Chaitanya Jyothi Museum Opening, 2000
RAMANAM
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.
Countrymen,
ORBIS NON SUFFICIT
SOLUS DEUS SUFFICIT
Script highlight, from Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather, Part III:
“DON Tommasino (in Italian)
“Your enemies always get strong on what you leave behind.”
MICHAEL (in Italian)
“Don Tommasino, who could give the order for that massacre, and still pressure the Vatican deal?”
DON Tommasino (in Italian)
“Only Lucchesi can reach between these two worlds.”
MICHAEL (imitating Lucchesi)
‘Our ships must all sail in the same direction…’
(then)
Italian politics have had these kind of men for centuries. They’re, the true Mafia.
HARRISON
The Archbishop and the Vatican bank, that’s the big problem.
MICHAEL
They’re the same problem. B.J., they’re connected. The Archbishop has very powerful friends. They totally protect him.”
(then, to Don Tommasino, in Italian)
“Is there someone in the church we can turn to? Someone we can tell our problem to.”
DON Tommasino (in Italian)
“Cardinal Lamberto. A wise and good man, very influential. He will see you.”
MICHAEL
Bene. I will go see this Cardinal Lamberto, and see if we can work things out in a civilized way.
VINCENT
You honor your agreements. But these people you’re dealing with are crooks; they have no honor.
MICHAEL
My word is final.
<Michael gets up and wheels Don Tommasino away in his wheelchair.>
MICHAEL (in Italian)
“Politics and crime. They’re the same thing…”
This scene and exchange have been in my mind of late. The proximate cause of that presence is, obviously, the seemingly endless dance in Washington D.C. by partners Who-Knows-What and What-Did-They-Know-And-When. The subtler cause is this age-old existential question: In any given situation of peccata mundi, which is all situations, where does one look to find the source of evil mixed into it?
Shakespeare addressed that question through Brutus’ thoughts:
It must be by his death, and for my part
I know no personal cause to spurn at him
But for the general. He would be crowned.
How that might change his nature, there’s the question.
It is the bright day that brings forth the adder
And that craves wary walking. Crown him that,
And then I grant we put a sting in him
That at his will he may do danger with.
Julius Caesar, Act 2, Scene 1
It is useful to know who is on the dance floor. It is more useful to know who wrote the dance.
Scott Johnson, Power Line: Analyze This, #30
I commented:
Don Westblade points out the error in the transcript and that Nunes asserts that he has evidence of the absence of an intel product supporting the FISA [and SC?] action.
Greg Sanderson points out that Nunes saying that now means indictments are about to be unsealed.
Stephen Shiel points out that whereas Communists took up residence in the White House during The Fraud’s occupation of it, so did the Moslem Brotherhood.
General discussion of Sid Vicious and Cory Shearer ministrations.
So best I can see at this point, the question stands: Who started the tale-to-become-intel (from all 17 IC agencies) and could make the Deep State feel comfortable running with it? I think that question is akin to: Don Tommasino, who could give the order for that massacre, and still pressure the Vatican deal? Or, in our context: Who would think they could cook stuff up against someone whose very being threatens to expose them as a common thief and also credibly threaten Deep State functionaries if they do not develop the story as told to do?
Put another way, of whom are James Comey, Andy McCabe and Robert Mueller and minions afraid, really, truly afraid? Who is NOT in the daily news? Mention of whom did Robert Mueller remove from FBI training manuals? Who is sitting silently and alone in a chair across the room from the argument, controlling the arguers?
I doubt it is Hillary Clinton, even with their knowing her associations with dead bodies. The Clintons are, always have been, bad-tempered servant-class.
The Moslem Brotherhood consider themselves, from their start, a revolutionary vanguard, which concept is a Leninist construction. So thinks of itself the Salafi/Shiite Jihad generally. Smaller formations, such as Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, ANSWER, Media Matters, Democracy Alliance, Antifa, armies of NGOs and foundations, also consider themselves, mostly for self-flattery, revolutionary vanguards. Now a teen named Hogg says he is one.
Thus the confluence of Leftist and Jihadist lines of attack as from the late occupation of the White House. And the foregoing question, contemplating a person’s name, stands. Who would think they could transform a sovereign nation, The USA, into a piggy bank for global governance functionaries, starting with themself, and believe, truly believe, they could make it happen without negative effect on their person or associates?
Sundance, The Conservative Tree House: Sunday Talks – Explosive Interview With Devin Nunes .…
I commented:
Sundance, as I read this, you side-step your own question: “Who produced the unofficial information Brennan — and no doubt The Fraud/Jarrett who occupied the White House — gave Comey essentially to do whatever to get rid of DJT? Am I right? Did you?
Here are two guesses, really facets of just one: The Muslim Brotherhood and said Fraud/Jarrett occupying the White House, relying on the likes of Soros’ ubiquitous Media Matters, produced that unofficial information.
I think this entire business is a narrative screen for hiding the fact and extent to which The Fraud and minions turned over the USG to the Moslem Brotherhood. (Be it noted, POTUS George W. Bush well-started the USG in that direction.)
And if MBS really is turning out Salafi Jihad (includes Moslem Brotherhood) from its homeland, the mulish mullahs of Iran, Salafi Jihad’s allies, have further and essentially unbearable financial obligations for their allies of convenience.
Anyhow, the man behind the curtain in USA at this juncture of our history is the Moslem Brotherhood and about that fact becoming self-evident D.C. and other loci of the D-R UniParty seethe in well-deserved anxiety.
And:
Even Tulsi Gabbard and another D (I forget whom) warned that the USG was supporting ISIL in the ME. UniParty shut her down after she went to Syria to make the point — arguably out of her lane but bearing a true and important message nonetheless. She was referring to HRC/Power/Rice/The Fraud/Brennan/Stevens moving Gaddafi weapons to AQ and Moslem Brotherhood (both Salafi) moderate Muslim allies in Syria. Sundance has posted regarding McVain supporting that lunacy in situ, with pictures and names. (So have I.)
And a fellow commenter asked if I thought John Brennan, of whom I have written It Was Brennan All Along, is the source of the fiction that started the Deep State’s espionage against DJT and his campaign for POTUS. I replied:
Yes, possibly, at least as secondary source. He is definitely the messenger boy to the FBI to start the drama, and no doubt loving the trouble FBI is in/he set up because CIA-FBI is traditionally a competitor if not hate-hate relationship. My hunch is primary source is The Fraud/Jarrett himself, the one who said he would cook stuff up, with decisive help from Media Matters because on his own he could hardly cook up a ham-on-rye. The Fraud/Jarrett is competent at shaking down the dirty, whose numbers in this age of soft minds and hard hearts abound.
Earlier, Scott Johnson posted Mueller’s Warning — And Hanson’s
I commented:
The Hunt for Red Collusion in this case is a coverup. This is known.
And a coverup is worse PR-wise and sometimes penalty-wise than its object. This is known.
Exactly why the coverup? This is known but indistinctly.
Who participated/es in the coverup? This is known but incompletely.
Scientists ask, What, Where, When? Philosophers ask, Why, What? Sages ask, Who?
My hunch: the who? is on the Abedin/Weiner laptop and it is the Moslem Brotherhood owning the American Left/Deep State/Top-Tier IC — Puritans, Roundheads, Salafists, Manichaean, Cathars all. Name prominent figures in that complex, current and lately, and you have the who and they are on that laptop. As the President says: lowlifes. They are indeed that.
In support of recognizing the Brennan-Hussein-Jarrett-Rice-Mueller-Comey-McCabe-etc. operation to manufacture inculpatory evidence framing Donald J. Trump and his Presidential Campaign and Administration with the prosecutable crime of endangering United States national security, I offer the following anthology of works by other observers:
John Kass: Obama’s silky lie and FBI bias in the Clinton investigation
VDH: Elites Value Mellifluous Illegality over Crass Lawfulness
Related from Ann Althouse
VDH: The Scandal on the Other Foot
Scott Johnson: To And From Russia, With Emails
Lee Smith: Tying Hillary’s Emails to the Russian ‘Collusion’ Probe
James Wesley Rawls: The Mathematics of Countering Tyranny
Bayou Renaissance Man: The “Russia! Russia!” court case is getting entertaining
Mark Wauck: A Guide To Spygate
John Hinderaker: Did The FBI Frame Flynn?
Sundance, quoting himself in the following excerpt in a post, identifies the subject of the fuss: freedom. His full statement, containing this self-quote and its remarkable context and other points, is here.
When we see that justice is measured, not by due process, but by compulsion; when we see that in order to invoke our fourth or sixth amendment right to privacy and due process, we need to obtain permission from men who rebuke the constitution; when we see that justice is determined by those who leverage, not in law, but in politics; when we see that men get power over individual liberty by graft and by scheme, and our representatives don’t protect us against them, but protect them against us; when we see corruption holding influence and individual liberty so easily dispatched and nullified; we may well know that our freedom is soon to perish.
Scott Johnson: On Mueller’s Appointment
Sharyl Attkisson: 8 Signs Pointing To A Counterintelligence Operation Deployed Against Trump’s Campaign
Her timeline collusion against POTUS Trump.
Her The FBI’s Fractured Fairytale
Her 50 Media Mistakes In The Trump Era: The Definitive List
Clarice Feldman: The Great Unmasking
Conrad Black: The Collapse Of The Collusion Narrative
Margot Cleveland: 3 Reasons Rod Rosenstein’s Special Counsel Appointment Was Illegal
Malcolm Davis: China’s Strategic Strait In The South China Sea, Part One, Part Two
Thomas J. Farnan: How Then FBI And CIA Restarted The Cold War Top Protect Themselves
Karin McQuillan: Outside The Defensible Perimeter
Angelo M. Codevilla: The Tipping Point
Norman Borlaug, agronomist, Father of the Green Revolution
William A. Jacobson: Bernard Lewis RIP – “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people”
Rod Dreher: Benedictine Agrarians
Βασιλεία του Θεού
Kingdom of God
Update 1: Reading here the confusions and struggles with grasping just the literary taxonomy of the Bible puts me in gratitude for being required, for so many years, to learn the history of text criticism of the Bible and especially the labors of St. Jerome, whose Latin Vulgate I would argue more fixed the canon — especially its internal etymological potencies — than Nicaea did, at least for the Latin Church.
One opines about what one sees going on among their practitioners, but one does not hold one’s grasp of the medical, engineering, legal, military, etc., professions as more than amateur level preliminaries unless, of course, one has undergone the years of training required to function as a professional in one or more of those professions.
Yet seemingly evey manjack and sallyjane abandons caution to advance their grasp of the Christian theological and exegetical professions as world-class authoritative.
Yes, God can reach each person without need of an intermediary. (Note, the Church has never said *does.*) No, one’s grasp of Christian culture, especially intellectual culture, is amateur at best until one has spent years learning it by living it. Same as for the other professions. One can talk as a General Officer when one has mastered command and staff responsibilities in every rank below that one.
Also, there is no such thing as a religious teaching that tells you what you should believe. And Christianity has nothing to do with morality, much less teaching it. Also, God does not exist. Those are each and all classical Christian doctrine, and they do not tell, compel or threaten what you should believe. They describe powers of being regarding which you must make decisions.
Doctrine is verbal distillation of universal truth guaranteed by universal experience. The apple does not fall far from the tree, is doctrine. Jesus the Christ is thrown into existence in order to rescue creatures, men and women, and all the rest, from sin and death, is doctrine.
Update 2: Sharyl Attkisson: What Did Peter Strzok Do?
Update 3: Adam Mill: The DOJ Has Turned The Russia Investigation Into A Puzzle Designed Never To Be Solved
Update 4: Avner Zarmi: The Truth About George Soros
Update 5: Sharyl Attkisson: What would the intelligence community’s ‘insurance policy’ against Trump look like?
Update 6: Gabbard’s Presidential Run Strikes Fear In DNC Heart
Update 7: Sharyl Attkisson: A Citizen Suing the Department of Justice Needs More than Just a Winning Legal Argument
Update 9: Confidential Memo: Secretive Liberal Donor Club Plots $275 Million Spending Plan for 2020
Update 10: Tulsi is not a fool.
floridaobserver to David R. Graham
That’s what I thought until she met Assad and said he was not the enemy.
David R. Graham to floridaobserver
I expected that point to be raised. It should be. Here is my take on it, FWIW: Assad is no friend of the USA and has caused death to USA Soldiers. He is a louse. However, that was not Tulsi’s point in visiting him, as she has explained several times.
Her point was that USA — aka Obama/Brennan/McCain — were trying to oust Assad by benefiting AQ/ISIS with arms and training to do the deed.
They had no strategic reason beyond personal pique and ancient and commanding CIA crotchets devoid of allegiance to USA as a sovereign nation.
In fact, arming/training AQ/ISIS undercut their support for the blood-thirsty ayatollahs of Iran who feed Assad. It was, as with all things Obama, FUBAR. And they risked war with Russia who also supported Assad.
That was Tulsi’s point. She was no fool for making it. On some other matters, I deplore Tulsi’s postures, but I would never ascribe to her the sobriquet of fool. That is reserved for people who ignore their duties to self-correct and to ruminate carefully and honestly upon advice they are offered from whatever source.
AtlDDS to David R. Graham
At the end of the day she chose to be part of the Democrats — that is proven fool.
David R. Graham to AtlDDS
Point taken. However, in this matter of which she spoke and traveled — Obama, Brennan, McCain, or as she tactfully put it USA, supplying and training AQ/ISIS to take down Assad — she spoke the truth and rightfully condemned those personalities’ actions in that regard. Some other postures of hers I abominate. But when she is spot on, I feel credit is due her. She behaves foolishly in some regards, but she is no fool, meaning behaving foolishly plenarily.
Update 11: Tulsi’s Last Stand?
AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA
