I got this story via AntiJihad Norge. The Iranian ex-Muslim Ali Sina, who is the author of the book Understanding Muhammad, comments on the dark sides of Obama’s personality.
From Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer by Ali Sina:
I must confess I was not impressed by Sen. Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was It is surreal to see the level of hysteria in his admirers. This phenomenon is unprecedented in American politics. Women scream and swoon during his speeches. They yell and shout to Obama, “I love you.” Never did George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan arouse so much raw emotion. Despite their achievements, none of them was raised to the rank of Messiah. The Illinois senator has no history of service to the country. He has done nothing outstanding except giving promises of change and hyping his audience with hope. It’s only his words, not his achievements that is causing this much uproar.- - - - - - - - -
When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult. The cult of personality is often created when the general population is discontent. A charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and project himself as an agent of change and a revolutionary leader. Often, people, tired of the status quo, do not have the patience to examine the nature of the proposed change. All they want is change. During 1979, when the Iranians were tired of the dictatorial regime of the late Shah, they embraced Khomeini, not because they wanted Islam, but because he promised them change. The word in the street was, “anything is better than the Shah.” They found their error when it was too late.
Khomeini promised there would be separation between religion and state. He lied and they did not care to look into his past to see whether he actually meant what he said. Had they done that they would have seen that he always believed in caliphate and the rule of Islam. People gobbled everything he told them uncritically. They wanted to believe and therefore closed their eyes so they did not see what they did not want to see. Eyes welled when he spoke. Masses poured into the streets by the millions, screamed and shouted to greet him. People kissed his pictures. Some saw his portrait reflected on the Moon.
Listening to Obama… it harkens back to when I was younger and I used to watch Khomeini, how he would excite the crowd and they’d come to their feet and scream and yell.
49 comments:
I think Obama will preside over the most aggressive incarnation of American foreign policy yet seen. Remember now, where Russia has defeated a Muslim terrorist insurgency in Chechnya (with unsound methods..) America has actively sought to create a Muslim country in the heart of Europe based on the ethnic cleansing of Serbians - Kosovo - just to prove how "open", "tolerant" and multicultural they are.
Obama represents the personification of multiculturalism and is therefore the most malignant and insidious incarnation of American psychology and by extension foreign policy since George Bush said "you are either with us or against us" in the war against "terror".
One thing about seducers I have noticed is that they secretly hate the object of their seduction, it's what makes them so effective in controlling and exploiting the seduced.
"Women scream and swoon during his speeches. They yell and shout to Obama, “I love you.”
Yep, and that was just the press corps.
Just read the whole article (long!) - and it's got some interesting points. I still simply can't see the point in voting for someone with zero experience. The same way I was pissed off when John Edwards (my sen. when I lived in NC) was trying to get elected with only 4 years of senate experience and nothing done for the state (not to mention Hillary who did jack for upstate NY the entire time I was stationed there - and who wasn't even a real resident of the state when she was elected).
I don't agree with everything Sina says, apart from the fact that Islam cannot be reformed. But I am pretty sure an Obama presidency would actually increase both racial and ideological tensions within the USA; I cannot see him "heal" anything. I also agree that the displays of personality cult we are witnessing are always a sign of dark psychological undercurrents. Jimmy Carter was the worst President in American history, but I don't recall that there ever was a "Carter Youth" movement in the 1970s claiming that he was the Messiah. Obama is unprecedented; a disturbing indication that the world's most powerful state no longer thinks in rational terms.
Obama represents the triumph of cultural Marxism in the Western world. One generation after Ronald Reagan led the USA to "victory" in the Cold War, a person with radical Marxist sympathies could be about to become President in the USA, and the Jihadists that the Reagan presidency helped in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union are now fighting against the West.
We didn't win the Cold War.
Tuan Jim-
"not to mention Hillary who did jack for upstate NY the entire time I was stationed there - and who wasn't even a real resident of the state when she was elected."
You can say that again. She is the ultimate carpet bagger. New York is so deeply blue she could have been from Mars and would have gotten in. Where were you stationed? Fort Drum?
As to Obama. Here is my vision of the future. He along with with the Communists he will bring along are going to push a leftist/ statist agenda so hard that you will actually see some states push for secession from the union. Setting up a new civil war with Obama seen as the new "black Lincoln".
The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. Obama's past behaviour is not fitting of the President of the United States.
Let's remember, how cold does a man's heart have to be to believe babies born alive after botched abortions should be left in utility rooms alone to die? How cold? As cold as Obama's heart?
Anyone who thinks Obama would not be capable for committing the same atrocities as Hitler, should remember that Hitler had others do his dirty work. I can't seem to find any evidence that Hitler actually killed people himself.
Spackle:
"....you will actually see some states push for secession from the union. Setting up a new civil war with Obama seen as the new "black Lincoln"...."
I understand the sentiment, but I don't see civil war or secession as a realistic alternative. Two reasons primarily: First, we as people are now totally dependent for our personal survival on the services and produce of the state. We are 2 to 3 generations out from being independent and capable of self-sustenance.
Second, technology has to overturned all the rules of previous generations, that individuals or groups can only grow opposition by totally flying under the radar, and surviving at the whim of state authority. This is not to discount the capacity to effect change in society... but the change would be on a slow-roll pace, and would amount to a campaign.
Alternatively, their could be highest level, government overthrowing change. That would be new for America in the age of technology. High stakes stuff, and would incur massive civil turmoil I think.
No, it seems to me we're in the same shape as Europeans who've witnessed their nations be overthrown by politically correct, multiculturalists with a different agenda than looking after their own people.
Right now there is a picture on Drudge of an Obama event...he's drawing Khomeini-sized crowds. The crowd's so big you can't see where it ends! The West is toast, he will deliver us bound to our foes. And pick our pockets clean along the way.
Women scream and swoon during his speeches.
Damn.
The very same thing happened at the Nazi rallies, and this in particular was significant in pursuading Hitler that he was indeed the Chosen One to Change Destiny into reestablishing German grandeur. I believe Discovery Channel ran a documentary on the theme "Hitlers Women" which investigated this.
Source unknown:
"If you truely want to test a man's character, praise him."
Not being American, I can just say that he looks increasingly as a bad choice, for the US and for the rest of us. There are so many reasons for that I'll skip even trying to list them. Am just holding that a sudden strike of common sense will take place between now and November 4th.
Fjordman: Obama is unprecedented; a disturbing indication that the world's most powerful state no longer thinks in rational terms.
Atomization of the typical American nuclear family along with its clan and community has all lent impetus to a reality disconnect of tremendous proportions. Years of nihilistic academia preaching its litany of uncertainty, white guilt plus moral and cultural relativism, have poisoned the average person’s ability to perform critical analysis.
Modern entertainment promotes an unprecedented degree of vicarious living to the extent where people no longer feel compelled to achieve and, instead, hitch their psychological wagons to airhead Hollywood stars, steroid bloated athletes or vapid glitterati whose only claim to fame is merely being famous. This reliance upon superficiality reinforces an already pre-existing disinclination towards any sort of self-examination.
Socrates said that, “An unexamined life is not worth living.” The ongoing prevalence of extremely self-destructive behavior, such as binge drinking, promiscuity, cutting, trichotillomania (hair-pulling), voluntary amputation, body piercing of genitalia and other sensitive or erogenous zones all point towards the rejection of autoscopic thought. This rejection of introspective analysis is epitomized by a dramatic increase in teen suicides and even the emergence of bug chasing, a practice involving intentional self-infection with HIV/AIDS.
Once self-examination has been thrust aside, the door is left open for all comers. An ancient Middle Eastern saying reads, “Into an empty jar can go anything.” This refers to how an unformed mind is susceptible to programming of any sort. This blank human slate is being vandalized with the grafitti of mass media’s obsession over conspicuous consumption and the crass materiality of consumerism. Clearly, given the modern triumph of style over substance, superficiality has won the field.
The resurgence of hedonism, paganism and unhealthy self-gratification demonstrates a redirection away from objective reality and towards sensuality. Decreasing educational levels combined with the rejection of rational analysis has served to coronate perception as the paramount informing source. Actual thought is relegated to the role of backseat driver. The United States’ productive legacy has proven too onerous for such mental lightweights and this manifests in pronounced anti-Americanism.
All of the foregoing represent divers facets of a single overriding societal malaise. It is self-absorption that manifests in almost terminal narcissism. What surprise is it then that Obama should float to the top of this anti-intellectual cesspool? When perception is king, hype will lead the charge. What else does Obama have going for him besides pure perception? His resume is as empty as his well-orated promises. Positions are taken for the least momentary gain only to be discarded—like so many of his previous personal acquaintances—the instant they prove inconvenient. Obama’s accomplishments are as superficial as his admirerers. They are all bonded by a blind hope for change, unexamined though it may be. The arduous task of actually assessing what change is needed and what certain changes will bring is left totally unaddressed.
This is what makes Obama so dangerous. His slate of unarticulated change means that he himself cannot formulate a coherent vision of this nation’s future. It is all too easy to believe that such bothersome tasks will be delegated to those who can best ingratiate themselves with their anti-American and pro-Marxist leader. That is where the real danger lies. Just as Obama can manipulate democratic party voters with such consummate skill so, too, should we anticipate he himself being gulled by the far more experienced bureaucrats he will, of necessity, have to bring onboard. Those who willingly kowtow to this supremely empty suit have already jettisoned enough of their morals and ethics to be nothing but the very worst news for America.
Joanne, you are right. Hitler never actually killed anyone himself. He was way too squeamish for that. Instead, he ordered others to do it for him.
Obama represents the triumph of Gramscian cultural Marxism. A person who has been affiliated with unrepentant terrorists who hate their country and has for a generation been a member of an organization which hates the white majority population, should never have been close to a presidential candidacy. If he is elected, it will be because he is a Marxist whose candidacy has been promoted by the Marxist media.
I'm suspicious of long-range psychology. And as for Sina's petition for psychological tests, such tests are not a panacea. Psychologists are not all that good at recognizing con artists. Besides, you have to be somewhat narcissistic to even run for President.
But for the sake of argument, I'll accept the author's word that this diagnosis of malignant narcissism is correct.
But there's another explanation. He's intentionally conning everyone. Radicals like Gitlin and Ayers and writers like Klein are participating in the con. Whether they're independent or organized I won't speculate.
Other words for con are "bamboozle" and "hoodwink", words Obama used to describe his opponents. They were also used in a famous speech by Malcolm X.
Back in 2005 on another forum, before anyone knew Obama might run, I wondered about the widespread paranoia and hatred of Bush on the left and the lack of evidence justifying it. I speculated this was being stoked intentionally by leaders on the left so that their candidate would be seen as a deliverer. I assumed Hillary would run and that criticisms of her would be deflected by accusations of sexism. We now see similar aspects in Obama's campaign.
Natalie, Hitler was awarded the Iron Cross 2nd Class in WW1, fought at the Somme, and was wounded in combat. I think it's hard to support the idea he would be squeamish about killing if he thought it necessary to do it himself.
He was clearly a very strange man but his bravery in combat was never questioned.
Obama is certainly a lesser man than Hitler but, on the other hand, he's in a position to do even more damage given he'll be at the head of America's Army.
Secession is not unthinkable. I suspect Obama will become deeply unpopular among many of the citizens who voted for him in 2008. The key will be the elections of 2010. If the elections are free and fair, I strongly expect the Republican to take a large majority in the House and 40%+ or maybe a small majority in the Senate.
Will the elections be free and fair? With Obamanistas in control of Congress, the White House, ( and maybe the SC.) Acorn will have a green light to register millions of “voters” where ever needed. Also, two years is enough time to import, naturalize and register millions of new third world voters. Programs can be constructed to locate the new voters where needed to retain control of Congress.
If that happens, Americans will feel they have no recourse but secession. Obama will purge the senior officers in the armed forces and fill top positions with loyalists. However, the bulk of the armed forces will not fight for Obama and many of them will join the secessionists. I doubt a shot will be fired.
I do not predict secession will happen, but if Obama does what we know he will do, and there is no secession, liberty may be dead in America for a generation or two.
Another possibility is for a majority of the states to call a constitutional convention. If they do, we will have a true constitutional crisis. If Obama tries to ignore it, or if his goons try to crush it, then Americans will have no alternative but to take up arms to protect and defend the US Constitution.
Fjordman:
I disagree. Woodrow Wilson was the worst president in US history. He brought us: WWI, prohibition, the Fed, the IRS and direct election of senators. His bungling after WWI set the stage for WWII. Have Jimmy Carter, a terrible president who kicked out the Shah and presided over 13% inflation, top Wilson's record. He can't. In my opinion.
Paul-
I understand where you are coming from but I still see the idea of secession as a real possibility. With most presidents it was fairly easy to predict in which direction and how far they would go. With Obama we know nothing of these things because we know nothing of the man except that he is an ardent leftist.
Now let us assume that the people he will bring in with him will be hardcore. People who have been chomping at the bit for years to take the reins of power. Combine their social engineering with a bad economy and you have got a culture war that could easily get hot. Regardless what the pundits say, most Americans between the two coasts have no use for Obama or his Socialist cronies. Some of them just dont pay attention.
But when he starts cramming his garbage down their throats I could see moves towards secession taking place. Would it go through? Who knows? But the mere excercise could be all that is needed to either.
A) Scare the s**t out of him and the left. Forcing them to back down.
or
B) Civil war.
Your points are well taken. But when lines in the sand are drawn, technology and all that other fun stuff wont add up to Jack. The stakes have been raised to high.
Joanne,
Exactly!
Big-time evildoers generally use other people's hands to commit murder - MANY other people's hands - rather than their own. They see themselves as "management" rather than "labor."
Johnny,
The only real difference among evildoers (including Hitler and Obama) is how much wrongdoing each one happens to get away with.
What they get away with depends not on them, but on our efforts to put a stop to their activities.
Zenster, your comment was superb. We only need more comments like that of yours, I couldn't say it better (or even half as well as you did) and I agree with you 90%.
I only disagree when you state "The resurgence of hedonism, paganism and unhealthy self-gratification demonstrates a redirection away from objective reality and towards sensuality." as something inherently bad.
"Obama represents the triumph of Gramscian cultural Marxism."
In America. We in Europe have had it for long. So, it is not any real new event, it is just progress coming the United States.
Did you noughty Americans thought progress would magically stop at your Northern borders?
By the way, I am shocked to see what I thought was the American empire going unamerican: Canada, from 2 per cent non-European to twenty percent so in twenty five years and... Iceland selling itself to Russia???
The problem is that we are ill at a Civilisational level... You know, when a children came home with a cold and slowly the virus passes to all family members... that's what we are going through.
Be aware that those who have less contact with the "infected members" resist harder and usually are the last ones to fall (Argentina) while the ones who first got the illness recover and go play as if nothing had ever happened to them.
And that is exactly what is happening. Our children, Russia and Eastern Europe, are/have recovering/recovered.
And they act really childish with the bully big brother (Russia) taking charge and the little brothers (Eastern Europe) acting like spoiled kids, going running to the sick parents whenever they can to tell the big brother "you do not rule here!" instead of colaborating with him for the common good. No, they go annoy the parents and risking to get infected by the illness.
Czech Republic and Finland will get infected, I think. The Balkans? They have leuchemia there (islam)!
I can't believe some people here are having wet dreams about sessesionist movements.
Do you really believe that blacks would let Mississipi breake away or that Mexicans would allow Texas to do so? Any sessessionist movement would have to seduce the state's people first, and I am not seeing it happen.
At another lever, Obama could easily gather a 3 million strong army. With some of the best soldiers/strategists of the world. Who will face him? He will have too much power.
Americans are indeed too lazy to revolt in case Obama will be elected.
America's GDP per capita is well above 15 thousand dollars. That means, people in America do not need to strugle to survive, only need to work, or pretend they're working. There is not insatisfaction enough to make a neighbours start killing each other.
It won't happen. The worst (really, worst?) that can happen is, as one said, "Another possibility is for a majority of the states to call a constitutional convention", and I don't even know what this means...
Or, if there is insatisfaction or disgust enough, someone will kill Obama before the country is to descend into Civil War. Like Kennedy, a shot and it's all kind of over.
Sessessions are impossible.
In spite of the similarities of the masses, Obama is, of course, neither Hitler nor Khomeini. More specifically he is Kim Jong-Il. Compare these two clips:
Clip 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-Ww2HVmY8I">Clip 2
I wouldn't call him precisely a Cultural Marxist either. From the aspect of propagandistic fervor and aesthetics he's exactly a Communist.
Moreover, clip 1 above has been part of the official Obama campaign for the last two months, before it was taken down:
Clip 3
Obama is also Ceausescu, but I haven't found the video clips to support the claim.
Another clip from Glenn Back (and ignore the Hitler connections, that's not the important part, but the rest is not cheap shots, but all substantial):
Clip 4
As Glenn is pointing out, Obama is the first presidential candidate campaigning around the world (!)
Glenn asks: Is he running for President or for King? I think the answer is, he will be:
King Hussein of the World
America will go through a deep transformation of identity and character, a.k.a. change.
Afonso-
" Do you really believe that blacks would let Mississipi breake away or that Mexicans would allow Texas to do so? Any sessessionist movement would have to seduce the state's people first, and I am not seeing it happen."
First of all what do you mean blacks or Mexicans wouldnt LET or ALLOW those states break away? Are you kidding me? Believe it or not Mexicans do not rule Texas. It all depends on which state we are talking about as to a future seccesionist movement. Sometimes I find your misreading, sarcasm and general ignorance of America and Americans downright annoying. You usually wind up apologizing and then go ahead and do it again, and I for one am sick of it.
You are spewing the same anti-American crap that has been coming from the mouths of European elites for years now. like this comment.
"Americans are indeed too lazy to revolt in case Obama will be elected."
And the "wet dreams" comment was really classy. If you wanted to belittle someones opinion then mission accomplished. I have been tempted to hurl that same comment at you for this strange obsession you have for Putin and Russia but I thought better of myself.
I disagree with Fjordman on the cultural Marxism thing, at least as to what the mechanics are (I agree that a debased Volk-Marxism is at the heart of the belief system of the elites, mixed with the debased Calvinism of predestined saved and damned).
The Weekly Standard has an excellent article about how the election is all about class and class aspirations. Obama and Biden represent the Upper Class (and aspirations, particularly for women) that form not just the elites but many/most of American society. Again, particularly single women.
Ayers and Wright are "cool" because they are a "edgy/hip rejection" of the status-quo which is assumed to be unbreakable and eternal. Thus no cost to the idolization of guys like Ayers, or Dohrn, who's "Dig It" quote shows the attraction, of nihilistic violence directed at middle class society by the cool/hip WASPY Upper Class.
Obama is different because he's the JFK inheritor. Women scream "I love you" at his rallies because he's thin, tall, Black, and powerful, with celebrities worshipping him. No woman could have done so with Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. Even Clinton would have generated some guffaws with that statement, given his "lower class" tendencies to pander to Joe Sixpack.
Obama HAS to punish "Joe the Plumber" to make the point that the election is about class. Those stupid "white men" and Joe Average guys are going to get punished. By the explicit alliance of Blacks, Mexicans, Yuppie Upper Class Whites, and single Women. Democrats have even written articles called "So Long White Boy" showing how Obama can win by making White Men the enemy (single women HATE White Men) and "abolishing Whiteness for our glorious multicultural future" (Harold Myerson in the Washington Post).
The reason for cultural Marxism is not, IMHO, a conspiracy of indoctrination by Gramscian Long Marchers. It is rather the natural alliance of the elites (WASPs in the US, Enarchs in France, etc.) who despise the middle/working class (Jacques Bonhomme in France, Joe Sixpack in the US, or Joe the Plumber) and particularly, single women in anonymous urban lives who can embrace the status-quest of Sex and the City.
I do not think Civil War or Secession is in the cards. Such a mindset requires comfort among a broad section of the populace with physical hardship AND violence. If Georgians could not take to the hills in a guerilla war, it is unlikely that anyone else will either. In WWII, only the Yugoslavs, Greeks, Italian Partisans, offered real and lasting resistance to the Germans. Most of the French Resistance was centered around rural people.
However, the White Male populace will have no place to go. They're not just going to disappear. They will, as a marginalized and officially discriminated against group, under President for Life Obama, create constant, grinding, low-level political and organizational trouble. Particularly in areas they dominate, such as the Mountain West, Upper Prairie states, and Kentucky/West Virginia/Indiana, parts of the Gulf South. Obama's entire political alliance is built on pushing White Males (non-Yuppie ones anyway) out of political and cultural life.
Just as most of the Caudillos in Latin America can't rule beyond the capital, Obama's ability to enforce things with most White Males figuring they are the officially despised group is questionable. Chavez may be a goon, but he's a relatively weak goon, given the ethnic/racial/class divisions. Obama differs from Khomeni in that he does not have gunmen to enforce his will.
Johnny, perhaps you misunderstood my comment, or I wasn't clear. Yes, of course Hitler was involved in combat in World War I. But there is a difference between killing in combat and murdering people in cold blood, which is what he ordered others to do during his regime. He couldn't stomach seeing civilians die--that's why he had others do that work for him. He hated the Jews and wanted them to die, but couldn't have actually killed them with his own hands, so to speak.
Interestingly enough, Heinrich Himmler was also very squeamish. One account I read in a book, Masters of Death, said that Himmler was having a tour of a concentration camp and watched an execution. He was unable to stomach it and was very affected by it.
OK, here are two video clips illustrating the Ceausescu connection. It's too late now so I will have to comment upon them tomorrow.
Clip 5
Clip 6
Spackle,
I may understand you.
But, lets stick to reality. The decolonisation movements in Asia and especially Africa, as well as the beggining of troubles in ex-Jugoslavia, like the fascist insurgence in Europe in the 20s and 30s all came from the same basis:
One small group of people get an advantage from the bad situation the general people are in (not existant in America, nor Europe for that matter which is painly worst than America) and then it urges the populace to kill (not happening in America).
Those people who kill are already desperate (like in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) and see no other way out but to kill. Then, the peope start to be obligated by the "small group of people" to "love" the movement or the masses really see the leader as a saviour (Hitler, Mussolini, Mandela, Chavez, Che, Castro, etc).
And you will have to face it, in America, people love Obama.
Concerning Mexicans or blacks, it was just to highlight that some visible large portion of the population in potentially sessessionist states will not be happy to divorce from the first non racist President of America...
And, if a sessessionist state starts to have mexicans or blacks to riot and support Obama, how will the State's authorities react? How will the rest of the United States react?
And by the way, who would recognise the State?
It's not anti Americanism (this time) but reality.
--------------------------------
I agree with Fjordman. America may suffer civil war and sessessionist movements, but it is too soon already. Later in the future, probably.
The commonalities Barry shares with Adolf are actually quite numerous and profound; but as history does not repeat itself and instead only rhymes, Barry and Adolf will differ in important degrees.
Barry is not a malignant narcissist; Adolf undoubtedly was. Barry is simply an exceptional narcisst whose train leads to malignancy.
He cannot imagine a tree falling without himself being there to witness it. So it must not.
Neither great leader, though engaging, has any sense of humor. This springs from a lack of humility, an inability or unwillingness to explain our past as ridiculous; yet we cannot grow wise before we learn that much that we have done was very foolish.
Both men, with or without considering their great opportunities, abstain from sexual liasons.
Both are very personable, and make each visitor feel like the most important person in the room.
Ultimately, they are expert at picking up on our weaknesses and needs, like a pimp at a bus station. It is not those men that we fear, but our shortcomings.
Most politicians had had a long and open history before they reached the power on the top;- at least they expressed solid ideological commitment to whatever cause they believed in or advocated.
In this respect, Obama is a mystery, a man with murky background and none of the achievement to refer back to.
How come that a nameless, unknown figure suddenly captivates the imagination of many out of nowhere?
It could be I am a carried away by conspiratorial theories - which are abound on the web - but I think he is only a front man put forth by the string-pullers behind the curtain; - I am alluding to the Soros type leftist conglomerate which insidiously working hard to destroy this nation.
Many on this forum tend to overrate this Obama guy and willing to attribute magic qualities he doesn't possess.
Have you ever tried to Google "Democracy Alliance"?
"What’s Next for George Soros’s Democracy Alliance?
Jan 10, 2008 ... Billionaires for Big Government..."
www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1297
___________________________________________________
A New Alliance Of Democrats Spreads Funding
Democracy Alliance was formed last year with major backing from billionaires such as financier George Soros and Colorado software entrepreneur Tim Gill. ...
www.washingtonpost.com/
If you checked the list of the interlocking web of hard left organizations like ACLU and the individuals who invented Obama you will be amazed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Alliance
I agree with Fjordman, America today is the result of 50 plus years of Gramsci’s Long March through the Institutions. Academia, the Law, the Media, corporations, entertainment, social institutions, some political groups, even religion and 'neutral' groups like vegetarians, animal lovers, naturalists have all been infiltrated.
Obama is almost a sure thing to win because the media will not reveal his Marxist proclivities and there seems to be a bizarre denial of reality going on. I see signs in my neighborhood saying only the word “CHANGE". The fear and loathing that has been cultivated towards G.W.Bush, for whom I have no great attraction, seems to have created hysteria amongst normal people, and change is seen as better than more of the same, any change.
I am about to ask my Obama-adoring friends these questions: If McCain had launched his political inauguration party in the home of Eric Rudolf (the abortion clinic bomber), or Timothy McVeigh, (Oklahoma bomber), could any decent American vote for him today? Would McCain even be a senator? Would it get more than a passing mention in the Press? Whatever the answers I don't think it will make any difference, something peculiar is going on with the mental processes; When I mentioned to one friend that I believed Obama to be a Marxist, the reaction was only a laughing/ choking noise, which I thought rather odd; No denial, no outrage, just a launch into a rant about Governor Palin's husband being her secret advisor & the real source of political power in the family.
I was considering the 'fainting women' syndrome myself only last week and could recall only Khomeini and Adolf causing such adulation. I'm not entirely convinced that these 'faints' were genuine. They were all very similar, there were too many separate occasions -about 10, the same position in the crowd, i.e. within eyeshot and water bottle tossing range. Obama's reaction was the same, same words: “Hold on, someone's fainting here.” his same tossing them a convenient bottle of water, and most suspicious of all, within just seconds of the 'faint', his insistence every time that "She'll be alright". How did he know that? how did he know it was a faint and not a seizure, a heart attack, a fall? But I digress.
I'm very worried about this election; I console myself with memories of the Carter experience and believe we can recover (our senses) again. Then I think about the encroaching Islamic Caliphate, Obama's odd history and get worried again. Times are very trying but I try to see this as a challenge, it gives me Hope! (Sorry couldn't resist that).
Decatur --
What the hysteria reminds me of most is Beatlemania. Readers of a certain age will remember it. Girls used to scream hysterically en masse, and faint, when the Beatles came on stage.
If John Lennon had decided on a political career beginning in about 1965, just think what he could have done.
Gramsci’s Long March through the Institutions
Yes, this is probably what we're facing. It's less than a year since I first heard of Gramsci, but the concept is what matters. Many institutions are so hollowed-out (especially in Formerly Great Britain) that they are more likely to fail entirely than to get back on track. People do not understand the need for institutions, lack respect for them and will undermine them if they can. Antifa and Islamists equally.
If John Lennon had decided on a political career beginning in about 1965, just think what he could have done.
Rather than 'think', may I suggest 'Imagine'?
First, I suggest to read the Wiki article. It is presenting a lot of the bad ideas we struggle with today, of course endorsed by people like Jimmy Carter.
I think the damage that he did do is *worse* than if he had entered politics, where at least in the 1960's, he'd have encountered some solid Conservatives who would ridicule his ideas before they could take root in the wider public.
Let's look at the lyrics and some ideas presented there:
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
living life in peace
This single was released in 1971 and became a significant hit in Britain. When did Britain decide to join the European Union? 1972. Ideas have influence. This was a bad one planted at a bad time.
One more killer idea:
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
Probably one of the shortest, most seductive and most dangerous wordings of the Communist manifesto ever. And by releasing this with great music to go with it, wide and long-lasting distribution of his ideas was guaranteed.
What he advocates here is, as we know from the Soviet Union and many other places, the abolishment of personal responsibility. Presented in a way that makes it very difficult to contradict. The fact that he was a complete hypocrite about this on a personal level didn't undo the uncritical distribution of this wicked idea.
It'll be a Long March to counter all these bad ideas, for they are spread high and wide, and will need attention to detail as well as refutation with empathy to get rid of them.
But then, even the longest of journeys start with a single step. I hope we can make it without too much suffering.
For one exception. Of course there will be religion. ONE religion and when it comes to which, your guess is as good as mine...
Hitler was an Infanterist for two days and a dispatch runner for the rest of WWI.
I think the economy will just be too bad for Obama to make much headway. Let's all pray for a Depression-level downturn all over the Western world. 25 percent unemployment in the US a year from now will seal Obama's fate, as he won't be able to blame it on the Republicans anymore. The Black Death helped save Europe from Muslim colonization - so let's hope for our own Black Death today. Sometimes it takes a deadly cure to cure a deadly disease.
Beatlemania indeed, Baron. That's what I thought too when I read Decatur's comment. Fainting women -- I though of Beatles and Elvis. This is the progression of my mental process:
Obama is bigger than The Beatles
Elvis is back
Elvis is black
The King
The King is black.
King Hussein of the World
Back to the comparison between Obama and Ceausescu.
Two of the clips were posted above, however here with comments.
Comments to
Ceausescu English Documentary:
English documentary starts at 0:43 after introduction in Romanian.
Words are written in the street using children. At 01:00 it says "omagiu" (no not Obama) which means praise. At 01:18 it says "Ceausescu and the children". Children always had a prominent place, in the front line, of these propaganda shows.
King of Communism - Great Shows -- this is the best documentary. It shows how central the children and their singing and dancing etc. were to Ceausescu's propaganda shows. Children have always been central to the personality cult of tyrannical leaders.
In all fairness, Obama has not yet taken it to this level, even though several of the components are already there -- such as the praising children and the grandiose mass meetings with a lot of symbolism.
But in fairness to Ceausescu, look at this clip from 1974, when he was inaugurated as the President of Romania: Nicolae Ceausescu - Primul presedinte al tarii.
Unlike Obama, Ceausescu hadn't got started with children propaganda shows before he was elected president. And this in spite of having been Secretary General since 1967. It took Ceausescu over a decade to get into this thing. Obama got started on it immediately.
"We open our hearts, without reserve, full of hope" the children sing to Kim Jong-Il (clip above). This reminds us of the children singing praising Obama (and vice versa).
The Obama campaign has backed off from this for the moment, and took this down from their website. However, once he's elected and sufficiently embolded again, we can expect it back. and much more pompous. And even before that we can expect spontaneous "outbursts" of such praising by children during his royal tours. Well, the children will be thoroughly rehearsed of course, but it will be spontaneous in the sense of the directing adults doing it without the command of the Obama propaganda machinery. This never happened in Romania of course (and that fact is not to the advantage of America). America is the first country in the world where this sort of Communist personality cult, with children singing praise of the great leader, will blossom completely voluntarily, from the hearts of the people. This will change the image, character and self-identity completely of America, which once was the symbol of freedom and independence.
There's so much about The Messiah that frightens me. I'm generally not prone to paranoia, but I just don't know what he really wants. All I see is his refusal to tolerate criticism, his intimidation of opponents, and his desire for "hope" and "change" without any specifics.
Where I'm at, I can't seem to make anybody understand that hope and change are not necessarily Good. Change for the worse is very possible.
Just last week, a critic, "Joe the Plumber" saw what happens to the Unbelievers. He asked a question, and everyone is searching for all the skeletons in his closet. Meanwhile, the fact that the Messiah told him that higher taxes are intended for "the redistribution of wealth" get ignored.
It's amazing to me that people don't know or care what he does. I ask people why they support him, and they prattle on about- you guessed it- hope and change, and how McCain=Bush, and how the Messiah will restore the economy and so on. Then you ask what the proof is for any of that, and they get offended. Like a religion, you believe or you don't believe.
As for a civil war or secession, I'm not convinced. The media are completely devoted to him. If a movement started, they would do their best to try and suppress any word of it from leaking. And whatever the Messiah proposes will be presented as Good and Fair. It'll be up to the blogosphere to get the truth out. If they can.
There have been rumors that some of his Chicago friends might give evidence of his past corruption, even before the election. The thought crossed my mind today- would it make a difference? If he were indicted on charges of fraud, bribery, extortion, etc, how many people believe that it would cost him the election? Most liberals would still vote for him, assuming that this was Bush trying to impact the election so he could stay president. And even if they avoid that thought (they won't) they would still consider it as nothing to prevent him from saving he earth.
Thoughts?
Whiskey:Obama differs from Khomeni in that he does not have gunmen to enforce his will
If he's elected, urban street gangs will be his enforcers. He'll frame it as "empowering youth." I'm not joking. City governments are always trying to be inclusive of thugs. Last year or so, there was a plan in Oakland to have young people on parole/probation serve as security guards to help women and old people walk out of BART (subway) stations. I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that. The plan didn't go anywhere, but this is how city governments think. Obama will use it.
Afonso Henriques: I only disagree when you state "The resurgence of hedonism, paganism and unhealthy self-gratification demonstrates a redirection away from objective reality and towards sensuality." as something inherently bad.
Please indicate what, then, is “inherently” good about unhealthy self-gratification? While it is important to enjoy life, there can always be too much of a good thing. It is one of the concepts that America’s Puritan founders got very right. Namely, “work before play.” We are now in an era where instant gratification has become so culturally ingrained that portions of the population are in a near-perpetual masturbatory state.
Be it video games, promiscuous sex, conspicuous consumption or just plain mass consumerism, people want it and want it now. Massive credit card debt and teen pregnancy rates all point away from one of civilized society’s most basic hallmarks, deferred gratification. It is why I cast this trend in an “unhealthy” light. There is nothing wrong with personal enjoyment. However, far too much of the hedonism going on is nothing more than an escape from reality. This lies at the root of the massive “disconnect” that I mention.
One of the major drivers of this trend is a sense of entitlement. One need merely examine the current societal fixation upon unearned wealth (e.g., the lottery and gambling) and unmerited fame (e.g., Paris Hilton or Regis Philbin), to get an idea of how badly things have deteriorated. It is as if such gratification need not be earned but is some sort of assumed birthright.
Several decades without a global conflict have bred up such a presumption of stability and expectation of personal freedom that few people pause to reflect how our current liberty has been secured. Again, this notion of entitlement discourages any understanding as to how much personal sacrifice and sense of duty were involved in establishing the profoundly emancipated culture we live in today.
Lack of education and an unwillingness to closely examine or parse the reasons why this untrammeled independence exists have only made the disconnect worse. Critical analysis is no longer needed in a world where the media pundits, peer pressure and the status quo all make your decisions for you. It is precisely this lack of critical analysis that has allowed a supremely empty suit like Obama to slip underneath society’s radar. A mere fifty years ago would have seen such an imposter laughed out of the nominating process.
Whiskey: Ayers and Wright are "cool" because they are a "edgy/hip rejection" of the status-quo which is assumed to be unbreakable and eternal. Thus no cost to the idolization of guys like Ayers, or Dohrn, who's "Dig It" quote shows the attraction, of nihilistic violence directed at middle class society by the cool/hip WASPY Upper Class.
The persistence of murdering thug, Che Guevara, as a leftist icon is indicative of how modern counterculture has migrated from “rebel without a cause” to “rebel without a clue”. It is also this ingrained assumption by the clueless Left about how America’s status quo is “unbreakable” that allows a maggot like Obama to bore into the flesh of our nation. Nobody can bring themselves to believe that the Emperor’s new clothes might be a turban and thawb.
Natalie: Interestingly enough, Heinrich Himmler was also very squeamish. One account I read in a book, Masters of Death, said that Himmler was having a tour of a concentration camp and watched an execution. He was unable to stomach it and was very affected by it.
In his remarkably detailed book, “Aftermath”, Ladislas Farago makes the specific point that Nazi death camps were created because of how traumatic it was for the German soldiers to perform mass executions.
Was it Lennon or Obama who claimed to be more famous then Jesus?
Conservative Swede said:
>>>In all fairness, Obama has not yet taken it to this level, even though several of the components are already there -- such as the praising children and the grandiose mass meetings with a lot of symbolism <<<
It's coming Swede, check out this nauseating little video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54tjbgJmLFg&feature=related
Is it in a home or a school? check out the 'IMAGINE' T-shirts, how spot on were we? and take a look at the joy on the face of the conductress and the (IMHO) bemused look on the children's faces.
Well Decatur,
I already provided this link in my very first comment in this thread. Together with two other clips that underlines the significance of it. Scroll back and check it out!
Sorry about that Conservative Swede, yes I see your post. I don't get to check all comments every day and missed your link.
Don't worry about that Decatur. The link is so good, that it deserves to be posted over and over again ;-)
Post a Comment