The Obama Acceleration: Tyrant? (First Installment)

The time is coming for all of us to prepare for the worst. Paradoxically perhaps, we can decelerate that movement by "speaking truth to power" as SANE put it the other day about former Congressman and past head of CIA Goss. Now in fact, Goss did not speak truth to power. He spoke about the problem of Obama in processes of destroying American IT at the CIA. But he never mentioned the reason. The reason is the convergence of Islam (Muslims, Shari'a) and the Western Elites. Any speech to power about this problem is a consideration whether democracy etc., requires no consideration if Muslims embrace a teaching which includes treason. Now what? Impeach Obama? He is in fact incarnate for the convergence as leader of the Elites in Western societies at the same time he is doing everything in his power (and he has great power as head of Western Elites, all of whom are his supporters and protectors) to nationalize Shari’a in the U. S.; that is, to become leader of the Muslim Brotherhood which is now pursuing this same end. The Muslim Brotherhood is a Jihadist functionary of Islam.

Consider the case of Paulson and the National government's "terrorizing" and using U.S. business, here banks, the reason is also absent. In SANE's presentation, and certainly in the reason why the Banks obeyed, and why the government had leave to play its very brutal role with the banks. The source of the problem here is again about speaking truth to power. Has anyone spoken this truth to power? Of course not. The reason is the same as in the case of the Muslims. Here again it is democracy. The source of the entire financial crisis is the power of  the Rainbow bloc vote. Now that is the truth to be spoken to power. I can speak it because it makes no difference. "He's a racist" will take care of me. But then I can't speak truth (or anything else) to power. But then at least it is plain the same question applies to the Rainbow as to Muslims. Now what? Two nations? Six? Or the World State.

What would it mean for anyone to speak truth to power about Obama, or to him? Another way to put this is to re-state the first sentence of this note. If we are to prepare for the worst, what is the worst? This is an easy question to answer, but it is not truth to power; and this for the reason that it is not in the realm of what is truth in Speech where all is Reciprocal for Science (Certainty).  The worst is the World State. Obama is preparing this as sure as he is releasing the ban on federal funding for medical procedures said by science to be ontologically and morally neutral. But here Obama is making it easier to speak. This is to say he is moving to curtail Speech for those who object to these procedures as their opinion. It cannot be otherwise if Science is the transcendent point of truth. (Science is a transcendent teaching for Second Intention.)

Perhaps you will consider this with respect to the efforts –here as noted in Gaffney’s comments on Koh appearing at SANE this morning –of the U.S. President to seat a “transnationalist” in high office where he will become decisive what the U. S. Constitution is. Is the “worst” in view or is it not? Will he oppose any constitutional criminalization of Shari'a? But if he does not how will this alter the meaning of treason if the President of U. S. favors Shari'a or de-criminalization of treason explicit for Muslims in Shari'a?

RJL

Printer-Friendly Version