WILL THE REAL ANTICHRIST PLEASE STAND UP


It was with great shock that I read an article written by a former minister of the federal republic. With the exhibition of such unadulterated mediocrity, there’s little wonder why ours is a country that cannot seem to move an inch to the fore. It is thoroughly demoralizing to see people of that caliber engage in what appears to be chauvinism of dangerous dimensions. My intention is simply to address and dismantle the writer’s arguments one after the other. It appears the writer has become an adopted child of the far right wing of the American political theater. What some would call an “uncle Tom” given his own roots. He chooses to side with a group that has historically been either hostile or indifferent to minorities through both policy and politics. To ignore the oppressive policies of America’s far right like the systematic economic deprivation of minorities, the prison industrial complex, biased criminal justice system, Jim Crow and many others and focus on Saudi’s supposed oppression of minorities is nothing but deliberate conjecture. And since we’re talking about rights, did the writer consider the rights of the poor in his own country while discharging the duties of his office as minister?
In the writer’s perfect world, the United States should flex its muscles across the world and show absolutely no respect for other nations and peoples. The spirit of cooperation needn’t be encouraged and even if it is, it certainly shouldn’t be directed towards Arabs, who saw one of their countries invaded and occupied based on false pretenses. The United States should also support a Zionist land grab agenda, after all, it is justified, they refuse to recognize a concocted state populated by second and third generation immigrants and to make it worse, they are Arabs. This is the writer’s world view. He has also joined the band wagon of those implying that President Obama is a secret Muslim, a tired, over flogged and failed political fear tactic. Interestingly, the group accusing him of being a secret Muslim is the same group that attempted lynching the then candidate Obama over the divisive statements of the pastor of his Chicago based church. Clearly the writer suffers from amnesia.
The writer’s subjectivity and utter lack of intellectual depth in the article may possibly stem from his complete lack of understanding of the American political system as evidenced by some monumentally fallacious claims he advanced. I humbly advise the writer to always approach his keyboard while sober.
The issue raised by the writer pertaining to Obama’s bow to the Saudi monarch three years ago is not a new one, in other words, he’s not the first US president to engage in a controversy generating bow to a monarch. According to David Sanger of the New York Times; President George H.W Bush deeply bowed to the casket of the late Japanese emperor. This act generated some degree of political noise at home, and he was probed by journalists as to why the bow was necessitated. The former president answered like an exemplary and astute statesman by saying “I’m representing the United States of America. And we’re talking about a friend, and we’re talking about an ally. We’re talking about a nation with whom we have constructive relationships. Sure, we got some problems, but that was all overriding – respect for the emperor. And remember back in World War II, if you’d have predicted that I would be here, because of the hard feeling and the symbolic nature of the problem back then for the former emperor’s standing, I would have said ‘No Way’. But here we are, and times move on; and there’s a very good lesson for civilized countries in all this”. Sanger further posits that there is no protocol against US Presidents bowing to monarchs, the only protocol ignored by President Obama was the one suggesting a president cannot bow and shake hands at the same time. One has to be chosen over the other. The writer’s exercise in shameless demagogy led him to conveniently leave out discussion of President Obama’s bow to the Japanese emperor Akihito. Choosing instead to focus on an “Arab King”. Assuming that the gullible amongst us would buy into his deceptive motive. A bow symbolizes respect, a virtue the President promised to imbibe at his assumption of office, mutual respect and cooperative spirit. The writer’s crass insensitivity towards an elderly and internationally respected leader, King Abdullah by tagging him an “Arab King” unworthy of gestures of respect portrays a man that has deserted the tenets of his own ethnicity.

Another laughable albeit disgraceful statement in the form of a question is his claim that violent hurricanes are caused by Obama. No enlightened mind would ordinarily dignify this with an informed response. However, for the writer’s Information, hurricane season and campaign activity typically fall in the tail of the year, a mere coincidence rather than a cause and effect relationship. Furthermore, going by the writer’s premise, George W. Bush is a greater antichrist given that a major American city was almost entirely displaced by a hurricane during his presidency. We should therefore conclude that real antichrist’s name is Walker and not Hussein.
The former OBJ era aviation minister then floats into domestic social policy with first attempting to impose his religious views on the American polity then disregarding what every other child knows to be ‘AMERICA 101’ which is the separation of church and state. As much as we are all people of faith and firmly believe in our religious ordinances. America’s founding fathers charted a course for that country which they felt in their vision would service the nation’s growth and development, rightly or wrongly so. The foundation of that country is secularism, meaning that no religious sect, ideological persuasion, can hold sway over public affairs or have undue influence in matters of state policy. Neither can citizens be discriminated against on the basis of these factors or additional factors like race, creed, sexual orientation and national origin. This means that the state cannot take the religious views of some, whether minorities or the majority and impose it on everyone. The US constitution stipulates articulately these principles. Obama has endorsed abortion and the US Supreme Court has adjudged it constitutionally sound in Roe V. Wade. So may be the writer needs to take issue with the document itself not the individual that has sworn to uphold it. Indeed what Obama has supported is the US constitution both in spirit and script. That each and every American regardless of religious creed can have equal protection under the law, inalienable rights and freedom to pursue his or her happiness. This is the American ideal that has attracted millions to leave their homes for its shores. Thus dogmatic variance is an issue that belongs squarely to those that adhere to that given dogma as opposed to a public policy issue. The President is a democrat, hence an advocate of liberal policies like racial tolerance and economic fair play not “new age” ungodliness.
Another strikingly interesting point is how the writer starts out with an excessive dose of hostility towards Muslims which surprisingly transforms into sympathy for poor Muslims in tribal Pakistan being bombarded and killed by drone strikes. This just displays his inconsistency and confusion. Furthermore, blaming President Obama for events in North Africa is simply disingenuous. Obviously, the writer has neoconservative leanings and would prefer a situation where America invades every country that doesn’t play into its global agenda. Other than what Obama is doing with Iran, which is a multilateral coalition centered economic sabotage (as opposed to Bush’s unilateral action with a small coalition of the bribed and the coerced in Iraq) there is nothing else to be done short of a full scale war, which the country cannot financially stomach. People of good will around the world also have no appetite for another war in the Middle East. He also accuses Obama of ‘indecision’ and ‘procrastination’ in Syria. Any keen observer of the Syrian crises will tell you that decisive action at the security council against the Syrian regime has been continually barred by Russia and China, both of which equally posses veto power at the security council as permanent members. So maybe more blame should be directed towards Russia for protecting a murderous regime. Obama is not responsible for home grown revolutions in the Arab world, the domino effect is observable. Political suppression and economic hardship are the culprits. Similarly, President Obama cannot be blamed for Mali’s inability to protect its territorial integrity, which is the responsibility of Mali’s armed forces. The writer’s admonishment of the Obama administration for the political metamorphosis in North Africa is not only unjustifiable, but not rooted in fact or common sense. He suggests America should do more to stabilize the region but is likely one of those people that will be the first to accuse her of interference and meddling in the affairs of others when things go bad.
The writer claims that under Obama, America is gradually turning into a “quasi – welfarist state”. This claim is unfounded and he provides no data to back this claim which sits on the outskirts of common knowledge. Without a doubt, President Obama inherited subpar economic conditions from his predecessor. The country was already losing seven hundred thousand jobs a month towards the end of the Bush era. Bush’s deregulation of Wall Street is part of the cause of the deepest financial crises since the great depression where financial institutions engaged in all manner of risky behavior from subprime mortgages to predatory lending practices to collateralized debt obligations to credit default swaps and a host of other financial innovations. Overburdening War spending and Chinese mercantilism are also at the heart of the recession, the war being a misadventure and China being a force of history. Therefore, the country’s economic woes were caused by Bush, who inherited a surplus economy from Clinton.
The writer’s Orwellian branding characterized by his neat sweeping up and packaging of the world’s problems and branding them ‘Obama’ clearly doesn’t hold any water and is unacceptable to all fair minded people. Consequently, my prayer too is to see President Obama, a truly inspirational leader, retain his seat as ‘POTUS’.


Mr. Jidda writing from Abuja

This guy really finished femi fani kayode, interesting read.

Well articulated viewpoint. If I may add to your write-up especially regarding FFK's last line on Obamacare. Its important too to remind him to crosscheck facts before writing.
First, the Obamacare bill has
not mentioned any RFID,
chip or implants. I know
because I actually read the bill
and others can, too. It’s on a bona
fide website called thomas.loc.gov or you go to
senate.gov or house.gov. The bill that a lot of people are
calling the Obamacare or HR
3200 isn’t even Obama’s bill.
HR 3200 had two versions and
both were sponsored by a Michigan US Representative,
and both never went for a
single vote in congress. There
are no mention of chip
implants (or the like). The only
references is CHIP, which is a form of medicaid for children
called, Child Healthcare
Insurance Program. The Obamacare bill is actually
called, “Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of
2010, H.R. 4872″, which does
not mandate any microchip or
implant device for any reason. Second, the whole RFID being
used for healthcare came from
National Medical Device
Registry in HR 3200. And, the
purpose was to track and analyze data from life-
supporting medical implant
devices, like an artificial heart.
So doctors can monitor their
patients, and for other
maintenance related issues.

I wonder why someone will waste his precious time responding to that overfed buffoon called FFK. He's so ignorant that no informed mind should bother to dignify him with a response.
The man is simply an attention seeker. It's only in Nigeria that folks like him are called intellectuals.

Where are all those southern hypocrites? Silent I see!

gadogado: Where are all those southern hypocrites? Silent I see!

Why don't you learn how to post first or better still get northerners to respond?

Fani Kayode's article was the daftest, most putridly obtuse, ridiculously retarded sh(i)t ever conceived and written since the turn of the millennium. It is perhaps at par with Tonto's effort at songwriting/singing, and i daresay they possess the same cerebral functioning. In a military era, they would've been shot, and their corpses locked up!
.. This rejoinder doesn't do enough to tell Fani how stup(i)dly shallow and mor(o)nic he is, but it will suffice for now.

Akanbi_edu:
Why don't you learn how to post first or better still get northerners to respond?

pls teach me, slowpoke!fact is, his hostility towards muslims is a sentiment his kinsmen share!