Tag Archives: Adina Kutnicki: The Paradox & Pitfalls Of Liberal Democracies

Obama & Crew March In Lock-Step With UN Thugs, Chiefly To Disarm Americans…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Posted on by
11

Popular truisms are not for nothing. One can often extrapolate much from their intended usage, as well as learn from their bastardization. As such, there really is “more than one way to skin a cat”, even when things appear exceedingly bleak. But one must first recognize the dangers, otherwise how can one skin this or that. Precisely.

Yet, without piecing together all the (seemingly) disparate threads, one is hard pressed to know where the end point is. And this is no small matter. In fact, without said recognition the slippery deed will be done, bereft of a chance to massively push back, against those who seek nothing less than total submission – yours!

Par for the course, radical revolutionaries avail themselves of a potpourri of converging – to the non discerning eye, they can be seen as diverging – epicenters, as they bore from within. Rules For Radicals – www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rulesfor-radicals …is their “holy” grail. Their bible. It is more than worthwhile to print out the above rules, as they serve as a blue print. They explain the heretofore inexplicable, making sense out of what is transpiring before our (horrified) eyes. In fact, this American-Israeli has a copy of the actual book and studies it, as necessary. Yes, reading is fundamental!

In furtherance of the above, and as a tie in to the commentary at hand, learn “Adina Kutnicki’s”  lessons/rules herein, free of charge to boot. Less than a baker’s dozen (the number within the left’s rule book), but no less trenchant.

Rule Number One: Leftist dogma is the same world over, and don’t ever forget it – adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/01/leftist-dogma-the-same-world-over-freedom-loving-people-beware-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-32-2/

Rule Number Two:  Western media is mostly in the service of radical leftist forces, and operates to the detriment of patriots. They are particularly fired up against Americans & Israelis, the locus of leftist rage – adinakutnicki.com/2012/12/30/u-s-leftist-media-in-the-service-of-a-radical-revolutionary-obama-administration-what-can-go-wrongcommentary-by-adina-kutnicki/.

Rule Number Three: Leftist academia has a death grip on the nation’s young, capable of upending western civilization – adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/21/the-paradox-pitfalls-of-liberal-democracies-in-a-time-of-immoral-relativism-the-havoc-wrought-by-leftist-academia-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/.

Rule Number Four: The company one keeps is emblematic of ones worldview/intentions – adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/07/when-authentic-revolutionaries-hold-the-reins-of-american-power-centers-via-the-most-radical-regime-in-u-s-history-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/.

Rule Number Five: Ones “roots” are, more than less, embedded, even if one states otherwise – adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/11/the-islamist-in-chief-his-kenyan-wahhabi-relatives-obamas-inner-roots-addendum-to-the-ties-that-bind-the-islamist-in-chief-to-sunni-islam-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/

And while the above rules are not foolproof, they are indeed worthy of all due deliberation, as they have proven their merits, time and again. So, is the following at all surprising, even though many will “see no (Obama) evil, hear no evil”, even as Americans become buried with evidence?

‘Disarming American citizens, Obama style’

Canada Free Press, Doug Hagmann, March 19, 2013

Presently flying under the radar of the American people is the much misunderstood,  deliberately mischaracterized and under-reported United Nation’s Arms Trade Treaty. Considering the persistent multi-level attacks against U.S. gun owners and American’s rights under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the “Final U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty” that convened yesterday and is scheduled to last through March 28, 2013 should be front page news all across America. But it’s not, and for good reason.

But first, let it be made clear thatBarack Hussein Obama is on record as being against the private ownership of firearms by American citizens. This might surprise anyone who listens to the hysterically-pitched assertions by such Obama lapdogs as Chris Mathews and Lawrence O’Donnell, for example, who contend that Obama has posed no threat to private gun ownership as President. Such assertions are only convincing to those who have not done any research into this matter.Most people, including conservative Americans thought the United Nation’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) was a dead issue, or at least not a threat to U.S. gun owners based on a number of assumptions relating to international treaties and U.S. Constitutional law. Like everything else with the Obama regime, however, things are never what they appear, nor are they as simple as we are led to believe.

Obama vs. the Second Amendment


In 2003, Obama voted in support of legislation that would have banned privately owned hunting shotguns, target rifles and black powder rifles in Illinois. While running for political office in 2004, Obama called for national legislation to prevent anyone but law enforcers from carrying concealed firearms. As reported in the February 20, 2004 edition of The Chicago Tribune, Obama was quoted as “back[ing] federal legislation that would ban citizens from carrying weapons, except for law enforcement.”Barack Hussein Obama has a long and well documented history on gun control, going back as far as his law school days. There, he was mentored by Laurence Tribe, a staunch opponent to gun rights of American citizens. In 1994, Obama was a member of the Joyce Foundation, a Chicago based charitable organization that in part, is a proponent of various anti-gun groups and related agendas.

In the April 2, 2008 edition of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Obama was quoted stating “I am not in favor of concealed weapons… I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.” As an Illinois State Senator, Obama voted twice against SB 2165, more commonly known as the “Castle Doctrine,” which would permit household occupants to defend themselves through the use of firearms.

Perhaps most nefarious and telling of all is what Obama whispered to Sarah Brady during a meeting on 30 March 2011 concerning gun control:  “I just want you to knowthat we are working on it. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

By far and despite the intent of Obama-supported organizations such as Fact Check and Media Matters, it is clear that he is the most anti-Second Amendment (putative) President ever to hold office.

U.S. arms control via the UN

Perhaps most disconcerting about the present actions of the United Nations is the cavalier attitude held by most, including many conservatives, that the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty would be completely impotent against the U.S. Constitution and American’s rights under the Second Amendment. After all, it is argued that to be effective, such a treaty would require Senate ratification and at present, such ratification would have a “zero possibility” of passage. Such thinking is consistent with a normal political atmosphere and an administration that has a genuine respect for the U.S. Constitution. Considering what we’ve seen over the last decade, does the recent track record of our elected leaders alleviate your concerns?

Consider that within 24 hours of his re-election, Obama pushed for a new round of international negotiations to revive the very U.N. treaty he visibly backed off of in the months leading to the 2012 elections. Isn’t this act alone enough to trip some alarm bells, even among the most skeptic?

It should also be noted that on February 26, 2013, the American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights issued a white paper on the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty,  concluding that “the proposed ATT is consistent with the Second Amendment.” A review of this four-page document reveals certain questionable assumptions on which that conclusion is based.

This is a warning to all Americans that the Obama support of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty can lead to some “UN-intended” consequences to American’s right to own and bear arms. Americans looking at this issue are failing to look at the larger picture, which is the ultimate subjugation of the United States to a global governance. This can most effectively be accomplished through the disarmament of its citizens, especially in the face of violent outbreaks as the U.S. and the world economic systems begin to unravel.

The machinations of the Obama regime within the inner workings of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty must not be underestimated. We must look at the bigger picture and the end-game objectives of the globalists pulling the puppet strings. All is not what it appears.

canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53885 …and raising the clarion call is surely more than necessary, if freedom and liberty mean anything at all. Some more “proof in the pudding” – news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/032013-648751-kerry-announces-support-of-arms-trade-treaty.htm#ixzz2O7l3A6Br

But it is not as if this blog hasn’t fleshed out the Radical-in-Chief’s gun control designs, both involving the UN and in other converging ways. Specifically, back in July 2012, at this blog’s inception, an antenna was raised about the UN’s march toward disarming American’s, and with the Commander-in-Chief’s blessings-  adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/09/washington-very-close-to-subsuming-the-constitutional-right-to-bear-arms-straight-into-thuggish-un-arms-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-15/. How dare he/they? 

Ever since then, the topic has been hotter than hot, as related within all the attendant links –  adinakutnicki.com/2013/03/02/explosive-dhs-insider-reveals-congressman-louie-gohmert-too-disarming-americans-gun-control-empowers-the-redgreen-alliancesharia-law-its-beneficiary-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/.  

Nevertheless, some may be heartened by the recent “shoot down” given to Sen Feinstein, the left coast harpie, as she incessantly guns for total control with her radical revolutionary surrogates – pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/03/19/sen-feinsteins-assault-weapons-ban-amendment-is-doa/. 

No matter. This is certainly not the juncture to become complacent. In fact, doubling down is the way forward. And who said we can’t learn from our enemies (yes, they are) – townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/2012/10/09/obama_would_double_down_in_a_second_term/page/full/…using their tactics against them, as we aim for Conservative, Constitutional victory!

The Moral Decline Of America…The Part Played By Progressives…Israel’s Essence Exposed…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Posted on by
3

Those who really believe in a Higher Power, in One G-d, will not gravitate towards progressive “ideals”, nor engage in “historicism”. They are diametrically opposing value systems. 

One holds true to “ethical monotheism” – www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/mono.html ….the other to “progress” via muscle politics and intrusion into traditional families, paradoxically upheld under the banner of protecting the common man. Thereby, there are no moral givens, no rights, nor wrongs, everything is interchangeable and malleable to the winds of “change”. Hence, “progress” takes root – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism.

But leave it to one devout Christian, and another devout Jew, to tear apart its underbelly, hence, making mince-meat meat out of the progressives and their so called “caring”. In effect, demonstrating the wreckage they have left in America’s wake, as well as all over the west.

Glenn Beck exposed the movement long before others had a clue – except for the leftist mischief makers! This blogger recalls all his tutelage, predicating his unceremonious dumping from FOX, coincidentally, as a Saudi royal grabbed up a piece of the action – thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/26/saudi-royal-backs-imam-and-fox-news/ . Nevertheless, Beck’s lessons are more than noteworthy, they are timely – www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23936/. Worth perusing…passing on too.

As to the Jewish side, not only is Professor Paul Eidelberg a well endowed scholar in America’s founding principles, but of Jewish thought too – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Eidelberg.

As such, he is no stranger to this blog’s commentary – adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/21/the-paradox-pitfalls-of-liberal-democracies-in-a-time-of-immoral-relativism-the-havoc-wrought-by-leftist-academia-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/…as well as a reliable and close associate.

His masterpieces are found within the links – adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/26/the-death-of-the-west-or-its-survival-runs-through-western-academia-addendum-to-the-paradox-pitfalls-of-liberal-democracies-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/ …and continue below, as he explains America’s decline and Israel’s connection to history’s unfolding events.

‘America’s Decline and Israel’s Redemption’

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

From an intellectual perspective, signs of America’s decline appeared with the advent of Progressive Movement toward the end of the 19th century. The most prominent leader of Progressivism was Woodrow Wilson.

Philosophically understood, the concept of Progressivism denies fixed or trans-historical truths. Progressivism therefore resonates with historical relativism or “historicism.” It also resonates with evolutionary Darwinism which took academia by storm after the First World War.

Historicism entered American higher education early in the 20th century. The doctrine was ensconced in Johns Hopkins, Wilson’s alma mater.

Historicism, Progressivism, and evolutionary Darwinism are cousins. Just as Darwinism denies fixed species, so Progressivism and Historicism deny permanent or immutable truths. Both contradict America’s primary foundational document, the Declaration of Independence, whose pivotal concept is the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” the ultimate source of man’s inalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.  These rights entail limitations on the powers of government—of the One, the Few, and the Many.  The academic denial of the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” is the first step toward a second American revolution.

Few have probed the intellectual causes of this bloodless revolution. It has been going on with increasing force for more than a century spearheaded by higher education.

Early evidence of this revolution appeared in a book written by, Carl Becker, “The Declaration of Independence” (1922). Becker, a historicist, portrayed the Declaration as a mere tract of the times. He negated the Declaration’s pivotal idea of “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” the source of man’s inalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Becker’s historicism was reinforced by evolutionary Darwinism. Darwinism is a materialistic doctrine. It contradicts the creation narrative of the Bible. So does Becker, who boldly states: “Much serious, minutely critical investigation into the origins of institutions seemed to show that all things human might be fully accounted for without recourse to God or the Transcendental Idea.”

Becker’s materialistic worldview was reinforced by Charles Beard’s Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. Such has been the number of its printings since 1913 that it became commonplace for historians and political scientists to explain the political principles of the Founding Fathers in terms of their economic interests. This is an example of the reductionism and crypto-Marxism—indeed, the cynicism—that has permeated the social sciences for more than a century.  Is anything more required to undermine a people’s reverence for their foundational documents?

Returning to Wilson: he not only rejected the Declaration’s concept of natural rights. He also rejected the Constitution’s system of institutional checks and balances. He targeted the constraints on the Executive branch. He regarded the President as the spokesman of the people, but in a new way. The President, he said, is to “move with the common impulse” and feel what ordinary men feel, to feel “what touches them to the quick.”

Wilson thus inaugurated what I called in 1974 the “politics of compassion.” This politics opposed the politics of the Founding Fathers, which I termed the “politics of magnanimity.” The latter identifies not with the few, and not with the many, but rather with the nation—with those structural principles and universal moral values that make this nation unique, exceptional, a nation that transcends the paltry and perennial conflict between the rich and the poor, a nation headed by statesmen, not politicians, statesmen whose love of fame is wedded to noble ideas, to immutable and transcendental truths.

Historical relativism cannot but degrade this lofty concept of statesmanship. This academic doctrine, which makes the philosopher a child of his times, also strips the statesman of intellectual independence. No longer is the statesman an educator. He becomes merely a policy maker, who may be nothing more than a puppet of the masses, for he must “move with the common impulse.”

Whereas the politics of magnanimity makes demands on and elevates the people, the politics of compassion undermines the people’s sense of personal responsibility and thus leads to the “nanny” state of which Wilson may be deemed the grandfather.

Fast forward to Barack Obama, the unlearned successor of the learned Woodrow Wilson. But note well that Obama, as a “post-American” President, augurs the end of American Exceptionalism.

What made his election possible was one hundred years of American “higher” education, an education steeped in the decrepit doctrine of moral relativism. This doctrine, which the present writer excoriated in an article of warning published in the Congressional Record (Senate) in 1968, has degraded the American people. It has corrupted countless opinion makers, lawmakers¸ decision makers, and judges—to which add America’s cultural elite, if we may take a liberal view of the word “culture.”

There is no way of undoing this insidious, century-long revolution by conventional politics. America has become a “Humpty-Dumpty.”

This decadence is of course symptomatic of what has happened to Western Civilization. This civilization ceased being civilized in proportion to its forsaking the Biblical heritage and yielding to the atheism spawned by scientific materialism and multicultural moral relativism.

The First World War that engulfed Christian Europe was a bloody refutation of “Progressivism” or the Idea of Progress—the conceit of the “Enlightenment.”  That war put a question mark on Christianity. Rabbi Avraham Isaac Kook (d. 1935), Israel’s first Chief Rabbi of Mandate Palestine said Western Civilization was bankrupt.

The most distinctive and greatest intellectual achievement of this civilization was science, above all, mathematical physics. It so happens, however, that the founders of modern science, Galileo and Newton, had bestowed upon the West a science devoid of any moral compass. The truth is that paganism still lurked in Christian Europe, whose nations, in contradistinction to saintly individual Christians, had not fully assimilated the ethical and intellectual monotheism imported from Israel.

The Great War brought this paganism to the surface. Europe, the heart of Western Civilization, of Christianity and humanism, was again drenched in rivers of blood.  Neither the religion of love nor humanism had made the nations of Europe truly righteous or humane. While the works of Goethe and Schiller, Herder and Schelling, Lessing and Schlegel may have illumined the salons of Europe, their influence was invisible during Hitler’s long night. Once against Jew-hatred has erupted in Europe. We see this sign of paganism in Europe’s support of the Arab Palestinians, an invented people that adorns its paganism in the guise of monotheism which threatens the world.

We should also recall, however, that the Great War not only terminated the Ottoman Empire, but also produced the Balfour Declaration, thus facilitating the rebirth of the State of Israel.

No doubt it will appear fanciful to say that just as a daughter of Israel saved Rome from utter barbarism, perhaps Israel herself will come to America’s? Since America no longer has the heart and the mind to confront the greatest enemy of civilization, perhaps the task has been left to minuscule Israel whose complete redemption requires the convergence of science and the Book of Truth.◙

There is a very valid reason why many progressives (even though they may align with liberal “religious” folds) eschew Christianity and Judaism, often mocking its principles in the public square. Believing Christians and devout Jews are depicted as primitives, whereas Muslims who follow Sharia Law (a political/quasi-religious ideology, one in which throat slitting, head chopping and every imaginable horror is sanctioned to execute the submission of infidels) are embraced and protected. 

Simply put, in order to institute “progress” one must also think within a totalitarian prism. Thus, the meeting of their minds –  progressives (aka reds) and Islamists (aka greens) – adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/17/the-radicalislamist-in-chief-his-forward-march-towards-a-green-red-tyranny-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/…as the Radical/Islamist-in-Chief marches towards tyranny.

The above fruits are demonstrative of anti-American, anti-Judeo/Christian  “progressive” labor.