- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Without a doubt, the political landscape in America has become such a surreal wasteland of utter deceit and conspiracy that should a preponderance of citizens ever become aware of its breadth and depth, we will collectively suffer a paroxysm of shame as well as horror in having been so completely duped for so many years by so many whom we trusted.
Since December, the European press has regularly reported on the fact that the Obama administration and congressional emissaries have lent support both moral and economic to factions that later became the revolutionary government in Ukraine. These factions, which fomented the uprisings leading to the flight of President Viktor Yanukovych late last month, are essentially Nazis.
In mid-December of 2013, Sen. John McCain traveled to Kiev and visited with members of the Svoboda Party, an ultra-nationalist, anti-Semitic group that is aligned with other European nationalistic parties; initially, they were called the Social National Party of Ukraine. Their symbol is a swastika-style logo. Since 2010, the Svoboda party has garnered a healthy following, winning their first parliamentary seats and taking just over 10 percent of the vote to become Ukraine’s fourth-biggest party.
I believe that the sole reason the European press feels safe in reporting these things is twofold. One is distance: The issue deals with the American government, rather than European governments. Two, their reporting is typically replete with references to the Svoboda Party and other Ukrainian ultra-nationalists as “far-right,” a term that is accurate with respect to the 20th-century European political model, but inaccurate with respect to the present one. It is convenient, however, in demonizing conservatives, particularly American conservatives – so the “far-right” appellation works for them, as well as the American press in other areas.
Both Reuters and the BBC have made no secret of the fact that the Svoboda Party are violent, dangerous radicals and that the Obama administration (as well as certain members of Congress) is supporting them. Their rhetoric, as revealed in a recent BBC report, is that which one might hear from any American white separatist or neo-Nazi, save for the Ukrainian accent. The Obama administration has subsidized the Ukrainian government with $5 billion to date, with $1 billion more promised last week by Secretary of State John Kerry – and all approved by Congress.
This week, President Obama met with Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Ukraine’s interim prime minister, a leader in the opposition to ousted pro-Russian President Yanukovych. This of course raises the stakes with regard to his demonstration of solidarity with those opposed to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ambitions in Crimea.
So, why would an American president – and a black American president at that – support an ascendant 21st-century Nazi regime, considering all of the attendant overtones of racism, fascism and genocide?
The answer lies in the same place as that of why 20th-century Nazis would align themselves with the Japanese and Arab Muslims, or why the American political left would align itself with radical Muslims (who would kill off half of the left’s base if they happened to gain pre-eminence in America): common philosophies and common objectives.
The common philosophy of Hitler’s Nazis, Benito Mussolini’s Italian regime and the Japanese Empire in World War II was fascism. The common objectives of Hitler and Arab Muslims was the eradication of Jews in Europe and the Middle East, respectively. The common objectives of the political left in America today and Islamists is the destruction of the entire American system.
Of course, Obama’s common objective with the Ukrainian opposition – challenging Vladimir Putin – has become worrisome to all concerned. Particularly disturbing to observers such as myself who habitually look beneath the radar is how this plays out relative to Obama’s overall designs. Given the body of clandestine, dark machinations he has brought to bear, more than a few of us fear that his confrontation with Putin may be integral in bringing about a cataclysm beyond the conceptualization of most Americans, one which would result in America’s devastation. This theme has of course been an ongoing advantage to Obama by definition, in that one cannot defend against what one cannot even conceptualize, let alone perceive.
As indicated, all of the above – with the exception of Obama’s possible intention to touch off World War III – is common knowledge in Europe, yet the American press has made no mention of it whatsoever. The reason is obvious: Americans simply would not stand for a government that allied with anything resembling Nazis.
Of course, were Americans generally apprised of any number of things in which the Obama administration has been engaged (such as an administration guilty of treason and perhaps murder in the case of the Benghazi attack on Sept. 11, 2012, providing military and economic aid to Islamists in Egypt and Syria, and the Arab Spring; clandestine domestic spying programs, the use of government agencies to persecute private citizens, the insinuation of Muslim Brotherhood operatives into high places in our government, voter fraud and so on), they would be similarly outraged.
All of which puts the press, in my humble opinion, in the dock with President Obama and others in his administration and our government who have committed treason against America and the Constitution. As the despot Obama devastates our economy and incrementally enslaves us, the press continues to prioritize trivialities like climate change and gender identity issues, while obediently paving the way for the odious, toxic witch who believes she is heir apparent to the presidency.
The American people would no more tolerate a press that shielded a government from accountability where such things were concerned than they would the government itself. Should Americans ever reach a level of consciousness sufficient to perceive the crimes of the press, I only hope there will be hell to pay for them as well.
Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.