'The Message Was Delivered...'

There are two very interesting articles out that deserve our attention. 

The first one involves that situation in which Dianne Reidy, the floor stenographer for the U.S. House of Representatives briefly took over the microphone on the house floor and spoke to the house. Based on early reports from the MSM (and I don't know better by now?), I assumed that this woman had experienced a brief period of psychosis, for whatever reason, and had to be escorted out. Not knowing what she said, I quickly dismissed the story. 

However there is much more to this story and it is definitely worth reading. Suffice it to say, there is no indication at all that she had any form of mental problems that day based on everything we now know about her behavior before and after the incident. Instead, it appears that we have a very different scenario, one that is worth knowing and understanding: 

The Message Was Delivered, But Was It Received?

Following the vote to suspend the debt ceiling last Wednesday night, 48 year-old Dianne Reidy, a floor stenographer for the U.S. House of Representatives for the last 8 years, surprised everyone when she briefly but unexpectedly took over the microphone on theHouse floor at about 10:00 pm.

C-Span footage shows her calmly walking to the dais where she began making statements about God, the founding of the United States, our Constitution, and the influence that Freemasonry played in the founding of our country. She warnedHouse members that they could not serve two masters and that God will not be mocked. Unsurprisingly, Mrs. Reidy was whisked from the dais and ultimately taken to George Washington UniversityHospital for “mental evaluation.” She was released after about two hours of evaluation.

The media, including nearly all conservative and even Christian reporters, columnists and pundits who even bothered to cover the story, portrayed Diane Reidy as someone who suffered a humiliating and very public mental breakdown. They used patronizing language and empathetic inflection usually reserved for the most fragile mental patients, attributing her actions to long hours and stress. They have not only dismissed the actions of Diane Reidy, but dismissed her message as well, even as they continue to decry the state of our nation.

Obviously, they did not pay attention to her message, nor did they listen to the interview of her husband by Rick Wiles of TruNews the next day. Mr. Reidy revealed critical details about events that led to her actions on the House floor, providing important context not just to her actions, but to the content of her message.

The message

To be clear, let’s examine the words spoken by Diane Reidy into the microphone. The following is the text of her message, compiled from two separate audio sources:

“God will not be mocked. The greatest deception here is this is not one nation under God. It never was. Had it been, it would not have been. No. It would not have been. The Constitution would not have been written by Free Masons. They go against God. You cannot serve two masters. You cannot serve two masters. Praise be to God, the Lord Jesus Christ. Praise forever.

So, that was her message, or as much as she was able to get out before being forcibly removed by two members of the House security detail.

The “run-up” to her message

According to her husband, they are both practicing Christians of firm faith. In the 4 weeks preceding Wednesday’s incident, Mrs. Reidy would awaken early, sometimes in the middle of the night, and spend time reading the Holy Bible. She would spend a few hours reading and often return to bed, something she had not done before.

Despite this change of behavior, her activities at home were not affected, nor were her duties at work. The former was verified by her husband, while the latter was verified by her co-workers through publicized interviews subsequent to Wednesday’s incident. But something changed, according to her husband, and herein lies the story behind the headlines and mischaracterizations by the media.

Mr. Reidy emphasized that his wife took her job extremely seriously and would never do anything to willingly jeopardize her position or disrespect the protocol of the Housechambers. During the four weeks of immersing herself in the Bible, admittedly a behavioral change according to her husband, however, he could tell that she was struggling with some type of inner conflict.

It was as if she was being led to do something, knowing that if she did, her actions would have ramifications to her position as a House stenographer. It was as if she was a reluctant participant, knowing that if she followed the instructions given to her through the Word of God, there would be blowback. This, of course, became clearer to him after the incident and the discussion that ensued between the two.

Message delivered

During his interview on TruNews, Mr. Reidy stated that she did not share the burden of her mission with him, nor did she appear to have any particular plan. He stated that his wife told him afterward that she felt led to speak when she did, although she denied knowing what she was going to say or when she was to speak. It was as if she was merely a vessel, or just a messenger prompted by the Holy Spirit to speak the words she did at the time she spoke them. It was a message intended for those to hear.

It is interesting if not particularly relevant to note how her husband described his wife’s demeanor after being led away from the microphone and escorted to the hospital for evaluation. Not only was she calm, but she seemed utterly relieved, according to her husband. It was as if her job, the specific job of acting as a messenger, was over.

Furthermore, she was very calm throughout the entire process, as if she was mentally prepared for the consequences, and accepted the process with quiet resignation. She knew that her actions would not only have a negative impact on her job, but that she would be publicly and privately depicted as mentally imbalanced. Yet, according to her husband, she did what she believed she was guided to do, albeit reluctantly, then knowingly and willingly accepted the consequences.

Diane Reidy feels that the event is over, the message has been delivered, and she does not want any attention. She just wants to spend time with her children and her family.

Dismissal due to discomfort

Most people, including many Christians, will be quick to dismiss the actions and words of Diane Reidy and characterize her in unflattering terms. It would appear that Diane Reidy knew and expected that, as her subsequent actions indicated.  It would appear that she struggled with - and even fought against the task she was given, and was relieved when it was over.

This incident is not without precedent. To Christian and Jewish believers, Biblical history documents God speaking through scribes. Even in antiquity, they did not relish the task and were mocked, ridiculed and persecuted. Nonetheless, they did what they were led to do and accepted the consequences and their place in history.

I do not believe this is about Diane Reidy, however, nor should it be. It was and always will be about the message, not the messenger. Given God’s historical track record and the prophetic utterances that were often used to warn both men and nations, I suggest that we take heed to the message, for it is not only simple, but true. “God will not be mocked.”

Looking at this message through the lens of Biblical eschatology, can you think of a better place or time for a modern-day scribe to rise up and deliver such a message? For it is within those walls of power that men and women leaders have sold their very souls to embrace and endorse the immoral and the profane. Through their laws, they have perverted God’s laws. Instead of reinforcing the laws of God, they have mocked Him by redefining them.

Additionally, we have this one from Caroline Glick:

Israel And The New Munich

Speaking to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Wednesday, Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz explained Israel’s concerns about the nuclear negotiations with Iran in Geneva. “We’re worried Geneva 2013 will end up like Munich 1938.”

Well, the time for worrying has passed. The statements from the Obama administration and the EU following the closing of the first round of talks all made clear that Geneva 2013 is Munich 1938.

The White House was unable to restrain its excitement at the prospect of a deal with the genocidal, nuclear weapons-developing mullocracy.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said, “The Iranian proposal was a new proposal with a level of seriousness and substance that we had not seen before.”

The stunning talks even included a one-on-one discussion between the chief US negotiator Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman and the Iranians.

The only problem with all these exciting developments is that all the “serious Iranian proposals” would result in the same outcome: a nuclear-armed Iran. There was nothing in the Iranian proposals that could give anyone any reason whatsoever to believe that Iran is serious about stopping its nuclear weapons development program. Indeed, the only thing we learned this week is that like the Allied powers in 1938, the Obama administration and the Europeans have no stomach for a confrontation and are willing to dress up appeasement of a dangerous foe as “peace” and “progress.”

The Iranians have given no indication that they would be willing to suspend all uranium enrichment.

In his press conference after the current round of talks ended, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif insisted that Iran has the right to continue enriching uranium. The Iranian offer appears to involve suspending its 20 percent uranium enrichment activities and sufficing with enriching uranium to 3.5%.

As everyone from US Sen. Mark Kirk to the Washington Post editorial board to US President Barack Obama’s former chief pointman on Iran’s nuclear program Gary Samore have stated over the past several days, given Iran’s current enrichment capabilities, Iran’s offer is meaningless.

Over the past year, Iran has installed a thousand sophisticated centrifuges at its nuclear installation at Natanz. These new centrifuges allow Iran to transform 3.5% enriched uranium to bomb-grade material (enriched to 90%) as quickly as its old centrifuges were capable of transforming 20% enriched uranium to weapons-grade levels. So today, 3.5% enrichment is as comfortable a jumping-off point for the Iranian weapons program as 20% enrichment was a few years ago. Iran’s “serious proposal” is a joke.

As Samore told The New York Times, “Ending production of 20% enriched uranium is not sufficient to prevent breakout, because Iran can produce nuclear weapons using low-enriched uranium and a large number of centrifuge machines.”

In a conference call with the Israel Project Wednesday, Samore explained, “What they’re offering is really no different than what we’ve heard from the previous government, from [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad’s government for the last couple of years

Pyongyang used the talks to undermine Western resolve to block its nuclear progress.

Just as happened with North Korea, so with Iran, the appeasement-crazed press will bring us endless stories about new, serious negotiations documents that will “ensure the peace.”

The last of the stories will be published the day Iran tests its first atomic bomb.

All of this is happening because the American and Europeans have changed their game. The only serious development of this week is the revelation of their new game.

The Iranians remain committed to developing nuclear weapons. But the US and Europe have stopped even paying lip service to stopping them. Instead, the US and Europe aim to destroy domestic Western opposition to Iran’s nuclear program. This is the new American/European game plan. This is what stands behind all the nonsensical talk of “serious” Iranian proposals.

Before his reelection, Obama felt constrained to pretend that he was serious about preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He opposed but then grudgingly signed comprehensive sanctions passed overwhelmingly by both houses of Congress. He told AIPAC that he had Israel’s back.

But now that he’s no longer facing reelection, the jig is up. Obama’s new goal, which is enthusiastically supported by Ashton and her comrades in Brussels, is to use the new negotiations with Iran’s phony baloney “moderate” new president to give himself political cover to open the door to Iran acquiring nuclear bombs. Obama doesn’t want to prevent Iran from getting the bomb. He wants to insulate himself from criticism when it gets the bomb.

Not only do the White House’s lies about Iran’s new “level of seriousness” give Obama the maneuver room to pretend he’s acting responsibly, they trap Israel into inaction. After all, how could Israel possibly bomb Iran’s nuclear installations when Iran is negotiating so seriously, and is “this close” to making a groundbreaking agreement?

Israel is alone. We have no diplomatic option.

No matter what Israel says, no matter what it does, neither the US nor any other Western power is ever going to be convinced to take the only step that would set back Iran’s nuclear program – bombing its nuclear installations. No matter what, neither Obama nor any European leader will ever support an Israeli military strike on Iran’s nuclear installations.

Israel’s back is to the wall. That is the meaning of the talks in Geneva. If we aren’t prepared to live with a nuclear-armed Iran, we have to stop talking and start acting. And we need to prepare for the diplomatic hell that will break loose thereafter.