Who Is Nikki Haley?
By
Julio
Severo
U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley withdrew the United States from
the United Nations Human Rights Council. Her argument is that this council has
an anti-Israel bias. Her decision was absolutely correct. In fact, the United
State should have made this decision many decades ago.
 |
| Nikki Haley |
Why
did she single Syria, which is not a member of this council, and did not single
Saudi Arabia, which is a member of this council?
If
the United Nations Human Rights Council is voting consistently against Israel,
it is because its Saudi member and other radical members want so.
Since 2011, Syria
has been a victim of the military actions of the U.S. government, firstly under
Obama and now under
President Donald Trump. The great Syrian sin is not to be
aligned to the U.S. interests. Saudi Arabia was not singled out for attacks by
Haley because, even though a sponsor of the worldwide Islamic terrorism, it is
aligned to the U.S. interests.
So, blame a U.S. enemy (Syria) for the anti-Israel hatred of a U.S. ally (Saudi
Arabia) in the United Nations!
Yet, this is not the first time the
U.S. and Saudi Arabia have aligned interests. When U.S.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was creating the United Nations in 1945, he
assured Saudi Arabia that he would not allow the creation of Israel.
So the creator of the U.N. — Roosevelt — did not want the creation of Israel,
because he had in mind Saudi interests. If the U.N. today opposes Israel to
serve Saudi interests, it is doing just the will of its creator.
If
Haley were a U.S. Ambassador under the U.N. creator, he would commend her for
not singling out Saudi Arabia for attacks. But he would certainly fire her for
opposing Saudi interests in the United Nations Human Rights Council against
Israel.
It
was a great step to withdraw the U.S. from this council. Yet, it would be a
vastly more necessary step to disavow its wicked creation. The U.S. cannot
disavow its own paternity over the U.N., but it can and should disavow its
creation and denounce Roosevelt.
Anyway,
Haley would get in trouble if she tried to oppose anti-Israel Saudi interests
in a Roosevelt administration.
But
even in the Trump administration, her interests are not always aligned with
Trump.
Last
April Haley was involved in a public quarrel after Trump’s adviser Larry Kudlow suggested she had some “momentary
confusion” regarding U.S. sanctions on Russia. Haley responded, “With all due respect, I don’t
get confused.”
She
supports an increase of the anti-Russian sanctions Obama had initiated. She
wanted more anti-Russia sanctions in a time Trump did not, and the result was
confusion.
Haley,
46, has been ambassador to the U.N. since January 27, 2017.
There
are other things you should know about Haley.
She
was named one of Time’s 100 most influential people in 2016.
So if she is so important, you should know her better, because if there is a
woman who can achieve the U.S. presidency, it is her.
When
she assumed office in 2011, Haley became the first female governor of South
Carolina. The Republican was also the first minority to hold that office. She
was endorsed by Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee. Romney
was the first governor to approve homosexual “marriage” in Massachusetts. But
Haley is not to blame for Republican liberals supporting her.
She
should be blamed for what she has done herself. And, with all due respect to
her, I think she does get confused.
In 2015, Haley signed a bill to move
a Confederate flag moved from the state Capitol grounds, adhering to demands of
liberals in the state who saw the conservative flag as a symbol of hate. She
sided with left-wingers against conservatives. She did exactly what liberal
governors did in other states.
“This
flag, while an integral part of our past, does not represent the future of our
great state,” Haley said at the time. I can understand her lack of roots in the
issue because, even though having been born and raised in South Carolina,
Haley’s true roots are traced to her Indian immigrant parents. The Confederate
flag or another U.S. conservative symbol has no integral part of her past.
“To
destroy a people you must sever their roots,” wrote Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the
Russian laureate who spent eight years in a Soviet labor camp for his
opposition to the Marxist system. He made this statement in regard to the
Soviets’ efforts to sever the Russian people from their history, including
their Christian history.
As far as I know, the Confederates
have good traditions. About 10,000 Confederates moved to Brazil after the end
of the Civil War in 1865 and they, who were Protestant, founded schools and
preached the Gospel in Brazil. They were the direct inspiration for the
Brazilian government to create the first public-school system. Before the
Confederates, the poor had no access to schooling and education in Brazil. If
the Brazilian poor have today some education, it is thanks to the Confederates.
Is this not a good tradition? If Haley does not see this way, what is there in
her mind?
 |
| Nikki Haley |
She
was married in two ceremonies. One ceremony was held in a Methodist church and
another was a Sikh ceremony.
Haley
attends a Methodist church. But she told The New York Times in a 2010 profile that she would sometimes attend
Sikh services, as she was raised in that faith.
The
Sikh religion, which is a combination of the concepts of Hinduism and Sufi
Islam, believes in reincarnation.
The
founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak, taught that god (Vahiguru) is already inside
every person, but can be accessed and known through only contemplation. Very
similar to New Age stuff.
In
his The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics, author Ed Hindson said, “Because
Sikhism is in complete contradistinction to Christianity, the list of
disagreements between Sikhism and Christianity is long. Sikhism denies the
incarnation, the Trinity, and the Bible. Sikhism affirms reincarnation and
denies the reality of sin. Even the nature of God as the uncreated Creator is
not the same.”
 |
| Nikki Haley |
I
do not know what Haley calls Christianity, but Christianity with the Sikh
religion is a strange mixture, strange fire and unequal yoke.
If
she eventually reaches the U.S. presidency, her medley Christian/Sikh (actually,
sick) spirituality will get her more confused, for if the body of a Christian
is the temple of the Holy Spirit, how can this temple share its premises to the
spirits (demons) of Sikhism?
 |
| Nikki Haley |
She
didn’t endorse Trump in the GOP primary in 2016. In fact, she attacked him. She
implied criticism of Trump when she said, “During anxious times, it can be
tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices. We must resist that
temptation.” Trump, who understood the “implied” criticism, answered, “I am!
I’m very angry because I hate what’s happening to our country.”
Headlines
would accurately say that, for Nikki Haley, any Republican could be a
candidate, but Trump.
Haley
endorsed Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who is a neocon who consistently wants war
with Russia. She has the same neocon feelings.
Trump
said in a tweet, “The people of South Carolina are embarrassed by Nikki Haley!”
Eventually,
Trump put in his administration Haley and the director of the McCain Institute — two avid neocons. He did exactly
what he condemned in 2016.
Today
as the representative of the United States in the United Nations, Haley has
used her position to celebrate pride in sodomy (homosexuality). Other
evangelical Christians in the Trump administration are doing the same
celebration. State Secretary Mike Pompeo, who says
that he is an evangelical Christian, declared June as a Homosexual Month,
and Haley joined him saying:
“We join our LGBTI friends around the
world in celebrating #Pride
Month. The United States supports the LGBTI community in standing up for their
human rights.”
“Utterly shameful, Nikki! You say you
are a Protestant Christian, but are you celebrating ‘pride’ in sodomy? God
said, ‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that
is abomination.’ (Leviticus 18:22) There is no pride in an abomination.”
No
real Christian or conservative would ever defend celebration of homosexual
perversion.
Haley
says that the United Nations is useless because, under Islamic control
(including Saudi, even though she does not include specifically Saudis in her
attacks), it is persistently anti-Israel. I agree with her. Yet, how cannot she
remember that, under neocon control, the U.S. government has been equally
persistent in an anti-Russia stance, even now when Russia is much more conservative?
The U.S. has treated conservative
Russia not much differently as Muslim nations treat Israel.
You
could understand Obama and his sanctions on Russia, including his anti-Russia
mockery. But you cannot understand how Haley, who alleges that she is
conservative, can continue Obama’s nasty behavior against a Russia which has
fought against abortion and the homosexual agenda at the United Nations. Just
as she did to the conservative Confederate flag, she is doing to conservative
Russia.
Can
she remember that she uses her position in the United Nations to condemn Syria,
which has been a victim of ISIS, al-Qaida and has suffered a violent civil war
provoked by the U.S. government under Obama, but she does not condemn Saudi
Arabia, which is directly supporting the carnage in Syria, which has one of the
oldest Christian communities in the world? Why protect the Islamic dictatorship
of Saudi Arabia and attack its victim, Syria? Cannot she be enough
compassionate to listen to the old Syrian Christian community, which has
largely opposed her decisions against Syria?
Can
she remember that the U.S. government traditionally values Saudi Arabia above
Israel? In fact, in his first international trip the first nation Trump visited
was not Israel. It was Saudi Arabia.
Can
she remember that the United Nations was not founded by Muslims and its
headquarters is not in Saudi Arabia or another Islamic nation? UN, whose headquarters
is in New York, was founded by U.S. President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt, who also valued Saudi Arabia above Israel. So it is no wonder that, following
the wishes of its American founder, the United Nations has always put Saudi
Arabia and its wishes above Israel.
Just
as anti-Israel Muslims (a pleonasm) are a threat in the United Nations,
anti-Russian neocons (another pleonasm) are a threat in the U.S. government.
If
Haley can get along with Saudi Arabia, which bans Christianity and the Bible
and is the main sponsor of Islamic terror around the world, including ISIS, why
cannot she get along with conservative Russia, which does not ban Christianity
and the Bible and fights ISIS?
If
Haley eventually reaches the U.S. presidency, her medley Christian/neocon
ideology will get her more confused, for if Jesus Christ never worked to expand
the military interests of the Roman Empire, how can “Christian” Haley work for
the military interests of neocons? What compatibility is there between Jesus
Christ and neocons?
Jesus
had plenty of opportunities to support the military interests of the Roman
Empire and he had had plenty of opportunities to induce his disciples to
support the military interests of the Roman Empire. But he did not do so. Why
is “Christian” Haley doing it?
If
Trump could say in on Twitter, “The people of South Carolina are embarrassed by
Nikki Haley!” in 2016, her attitude today against the Confederate flag and
conservative Russia has equally embarrassed real conservatives.
I
think I can offer some hard advice to her and to Trump too, because even though
he quit his 2016 antineocon speech, I continue following his antineocon
example. Yet, in Haley’s case, she has never quit his pro-neocon stances.
I
have “nudged” Trump and Nikki Haley on Twitter:
Nikki Haley: RT @USUN:
“It takes great bravery for the Iranian people to use the power of their voice
against their government, especially when that government has a long history of
murdering its own people who dare to speak the truth… All freedom-loving people
must stand with their cause.”
I
am sure that what moves Haley to support Israel is her Christian faith. This
makes sense.
But
I am not sure what moves her to support the violent Islamic dictatorship of
Saudi Arabia and disregard and even attack Saudi victims, including Syria. This
makes no sense. Certainly, it is not her Christian faith. This is her neocon
faith, and neoconservatism involves incessant wars to support the U.S. military
industrial complex in wars that often massacre Christians and make profits,
expanding the neocon imperialism and Sunni Islam — the kind of Islam practiced
in Saudi Arabia.
I
am not sure also what moved her to disregard the Confederate traditions and
conservative Russia. It makes no sense. Certainly, it is not her Christian
faith. It is her respect for the whims of liberals, who hate both
the Confederate conservatism
and the Russian conservatism.
If
Haley intends to continue using the name of Jesus, she should know that God is
jealous. The Bible says:
“Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you
not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore
wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Or do you
think that the Scripture says in vain, ‘The Spirit who dwells in us yearns
jealously’?” (James 4:4-5 NKJV)
It
can mean: “Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with Sikhism
and neoconservatism is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend
of Sikhism and neoconservatism makes himself an enemy of God.” Or she serves
only Jesus or Sikhism. Or she serves only Jesus or neoconservatism, which is
the “religion” of the warmongers.
Real
Christianity has no mixture with Sikhism, reincarnation and neoconservatism.
This is why I am concerned about Haley, whose Protestant Christianity has
exactly such spiritually harmful mixture. I do not know in the Methodist
church, but any such mixed “Christian” would have been a case for spiritual
deliverance for Jesus and His apostles.
Because
Time named her one of the 100 most influential people in 2016, she has a real
chance to achieve the U.S. presidency. As far as Israel is concerned, she would
be an excellent option. But as far as neocon ambitions are concerned —
including opposition to the Christian conservatism in the U.S. and Russia —,
she is far away from being a good choice. And her mixed
spirituality would eventually produce unforeseen disasters.
With information
from FoxNews.
Recommended
Reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment