paradise now

I am curious if after my vanished first comment on obama's speech my second did post to the (same/similar) moderators at least.

So except the annoyance that worldwide usian wars on terror remind me more of hell on earth then of a paradaisical promise i underline any not propagandic statement in obamas speech. In that it was really typical, that it was so splendid and full of good intents, when it wasn't militarist, nationalist or apologist.

Ofxourse that drove my mind not only to trying to match sincere objectives with his polarised words. (some 150-200 out of 2400 still) i have also been thinking a great deal about his motives.

However.. to start with the conclusion, it is still very offsetting and putting me on the wrong leg. It's complex to cope with such shrill contradictions.

After all, he did passionately call for peace.(1)

ok. evrything get's in the way with evrything, and thats what the speech did for me. It could have been a greatest moment, and perhaps it still was (tho i think my human counterparts more intelligent then that this would be their limit)

So i think if it fools people that is stupid, yet if it suffices them i also don't feel engraced.

However it would be a naive hope that this is: "best usian propaganda can do to fool people into something good". arguments before it can be made: the long 'patriotic' usian tradition must be expected to pop up, (although the suggestions to organised labour and development projects or "a national effort", reach a good way to that.)

For a dutch politician it might be enough to describe them a (retorical) populist.
in the usian tradition of selfglorification and "greeting the flag" tunnelvision
also here there is no great surprise.

His putting on one line of fascism and communism need not ever be forgiven even if it turns to no harm. communism is the endless struggle against fascism, he probably could know that well enough, to be culpable for wasting his own speech.

He should apologise for that, and i would rend it him a strategical mistake.
Yet i am not done,it wouldn't suffice
There is also his other confession to the military industrial complex. he owes the world yet one more apology.

And i guess he won't? So what have been his motivations for the two points where he completely missed the opportunity to make a speedy start with world-peace, (a communist? ideal ..? one opposed to .... fascism..).

First: US is at war with a worldwide network of terror.

observations: he is in denial (militairy violence still very much exceeds the civilian reaction everywhere)
He is not at peace, in his speech he mentions US is engaging in several wars, i imagine his standard israeli 'protect the civilians' remark in this context must be regarded the reason.

So he is at war with the world because israel is allowed to kill palestines. and he is on israels side. Or is he also at wars with the "commi's" , the anti-fascists?
(although anarchists vie for the honour).

I think it made him look really diabolic (comp. 'malicious') this out of context rape of the palestines.
He seemed to indulge in selfrighteusness all to visible. it always shows.

A few other psychological indications can suffice to sum up my only integer doubts to his sheer affiliation with "the powers that be (fascist)".

He appeared to be less at ease with a worldwide wars on terror then with casually defaming, malifying, commi's.

He appeared to be consistent in his social intentions. Those that required or invited .. more effort came not the easiest, and despite his apparently incoherent political position it is not so hard to read his mind, and look into his heart for the most part.

So for something wasted from the start he still did well.
It also leaves me little room to doubt my own conclusions.
These are that obama does either not have the power, or not the loyalty's that would have allowed him a peacefull speech. Since the martial part was very inspecific except in its rather unobvious but urging hints on israel it remains very suspect.

I think in obama's world vision the rest of the worlds attempts of cooperation, coexistence, and indeed entente, to easily coincide with what he perceives as enemy's of the US. and probably ,though not preferentially in my pov, it's representation of two-party system (ya know their 'democracy').

Usian sources start to describe obama as centre-right. The public is being prepared for another betrayal.

Will he have the mind, the wisdom, the sanity, the courage to finish what he started?

if he will, he can afford this excuse.
(much better then an apologist policy over bush' wars )


(1) our best online dictonairy is so limited, oblivate? not there .passionat(e?)ly? , not there, oftentimes it strikes me as politics, censoring. Like bush ended up superopstupating people or sth. because nobody get's a clue what it would mean and it sounds so intelligent and complicated.

sub. i noticed that several elements of the whole ceremony got dubbed or doctored, slightly improved, very quickly, it seemed not to significant, yet after observing it i didn't pay ,much extra attention, perhaps there was more then i think)