Richard Stanley
Well-Known Member
The following excerpted article ponders whether we'll have a real civil war in the near future, by talking to five historians about the topic. I say that we will indeed have a civil war, as this seems to be Trump's hidden agenda, consistent with the historical and religious typology I have discussed elsewhere on this site.
Trump is a type of Samson, preparing the way for the "Kingdom Come" du jour, the 'next' new world order. Samson, the son of Danoi (yes, those Greeks) immigrants was sent to "seek an occasion against" the Philistines, the people whom the Lord had placed in charge of the 'evil-doing' Israelites. At a mortal cost to himself, Samson succeeded in riling up the Philistines, but we are told that ultimately the Israelites obtained a kingship, ironically one which they hated.
Today, white America, at least, are the descendants of the pioneers who fanatically re-enacted the Biblical Conquest upon the American Indians, the Canaanites du jour. Racial slavery was Biblically justified, ironically making African blacks the literal descendants of Canaan, who suffered because his father Ham had some funny business with the drunk and naked Noah, his grandfather.
The northern slave colonies [sic] eventually disavowed the Biblical justification, and as well turned the insane Bible global real estate land grab narrative into a theological metaphor celebrating personal salvation. This is how we fool ourselves with religion, and why it is yet possible to be having a real life typological redux of history, working well within repeating millennial apocalyptic cycles. These revealing 'apocalypses' are always revealing how gullible most humans are to cynical shepherding techniques. This is why Jesus (aka Titus Flavius - the graft of Romans 11) says: "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do (Stupid MFs)."
Now, in the unfolding Futurist Apocalypse, the Christian (actual or cultural) Nationalists are being led over the cliffs of Gadara by Trump the Pied Piper, of which some evangelicals have even correctly identified Trump as their Samson. But he is also the Beast of the Sea, fulfilling the dragon's hidden global agenda.
Imagine the glee in Steve Bannon's mind, the student of The Art of War, knowing that he and the WH Jesu cabal are craftily employing the white "losers" that historically equated his Irish Catholic ilk as little better than the black sons of Canaan. The Jewish nationalist Zealots of old did not understand their global canonic subtext, and neither do the nationalist zealots today, their ancestral Conquistador heritage notwithstanding.
"This land is my land, this land is your land, from ...."
Because Jews and Christians, of all shades of gray, refuse to wean themselves from this cynical, genocidal, filth, we are all doomed to repeat this sick nonsense over and over. While the "knowing" laugh all the way to the bank.
Trump is a type of Samson, preparing the way for the "Kingdom Come" du jour, the 'next' new world order. Samson, the son of Danoi (yes, those Greeks) immigrants was sent to "seek an occasion against" the Philistines, the people whom the Lord had placed in charge of the 'evil-doing' Israelites. At a mortal cost to himself, Samson succeeded in riling up the Philistines, but we are told that ultimately the Israelites obtained a kingship, ironically one which they hated.
Today, white America, at least, are the descendants of the pioneers who fanatically re-enacted the Biblical Conquest upon the American Indians, the Canaanites du jour. Racial slavery was Biblically justified, ironically making African blacks the literal descendants of Canaan, who suffered because his father Ham had some funny business with the drunk and naked Noah, his grandfather.
The northern slave colonies [sic] eventually disavowed the Biblical justification, and as well turned the insane Bible global real estate land grab narrative into a theological metaphor celebrating personal salvation. This is how we fool ourselves with religion, and why it is yet possible to be having a real life typological redux of history, working well within repeating millennial apocalyptic cycles. These revealing 'apocalypses' are always revealing how gullible most humans are to cynical shepherding techniques. This is why Jesus (aka Titus Flavius - the graft of Romans 11) says: "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do (Stupid MFs)."
Now, in the unfolding Futurist Apocalypse, the Christian (actual or cultural) Nationalists are being led over the cliffs of Gadara by Trump the Pied Piper, of which some evangelicals have even correctly identified Trump as their Samson. But he is also the Beast of the Sea, fulfilling the dragon's hidden global agenda.
Imagine the glee in Steve Bannon's mind, the student of The Art of War, knowing that he and the WH Jesu cabal are craftily employing the white "losers" that historically equated his Irish Catholic ilk as little better than the black sons of Canaan. The Jewish nationalist Zealots of old did not understand their global canonic subtext, and neither do the nationalist zealots today, their ancestral Conquistador heritage notwithstanding.
"This land is my land, this land is your land, from ...."
Because Jews and Christians, of all shades of gray, refuse to wean themselves from this cynical, genocidal, filth, we are all doomed to repeat this sick nonsense over and over. While the "knowing" laugh all the way to the bank.
...
America’s stability is increasingly an undercurrent in political discourse. Earlier this year, I began a conversation with Keith Mines about America’s turmoil. Mines has spent his career—in the U.S. Army Special Forces, the United Nations, and now the State Department—navigating civil wars in other countries, including Afghanistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan. He returned to Washington after sixteen years to find conditions that he had seen nurture conflict abroad now visible at home. It haunts him. In March, Mines was one of several national-security experts whom Foreign Policy asked to evaluate the risks of a second civil war—with percentages. Mines concluded that the United States faces a sixty-per-cent chance of civil war over the next ten to fifteen years. Other experts’ predictions ranged from five per cent to ninety-five per cent. The sobering consensus was thirty-five per cent. And that was five months before Charlottesville.
“We keep saying, ‘It can’t happen here,’ but then, holy smokes, it can,” Mines told me after we talked, on Sunday, about Charlottesville. The pattern of civil strife has evolved worldwide over the past sixty years. Today, few civil wars involve pitched battles from trenches along neat geographic front lines. Many are low-intensity conflicts with episodic violence in constantly moving locales. Mines’s definition of a civil war is large-scale violence that includes a rejection of traditional political authority and requires the National Guard to deal with it. On Saturday, McAuliffe put the National Guard on alert and declared a state of emergency.
Based on his experience in civil wars on three continents, Mines cited five conditions that support his prediction: entrenched national polarization, with no obvious meeting place for resolution; increasingly divisive press coverage and information flows; weakened institutions, notably Congress and the judiciary; a sellout or abandonment of responsibility by political leadership; and the legitimization of violence as the “in” way to either conduct discourse or solve disputes.
President Trump “modeled violence as a way to advance politically and validated bullying during and after the campaign,” Mines wrote in Foreign Policy. “Judging from recent events the left is now fully on board with this,” he continued, citing anarchists in anti-globalization riots as one of several flashpoints. “It is like 1859, everyone is mad about something and everyone has a gun.” ...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war
America’s stability is increasingly an undercurrent in political discourse. Earlier this year, I began a conversation with Keith Mines about America’s turmoil. Mines has spent his career—in the U.S. Army Special Forces, the United Nations, and now the State Department—navigating civil wars in other countries, including Afghanistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan. He returned to Washington after sixteen years to find conditions that he had seen nurture conflict abroad now visible at home. It haunts him. In March, Mines was one of several national-security experts whom Foreign Policy asked to evaluate the risks of a second civil war—with percentages. Mines concluded that the United States faces a sixty-per-cent chance of civil war over the next ten to fifteen years. Other experts’ predictions ranged from five per cent to ninety-five per cent. The sobering consensus was thirty-five per cent. And that was five months before Charlottesville.
“We keep saying, ‘It can’t happen here,’ but then, holy smokes, it can,” Mines told me after we talked, on Sunday, about Charlottesville. The pattern of civil strife has evolved worldwide over the past sixty years. Today, few civil wars involve pitched battles from trenches along neat geographic front lines. Many are low-intensity conflicts with episodic violence in constantly moving locales. Mines’s definition of a civil war is large-scale violence that includes a rejection of traditional political authority and requires the National Guard to deal with it. On Saturday, McAuliffe put the National Guard on alert and declared a state of emergency.
Based on his experience in civil wars on three continents, Mines cited five conditions that support his prediction: entrenched national polarization, with no obvious meeting place for resolution; increasingly divisive press coverage and information flows; weakened institutions, notably Congress and the judiciary; a sellout or abandonment of responsibility by political leadership; and the legitimization of violence as the “in” way to either conduct discourse or solve disputes.
President Trump “modeled violence as a way to advance politically and validated bullying during and after the campaign,” Mines wrote in Foreign Policy. “Judging from recent events the left is now fully on board with this,” he continued, citing anarchists in anti-globalization riots as one of several flashpoints. “It is like 1859, everyone is mad about something and everyone has a gun.” ...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war
