True Conviction is Necessary for Action in Truth - Boldness Without It Does Nothing Good

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Jul 2, 2009 at 19:01

The American administration is caught between the intentions of an ideology once tried and found wanting, and a future thought by some to be the global change necessary to have peace, irrespective of what it will cost. The debate about what vision the current American president has for his agenda is over; only the details of execution remain to be worked out. What that entails remains to be seen, though a pattern has already been revealed, and many are dismayed at the prospects.

Some might advance the notion that what has happened in Iran could happen here, yet the Constitution has not been suspended yet for such a thing to occur. However, Islam has been resident in America long enough now, that, though it may be some time to be so, it could become a force to be reckoned with in order to do just exactly that, suspend the Constitution; for that would be the necessary thing to do in order to allow sharia law to take full effect. True Christianity will, of a certainty, already be outlawed (as the Holy Bible is already being challenged in public and private arenas), and the false religion that has overrun the apostate church will have a hard time convincing people that Islam is not the way to go. We see that ambivalence in the way the current American administration deals with the world at large. It is the result of years of it having been thought about for a long, long time; it has been written about and now is the time it is being employed to the detriment of America.

The current American administration knows what it wants, only the people do not yet understand fully what that means for the future, both near and far. Were the full ramifications of what is intended known at the time of the elections, a different outcome may have occurred. In either case(whether fully known or not), there were no full blown riots in the protests, only (tea) parties of dissent, allowable under the Constitution and the socially acceptable way for Americans to display their discontent. Anything beyond that would be cause for the case to say that the Constitution is no longer the basis for a peaceful means to resolve the issues. Then the United States would be reduced to being just another social experiment that lost its way and will be discarded into history's waste basket of failed world powers. (By the way, it is the only way to achieve dominance over the United States in a one world global society some think would be the way to global peace).

The power that controls Iran (read the Holy Bible to understand who the prince of Persia is) has just that desire of global world dominance, using Islam as the means to unify a subject population in accomplishing its goal. That the world seemingly cannot stop the influences of that intention indicates that there is a weakness against the underlying mentality that will stop at nothing to achieve it and will make everyone who will not get in line pay a dear price. It is in the fear of that the world is willing to pay any price to achieve peace, even to the abeyance of leadership with a Christian mindset to counter that threat. We already know that expecting that from the American administration is on shaky grounds.

In the crosshairs of the dispute, and it all does come down to this, is Israel. It has been explained why this is so many times before. And even though there are diversionary actions around the world to cause the powers that be to avert their attention, it will all come back to that. If Iran has said nothing else to affirm its perceived destiny, there is always the sound bite (in farsi) of the Iranian president declaring his intention of what he wants desperately to do to Israel; and without a definite retort coming from the leader(s) of the western powers, who's to say that is not exactly what the world should be getting ready to face before the next world war begins.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".