from reality by saying that America is great.
Where the president’s speech departs most from the reality of the times is at the point where he exclaimed, “We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished.”The federal debt is public debt which no one can force the United States government to default because the debt is denominated in its own currency. If it was denominated in another currency (as was the case with the euro) then things might be different. Fraser is wrong to insinuate that the federal debt at present as a problem.
This is not rhetoric in the true sense. These are the words of a sophist that clearly are either designed to hide or to just deny reality. For the overwhelming facts are that America is the most indebted, rather than the most prosperous, nation on Earth, possessing the power but without the demonstrable political will to use that power. Thus it renders itself powerless in respect of carrying any of the conflicts in which it is engaged to a victorious conclusion.
And the COGs have constantly insisted that the leaders of the United States lack the will to use it whenever some armed conflict does not go well for the United States. It is constantly repeated whether justified or not.
With regard to America’s inventiveness, this is being increasingly outshone in large part by foreign competitors which often make products superior to ours, with production of the goods and services we once produced ourselves in abundance now significantly outsourced to foreign competitors. The resultant transfer of wealth has severely disrupted our national economy.This is a real issue. But it is not evidence that the United States will soon be conquered by scary Germans or is about to collapse any time soon.
When we get to the “we will do it” section of the president’s speech, it lacks the same thing his speeches always lacked as he stumped the country promoting himself for the nation’s chief office: any clear explanation of just how, in practical terms, his administration will achieve all that it promises. To declare that “we will build … we will restore … we will harness … we will transform .… All this we can do. All this we will do,” without any word as to the ways in which it is planned just how “we will do,” is leading the nation up the garden path to no-man’s-land.At least he tried to make things better while PCG's leaders live off of the tithes and offerings PCG's lay members gave to them.
Fraser then complains about Obama trying to be inclusive towards fellow Americans who are not white and not straight.
Midway through his speech, the president reverted to the vision of “Our founding fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.”In 1865 the Constitution was amended to ban slavery. Would Fraser object to that "perfecting of our union"?
Yet Mr. Obama has already hinted that he regards that charter as imperfect, and that his administration is intent on “perfecting” it. Witness the following extract from the speech that he delivered as he commenced his train ride from Philadelphia to Washington: “I believed that our future is our choice, and that if we could just recognize ourselves in one another and bring everyone together—Democrats, Republicans and Independents, north, south, east and west, black, white, Latino, Asian and Native American, gay and straight … not only would we restore hope and opportunity in places that yearned for both, but maybe, just maybe, we might perfect our union in the process.”
To infer that the “perfecting of our union” involves the infusion of multiculturalism and homosexuality into the social stream of America would surely make the Founding Fathers, were it possible, turn in their graves.
Fraser accuses Obama of somehow wanting to change everything.
Mr. Obama sent an early shot across the bows of every truly freedom-loving citizen of the United States in his Philadelphia speech. It gives fair warning that his administration is intent on changing the very fundamentals upon which the United States of America is founded as a nation.Then Fraser condemns Obama for praising Americans' way of life.
One of the most damning statements in the new president’s inaugural speech was his declaration that “We will not apologize for our way of life.” Yet that is the very thing for which we ought to be not only apologizing, but also deeply repenting before our God! It is the American way of life that has led its consumerist binge, that has filled its entertainment with pornographic imagery and funded the drug lords through the increasing demand for pushers on its streets. It is the American way of life that has led to the destruction of millions of lives in the womb and to the confusion of gender roles that has rendered our society sick at its very heart and core—the family unit!Ironically later Obama would be condemned for alleged apologizing to other world leaders.
Fraser then tries to incite Islamophobic anger in his readers by accusing President Obama of somehow favoring Muslims simply because the way he listed various religious groups angered him.
In respect of our multicultural society, and perhaps an early warning of our future foreign-policy orientation, it was intriguing to hear Mr. Obama refer to the largest Judeo-Christian nation on Earth by maintaining that America is “a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus—and non-believers” in that exact order, with the Muslim interposed between the Christian and the Jew, surely a first for any inaugural presidential speech!With talk like this it is no wonder why some have incorrectly accused President Obama of being a Muslim.
Then Fraser quite bizarrely complains that President Obama does not share PCG's dogma that the United States is fated to be conquered by Germany and shipped there to be slaves just before Christ's return. The fact that Fraser would make such a complaint shows how insular PCG's 1% actually are.
As he concluded his inaugural, Mr. Obama mentioned that the source of America’s confidence was “the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.”
Let us be clear. In the eyes of God, according to His inerrant Word, the destiny of America is assured! There is nothing remotely uncertain about it! In these times which President Obama rightly described in his speech as proceeding “amidst gathering clouds and raging storms,” you need more than ever before to know your nation’s God-rendered destiny!What a pathetic polemic. How dare Fraser should disingenuously say the speech was moving only to condemn it at length often in nonconstructive and xenophobic ways.
- (Ron Fraser, Obama’s Radical Foreign Policy, February 2, 2009.)
Mr. Obama had promised change. Few have detected just how radical that change has already been in the foreign-policy arena.Fraser complains about an attempt to have more transparency with the CIA.
Writing for the Guardian newspaper, Martin Kettle declares, “Never mind the vaunted first 100 days. The first 10 days alone have already seen an opening to the Muslim world, the abandonment of military tribunals at Guantánamo Bay, the dispatch of a senior Middle East envoy, the unveiling of a new green agenda, the removal of the abortion bar on foreign aid programs, an eye-wateringly large fiscal stimulus package, major moves to increase government transparency, and now, as the Guardian reported yesterday, a decisive change of approach towards revolutionary Iran” (January 30).
However, it has a nasty ring about it; it appears to be borne of the same mindset that gutted the CIA under the Clinton administration and made the struggle for national security that much harder.Fraser then complains that the prison on Guantánamo Bay would soon be closed.
The same day, the president made clear via a draft executive order that he intends to close the Guantánamo Bay terrorist detention facility within a year, release some of its remaining 245 accused terrorist detainees, and transfer others to different sites for trial. This sends a signal to enemies that America’s days of getting tough with those who threaten the nation with terror are over.Never mind how that prison was constantly used by people Fraser would not like to condemn the Bush Administration. Never mind how it has been consistently mentioned in filthy Al Qaeda propaganda to incite hatred and lure more cannon fodder for their benefit. Fraser refuses to take such matters into consideration.
Thus, already, by the president’s second day in office, it was becoming apparent that this is a new appeasing administration which risks gravely endangering America’s future.In other words just two days into Obama's Presidency Ron Fraser is already luridly comparing him to Prime Minister Chamberlain and insinuating that President Obama will somehow plunge America into catastrophe. He really cannot stand having a Democratic Party member being President.
Fraser then tries to slur President Obama as being too closely associated with Germany, Palestinians and Saudi Arabia.
Consider the following.With talk like that it is no wonder why some have inaccurately accused Obama of being a Muslim.
President Obama gave only one speech in a foreign country as he stomped the campaign trail in the run-up to the presidential election. As the location for that speech, which received global coverage, he chose Berlin, capital of the nation that had twice dragged Britain, America and the rest of the world into the two greatest wars in history.
Upon his election as America’s president, Mr. Obama’s first telephone call was not to any of America’s traditional allies, nor to the leader of any established nation, but to the leader of a non-state, the Palestinians, declared enemy of the tiny Judaic nation of Israel.
This was followed by the new president’s first television interview, given to a television station sponsored by a nation whose religion seeks to overthrow traditional Judeo-Christianity and impose its teachings on the world, a nation whose ruling class has dirtied its hands in supporting terror against Israel, Britain and the U.S.: the Saudi-sponsored Al Arabia TV network.
Yet in the whole equation of the foreign policy of the new radical-left American administration, nothing is more glaringly apparent than the severing of the partnership between the U.S. and Britain, a natural union of brother nations that joined to save the world from the tyranny threatened by two great world wars and a 40-year Cold War.Fraser gloss over the two wars fought between the United States and Britain. Fraser ignores how a British shipping firm built a battleship for the Confederacy. It is not natural or caused simply by being of a similar race. Rather this alliance is maintained by what the people and leaders of America and Britain do day by day.
Fraser accuses Obama of forsaking Britain in favor of the European Union and particularly Germany.'
There is a reason why Mr. Obama and his advisers chose Berlin as the only foreign city within which the presidential candidate would give a public speech as he stomped the campaign trail. Theirs is an isolationist portfolio. Increasingly, the Obama administration will seek to hasten the day when American troops will withdraw from their 65-year residence in Europe and hand European security over to Brussels/Berlin. In the process, the U.S. will continue to hand over its bases and its military hardware to EU control. This, as our longtime readers will observe, will spell disaster for both America and Britain in the not-too-distant future.Fraser then nonsensically insists that the United States is broke and then will cause Europe to rise to power.
When the light eventually dawns on this new American administration to reveal that the U.S. is fundamentally broke, it will increasingly, and very willingly, hand over the security of Europe to the EU.Wrong, Fraser. The US is not broke. Fraser failed to understand the difference between private debt and public. The US has many problems but suddenly being forced to default is not one of them.
Fraser then insists this will lead the EU to send a peace keeping force to the Holy Land which would help to initiate the Great Tribulation.
This will serve to accelerate the military agenda of the elites that frame EU foreign policy, in the process drastically upping the expression of EU “hard power.” In the process, it will encourage those who have long held to the idea of the European Union providing an EU-led “peacekeeping” force to complete the surrounding of the tiny nation of Israel with a multination force with the intent of securing stability in the strife-torn Middle East.PCG had long insisted that Europe would take over America's role as mediator between the State of Israel and the Palestinians. In less than twelve months Obama will be out of office and this development has not occurred.
Fraser accuses President Obama of "signing the death warrant of his own nation" by not maintaining relations with Britain to his satisfaction.
The most radical of foreign policy change in which the Obama administration is presently engaged is the breaking of the U.S.-Britain alliance that has maintained the peace of the world for the past 200 years. In the process, President Obama will be not only handing over the baton of “hard power” to the EU to fill the gap created by the breaking of the pride of Anglo-American power, he will be signing the death warrant of his own nation!Like a hypnotist he tells his readers what to "watch" for.
Watch the upcoming 45th Munich Security Conference slated for February 6 to 8, and the G-20 meeting convening in London and the 60th-anniversary Franco-German-hosted nato summit, both scheduled for April. These three forums will serve as platforms to further publicize both the radical foreign-policy agenda of the Obama administration toward America’s past and present enemies, and the fracturing of the Anglo-American alliance.Fraser insists that if we do not see what he sees it is simply because we have no faith in PCG's God. This superstitious claim is manipulatively used to deny any criticism of the many failed predictions PCG's leaders have made over the years.
Watch for these three important conferences to provide the forum for the European Union—in particular its leading member, Germany—to effect a more strident voice in global affairs, increasingly overriding the drastically radicalized, and hence powerfully weakened, voice of the United States in the international arena.
If you fail to see these realities taking place before your eyes, it is simply because you lack an understanding of the Bible prophecies that have declared their inevitability and their timing for these very days that we are living through, right at this very moment!These are not the words of a man confident in what he believes but of a man preemptively covering up the failure of his words. What must go through the mind of a man who says something like that?
And so we see that Fraser's partisan animosity towards President Obama was well established even as early as February 2, 2009.