Obama Nominates Open Homosexual to Lead the U.S. Army
By Julio
Severo
Eric
Fanning, a longtime Pentagon official who is an open homosexual, has been
nominated by U.S. President Barack Obama to lead the U.S. Army.
 |
| Eric Fanning |
His
words and actions are radically opposed to the words and actions of the Father
of America.
As
recorded in “The Writings of George Washington” (March 10, 1778, 11:83-84, U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1934), George Washington ordered: “At a General
Court Marshall … Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for attempting
to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier … and do sentence him to be
dismiss’d the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander-in-Chief
approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous
Crimes orders Liett. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all
the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return.”
Washington,
the Father of America, had a soldier expelled just for attempting to commit
sodomy. In Fanning’s case, there was not just attempt. He did it.
Do
you want the bare truth? I am sure that in Obama’s and Fanning’s case, the
Father of America would approve sentence on them and he would treat, with abhorrence
and detestation, their sodomy and sodomy advocacy as an infamous crime.
In
the least, Obama would be expelled from the U.S. presidency and Fanning would
be expelled from Army, both with dishonor, never to return. Both have committed
treason against the Father of America.
Sadly,
Fanning and his open homosexuality are not the only scandals in the U.S. Army. Obama
and his blatant homosexual advocacy are not the only scandals in the U.S. government.
There are reports, even from U.S. Christian leaders, that U.S. military and
political actions have favored Islamic oppressors and harmed Christian victims.
Three important U.S. articles are:
The
Father of America never intended his Army to shelter homosexual advocates. It
would be abhorrent and detestable for him.
He
never intended his Army to favor Islamic oppressors at the expense of Christian
blood. It would be utterly abhorrent and detestable for him.
He intended the U.S. Army only to
be a protector of America, not a global police force to impose a pro-Islam,
pro-sodomy, pro-abortion and anti-Christian “democracy” around the world.
I have
read a lot about Americans who are proud of defending their gun rights by
arguing that guns are important for protecting themselves and their families. I
fully agree. But their argument also says that guns are necessary against a
tyrannical government.
Would
not a government treating, with abhorrence and detestation, Washington’s
anti-sodomy stance be tyrannical?
Would
not a government favoring Islamic oppressors at the expense of Christian blood
be tyrannical?
A
bare truth to gun advocates: if you are not able to move now, what are your gun
rights good for?
Washington
would have been utterly ashamed of a U.S. Army led by an open homosexual.
He
would have been utterly ashamed of a U.S. Army favoring Islamic oppressors at
the expense of Christian blood.
And would
he be honored by gun advocates who sit by while the U.S. Army favors Islamic
oppressors at the expense of Christian blood?
A
truly patriot American would make a revolution.
For
much less, Washington did it.
This
is the bare truth.
Portuguese
version of this article: Obama nomeia homossexual assumido para
liderar Exército dos EUA
Source: Last Days Watchman
Recommended Reading:
Posts
No comments :
Post a Comment