OBAMA AND JERUSALEM ON HIS MIND ~ Rollan's Censored Issues Blog

Tuesday, April 13, 2010



Whether or not Obama will be falling backwards like the Eli of my last article, I am now going to make some biblical points about Barack Obama, his ideas and policies. I am however less sure about comparisons with specific biblical persons such as I made with regard to the Pope and Eli. Nor am I quite so sure as some people that Obama is in some kind of immediate danger.

According to a Malaysian correspondent of mine last year and now according to the often correct Richard Nolle in America and apparently too certain Hindu astrologers, somebody else who might be falling backwards or just falling in some way is Barack Obama. He is supposed to need extra security later this month and in May.

I don’t know how these people can be so confident of a correct chart in terms of time and place to begin offering these forecasts, but from just the pattern of the birth's date I could never be too confident of Obama the man, starting with the afflicted, deception prone Sun/Neptune aspect. Ideally no strong, really trustworthy world leader should have it, nor, among other things, such as the dangerous Lie asteroid conjunct his sun. This even lends some weight to those negative psychological assessments which speak of narcissistic problems (and, yes, Narcissus does conjunct Obama’s Saturn, the problems planet, as though to register a problem along these lines – and if President Sarkosy of France now thinks Obama is a bit “aliene”, a bit mad, then he may actually be so!).

But I am not about to join silly choruses that make out President Obama to be the Antichrist or claim that everything he does is wrong. Doubtless he’s sometimes right. But although if I were an American I would reckon to vote Democrat and also support moves towards the universal health care I consider any country should have, I could never have brought myself to vote for Obama. I don’t believe he is who he appears to be; a master showman, I think he’s inexperienced, shady and even dangerous for international politics, not least Israel which plainly he doesn’t like.

No matter what he says in order to keep some sections of the public happy, there’s no way it is possible Obama could begin to like Israel and it's beginning seriously to show through. Even if he believes he has reasons to disapprove Israel on some points at this time, something is wrong when the same man unwilling to bow at Buckingham Palace but prepared to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia (usually symbolically taken as having implications for submission to Islam )is prepared via a nobody to admit Israel’s President through a side door of the White House only, to a waiting room rather than the Oval office, and all without the ceremony normally accorded even to minor nations, and then leave his guest sitting in limbo while he arrives very late at his convenience. This kind of theatrical arrogance towards specifically and uniquely Israel belongs somewhere with the world view of Rev Jeremiah Wright whose church Obama attended for years. There Judaism could be dismissed as “gutter religion” or words to that effect – the precise beliefs and words are disputed, but not the basic anti-Semitism. I am not about to make Obama out to be the Bible’s Haman (an early type of the anti-Semite from the story of Esther) but spiritually and otherwise I believe he’s still bad news for Israel, religion and the world beyond it.


This last Easter Obama’s Easter address took a decidedly multi-faith line - or some might say un-faith line since he wanted it to embrace people of no faith too. And doubtless one part of him does like to be and seem infinitely open and accepting just as his always peculiar sense of what’s honest has caused him to affirm to the world, what isn’t strictly the case, that America “isn’t a Christian nation”. True it may not be a “good” Christian nation and obviously many minorities aren’t Christian, but the fact is that the nation is predominantly Christian and it’s to manufacture truth to propose otherwise. What personal or political motive would Obama have to maintain otherwise? Perhaps plenty.

While it’s doubtful that as critics and enemies have maintained, Obama is outright a Muslim, (even if in his Barry Soetero childhood in Indonesia he was registered as such) there’s little doubt that despite the occasional (politically required?) church attendance his affinities, sympathies, and also hopes for political appeasement lie principally with Islam and its nations. In real terms, Obama may be more like a universalist Sufi, Theosophist or Unitarian (he has anyway said all faiths lead to the same place) but his real and deepest feeling is for the path of Islam whose exclusivism he chooses to ignore.

A YouTube feature devoted to proving Obama Muslim shows him making the slip, “my Muslim, I mean Christian faith” and declaring the prettiest sound in the world to be the muezzin call to prayer, and that the Koran, which he always carefully refers to as “the Holy Koran”, is a repository of wisdom, a book “revealed” etc. It’s a reverence for the scripture which looks to be signaled by the perfect easy trine in his birth chart from religion sign, Sagittarius, to Obama’s independent Uranus of the asteroid, Koranna (It’s an asteroid I’m still trying to decide about – originally asteroids got registered in feminine form). As in Obama’s Egyptian speech in praise of all things Islamic last year, you can’t help feeling it is less conviction than hurt pride and outraged narcissism in relation to his heritage that is fuelling his assertions. Like people who want to believe themselves aristocrats, really, Obama couldn’t have less than the best when it comes to religion and culture to back him.


Obama’s Kenyan relatives are all Muslims and at his birth Kenya conjuncts Patria (homeland), a strong hint that even if Obama was not born in Kenya (as he denies but some maintain - the Kenyan Press once supposedly referred to “our Kenyan born Obama”) certainly his truest affinities all lie there and that includes with the Islam of which he imbibed plenty while at school in Indonesia where he even won a prize for Islamic knowledge.

In parenthesis on this issue of origins, one gathers a case regarding his eligibility for presidency is posted for June 3rd - though one can imagine it won’t happen – as there’s the additional problem one can’t be born of dual nationality and run America and it appears Obama’s father was registered as a British citizen. I note that astrology’s Father asteroid (Abbe) in Obama’s natus directly opposes his Jupiter (register of truth and also anything foreign) a hint that again something is “wrong” or unclear around his origins. It’s not fashionable or just not reassuring to allow that Obama’s background might be the subject of lies and any major deception – Democrats who wanted him in obviously won’t hear of it and most of all the rest don’t want to realize they could have been gypped in a truly unprecedented way by an actor who likes to play big parts on an international stage - and yes, this theatrical Leo has Actor trine his Mercury. Watch his words, watch his mouth!

So…the birther case is liable to be dismissed as right wing rumour mill and resentment. Which it doubtless sometimes is, but one would still prefer to see cooler attitudes and more stringent policies prevail towards this whole subject. Whatever Obama’s true origins, I see no reason why he should ever have refused (and been allowed to refuse) to produce his original birth certificate – a record of live birth is not the same thing and it could be fiddled. If it would keep a restless section of the public quiet, why not produce it rather than pour money into legal fees putting stops to inquiries and cases around this vexed issue of a candidate’s background? Is transparency too much to ask?

……No matter the truth about Obama’s biography, I feel the case for his ongoing Muslim affinities is now sufficiently made and is rather bolstered by the way in which as soon as Obama has been finally released to international affairs from health care battles, first in line of fire has been Israel whose position on Jerusalem is getting challenged. And it’s being so basically in harmony with (mostly late developed) Muslim notions about possession of that city. Whether you agree with that particular claim or not, the fact is that now Palestinians, encouraged by Obama’s position, have been making stronger demands than previously about terms for peace talks and have been difficult this last Passover about the Temple area. Israel’s Netanyahu insists that Jerusalem is “not a settlement” and that is true enough because even if you don’t accept what looks like Israel’s rather obvious historic claim to the city, it’s quite normal for territory won in war, especially war in self-defence, to be retained.

If the nations of the world won’t and can’t accept that in Israel’s case, then they are making an idealistic exception they don’t reckon to apply elsewhere and the Palestinians, even if one concedes something to their complaints, are not by any standards good losers in the war game. If they are not, that’s at least partly involved with the fact that engages the religious issue the liberal west doesn’t care to admit or believe, namely that there is an assumption that wherever Muslims have once held land they should retain that land. It’s a claim or assumption that goes rather beyond the somewhat similar but obviously more long standing Jewish claim to Jerusalem. (If you don’t believe any real religious conflict is involved, and it’s nothing but a human rights thing, then perhaps you had better read the understandably recently best selling Son of Hamas).

In connection to these claims and by way of introduction to the next observations, let’s note this most peculiar and striking of points. In the foundation chart of modern Israel, the asteroid, Jerusalem (at 3 of fixed Taurus, the eternity sign, is contested by being in the 7th house of open enemies, but is conjunct of all things, The Part of Bequest. Bequest is how it and for that matter Israel more generally is biblically regarded, as a place and land to which the Children of Israel are more the guardians under God than the owners in the usual sense.


With so much complexity of opinion and human inflexibility involved, this is perhaps why, and prophetically too, the Bible’s book of Zechariah looks towards a time when specifically Jerusalem will become a “burdensome stone” for all the nations of the world which will eventually come against it. Israel’s battle for Jerusalem is perceived as ultimately a spiritual one because God’s “Name” (the Temple was originally called the Temple of the Name, Ha-Shem) dwells in Jerusalem forever making it the most sacred place on earth. The Satan is seen as challenging this and in Zechariah’s vision, the Lord says “The Lord rebuke you O Satan, the Lord who has chosen Jerusalem” (Zech 3:2).

Oddly, unfortunately, or however one sees it, it tends to be mostly rather noisy and sometimes merely fanatical evangelical Christians who know or emphasize this theme since Catholics read the Bible but little while even modern Judaism has become Torah orientated at the expense of even the prophets. This notwithstanding, the Jerusalem tradition is biblically so strong it would probably be more protested by Jews and Christians if it were more known and accepted. In fact, and rather incongruously, even Jerusalem’s Temple Mount area is currently under Muslim supervision to which it was accorded by the (secular) Israeli government almost as soon as Jerusalem was re-taken after millennia in 1967.

I am always claiming that with overwhelming proofs (see last December’s article on Broadcasting and Censoring the Bethlehem Star)I possess the true data for Christ’s birth, and certainly this same data dramatically reflects the just mentioned Jerusalem issue. On the chart’s world point (15 of royal Leo) there is Shaim (variant of Shem, the Name of God). Beside it at 16 degrees is Jerusalem, and beside Jerusalem at 17 degrees (conjunctions are very pro or con something) is Lucifer, placed there rather as in Zechariah’s vision challenging "the Name" and the Jerusalem where the Name stands for all peoples of the world (Shaim on the world point). Then in exact affliction aspect to Jerusalem is the asteroid, Stone, reflective of the prophecy of Jerusalem becoming “the burdensome stone” that Jerusalem will become to the nations of the world.

Jerusalem’s 16 degrees of Leo is plainly what astrologers call a sensitive degree of the kind that carries across centuries. 16 Leo is the position of Saturn, traditional symbol of restrictions and of any weight and whatever falls, in the birth chart of modern Israel. This Saturn is a linked, alternative way of symbolizing the ongoing Jerusalem problem which is all of a dramatic, mega-sized Leo one. And into this great potential for material and spiritual problems comes the fantasist Leo leader, Barack Obama, formerly Barry Soetero, that star performer ready to take on any part or sign to any name (as said, Actor trines his writing and speaking Mercury exactly!).


Barack Hussein Obama’s Leo sun is at 13 Leo and conjuncting it on that degree is asteroid Lucifer while at nearly the 15 degree world point he has the dangerous asteroid, Lie. Well, we do all have to have Lucifer and Lie somewhere in our natus and let’s not speculate on how much Obama may have been pulling the wool over the eyes of Americans on some things! But even being as generous as possible, we can’t quite ignore Obama’s Lie is close to the sensitive Shaim/Shem of Christ’s data. Even this we might ignore if the dangerous potential were not backed up by the distinctly noticeable close opposition of Obama’s natal Jerusalem to his Pluto. And I don’t think there’s the slightest doubt that in Christ’s chart, in modern Israel’s chart, and even anyone’s chart, the highest octave meaning of Pluto is quite simply as symbol of God. So Jerusalem is especially where Obama faces divine issues.

From the biblical/prophetic standpoint, to tamper with Jerusalem can finish by doing Luciferian work which, with Lucifer conjunct his sun, Obama is perhaps more liable than some to do – though of course we all have Lucifer somewhere in our charts! – and which needless to say puts one in bad relation with the divine generally. Once again there’s a hint of just such a potential in Obama’s pattern through supplemenatiojn of the core message through the affliction square of his rebellious Uranus to Bhagwat (Hindu name of the personal side of ultimate deity little stressed in Hinduism) and the affliction square of his Theotes (Godhead) to his natal Venus.

Even if you dismiss all of this, what can’t be dismissed is that currently the Obama policy, is very largely an appeasement, almost a flattery of some Muslim nations (who don’t favour him due to his continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan offensives), while it takes a firm line with Israel which he hopes makes up for what doesn’t please people elsewhere. This will do nothing and nobody any good and thinking Christians, who should perhaps never have voted for Obama in the first case (or in the case of Hillary Clinton consented to work for him as she is too compromised by it), ought to recognize that they are supporting a rather vainglorious individual who, if one could see behind the veil, can only help precipitate problems in the Middle East, encourage any “burdensome stone” scenarios and, however indirectly, take on God.


Anonymous said...

The Certification of Live Birth is now the official birth certificate of Hawaii, and it is the only birth document that Hawaii sends out. It no longer sends out copies of the original birth certificate (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html).

There is no way to get a birth certificate--long form or short form--in Hawaii that says "born in Hawaii" on it unless there was proof that the child was born in Hawaii. Obama's says "born in Hawaii," and the facts on it were confirmed twice by the two top officials of the Department of Health of Hawaii.

Rollan McCleary said...

OK, as a non American ignorant in this sphere I'll accept what you say till I hear the next contradiction and wonder what it's all about - the claims and counter0claims seem endless. I feel it's a pity you didn't discuss more important issues raised by the article, this one was merely by the way. I don't consider resolution of the birth issue crucial to what I have to say.

Anonymous said...

Re: "(even if in his Barry Soetero childhood in Indonesia he was registered as such) ..."

Even that is not certain. The form was filled in by a clerk, and not signed by any member of a family.