by

THIS RUSSIA OBSESSION AND THE DEFLATING OF THE AMERICAN AIR The news is awash these days, to the point of saturation about the involvement of Russia in the last US presidential election and I know many have commented about it one way or the other. My contribution to the discourse is to point out those keeping the narrative alive and how I think that the continuation of the discussion is not in the US national interest. Without asking for the issue to be swept under the rugs it will be better for those who are trumpeting the issue to tender their evidence as it is today and move on for the greater national interest. This is because the level of gullibility in the citizenry is high with many depending and parroting the talking points of their political leaning without the ability to do an independent analysis. To my mind there are two sets of people keeping the story alive. The first is the Russian-hawks in the GOP who can’t get over the fact that Putin who was a former KGB operative is, in their minds, calling the shots with wide international following—a situation created by the mishandled reset button. The other is the partisan democrats who don’t want to accept that they lost the elections fair and square. And in looking at the issues the suggestion for the end of the narrative is because the Russia these groups think they are disdaining are truly the ultimate beneficiaries of the narratives. Speaking candidly, it is known that every nation is interested in the electoral process of every other nation because they will want for the candidate more favorably disposed to them to emerge victorious. And given the US stature in the world you can be sure that all nations of the world had their preferred candidate but their level of partisanship depends on how much buttons they think they can push with success. Therefore, if every nation of the world is interested in the outcome of the US election why the obsession with Russia alone? And because this question cannot be answered honestly the focus was directed towards determining the extent of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian state. Unfortunately we all seem to have been deluded without asking for a definition of the word Collusion as used in this conversation. Asking for this definition is very important otherwise the investigation can go on forever. To my mind collusion can be verified in different senses. 1. Russia has something against Hilary Clinton for which the Trump camp remotely directed how the incriminating exhibits were release so as to drown Hilary. 2. Trump has things against Hilary and handed them over to Russia with a guideline of how to release them as to drown Hilary’s campaign. Apart from these, I don’t think collusion can be pressed against Hilary who was noted as a non-appealing candidate nor the Democratic party for imposing her on the people. I don’t think that a charge of collusion can be pressed against Bill Moore who knew what he saw to create that documentary warning the Democrats of the impending Trump’s victory. I don’t think that a charge of collusion can be pressed against the many partisan democrats whose complicity and hypocrisy were exposed in the way they were speaking from both sides of their mouths and leaking debate questions. I don’t know if the charge of collusion can be proven against President Obama whose passion in campaigning against Trump had the semblance of somebody who had something to hide. I don’t think the charge of collusion can be pressed against the liberal press who exposed their investment in Hilary’s victory by the manner of their reporting on Trump. Is it possible that by collusion they mean the manipulation of electoral results? I doubt that too because the recounting yielded no change in the outcome. May be people will have to travel to Nigeria to learn about the issues of electoral desecration manifested in ballot box snatching, voter registration delisting, electoral material suppression, voting machine malfunction, delayed accreditation of voters, missing of electoral result sheets, etc. It can only be imagined that Trump had and later sent those incriminating materials to Russia and stipulating how they were released. But that appears not to be what the debate is all about. Was it possible that Trump hired Russians as his campaign consultors for the smooth exchange of the presumed lost information on Hilary. By the way is there a law prohibiting citizens to hire foreigners at any capacity in their campaign strategy. If that be the case the US has to look in the mirror if their nationals have worked in any other nations elections in any capacity at all. Whatever be the case over all, the insistence on this probe is unfortunately saying something—that Russia has overtaken the US in the field of intelligence gathering/espionage. Unfortunately, it is not partisan democrats who sowed this seed. It is the Secret Service, the FBI etc. when they were categorical about the eternal loss of the missing Clinton emails. No wonder Trump looked outside for people who can look for them. I imagine some people called his statement treasonable at best but what more can one say when the people we trust to find stuffs as these have categorically said that they can’t be found. Another reason to say that the continued probe is working to honor Russia is rooted in the wonder if other countries were not interested in the outcome of the election. I guess they were. And if they were why is no one talking about the meeting those other nations ambassadors had with the two campaigns? Even why are we not talking about Russian officials meeting with the Hilary campaign because it would be foolhardy to think that Russians put all their diplomatic eggs in the Trump basket when every poll before the election gave victory to Hilary. I am not saying that the leaks had no possible effects on people voting choice. It should, because the revelation showed the gulf between what the Hilary campaign says and what they believed in conscience. For people who could not handle that duplicity there was every reason to bail out on her. If those leaks are said to be the result of a collusion then the highest people who colluded with Russia is the Obama cabinet who saw the presumed Russian hand and did nothing till the election was over. Another will be Mr. Comey and his soldiers in the FBI whose comment at the heart of the election persuaded some to dump Hilary in order to avoid voting for a president whose first duty would have been the temptation to grant herself a state pardon. The point here therefore is that Mr. Trump was only a beneficiary, by chance, of whatever was done and couldn’t have coordinated the presumed collusion or the things that erased the ambition of Hilary from the peoples mind. And speaking spiritually, I am strongly persuaded to hold that the Trump’s victory was God writing straight in crooked lines. Don’t forget that for some people the issue of the Supreme court was something they could not trust Hilary with. There were those for whom the thought of living in an open border nation was akin to a nightmare. Are we so fast to forget the menace of ISIS for which many want only to know they must be bombed out of existence. Do you imagine that majority of American were happy with the lawlessness in the land where the police became the hunted? This list of issues can go on and on and there were fundamental differences in what Trump and Clinton held. More so, there were others saw in Hilary’s unlimited timeframe for abortion as evidence of her cold-heartedness and lacking in the maternal milk of kindness that most middle Americans would want to see. She was only left with Coastal Americans with Coastal values. And thank God for the founding fathers who saw coastal people as fringe Americans whose values should not ultimately determine who becomes the President of America just because they have the population. Uju Okeahialam, PhD. (February 14, 2017)

by

I am created in the image of God: Do you see me? As the euphoria of the Papal held, there was the ecclesial global event called, “The World Meeting of Families” holding in Philadelphia. This reflection flows from the event of a group that gathered in Philadelphia at the same time using the model of Pope Francis Joy of the Gospel, to make a difference. It was the “People Improving Communities through Organizing” convention (PICO) which included what I chose to call a “holy demonstration.” The theme became palpable when we stood in front of the Federal Prison and Detention facility in downtown Philadelphia. As we prayed, we could hear inmates tapping on the narrow coasted windows, from which they could see passersby’s without being seen. Suddenly we started chanting “We see you, we see you. . . . .” Physically we were not seeing them but that gesture raised a deep thought in me of what happens in our society and the validity of our reflection theme. So much of the plagues of our society arise from the inability to see others as created in the image of God. We have erected walls and coated windows everywhere making it impossible for the ordinary passerby to see what happens inside. And without the ability to see, people may not be able to know what to say, good or bad, whether in Philadelphia or anywhere else. In the same vein there are the other forms of walls of discrimination erected among us making it impossible for us to see those held behind them leading to our individual and collective silences. The walls could be those of race, sex, class, color, religion, nationality, language, etc. There are also the various struggles that put people in the different camps against each other, based on political and ideological affinities, cultural and occult appeal, etc. These cause us to fight and kill each other; they are possible to be behind the different forms of migration whether trans-border or trans-city-lines; and they can even be found in some moving from one church community to another. If only we can see the image of God in each other we will know that any harm done to another is a harm done to the self and to all. The Bible tells us that nobody hates his body but nourishes and cherishes it (Ephesians 5, 29). Without seeing the inmates due to the coated windows and high walls people pass by daily without realizing that a part of them is shut-out. It is very possible that some of the inmates are paying for their crimes; yet we know also that there are miscarried judgments. However, the important thing from that experience is the awakening that unless we are able to see, we may not be able to act neither are we able to seek mercy or justice on behalf of the other. To desire to see is counter-cultural in our society today because we do not want to say or do anything that will make another angry. Therefore, we have descended from being our brother’s keepers to be our brother’s killers or banishers. We now live the Cain- syndrome forgetting that God always comes to ask, “Where is your brother? We may not be able to do magic, but we are called to see, and to act with what we have. And if the experience of Peter and John at the beautiful gate is instructive (Acts 3, 6), we can accomplish much with the Mighty Name of Jesus. Do you see me? Uju Okeahialam (September 30, 2015)