The Burden of Jerusalem

Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu found it necessary this weekend to remind President Obama that Jerusalem is not "a settlement" and that Israel is not under the jurisdiction of the United States.

It appears that late last week the Israeli ambassador to the United States was called in by the US State Department to warn the Israeli government not to permit the construction of a new apartment building on a piece of privately owned land in Jerusalem.

After his weekly Cabinet meeting, Prime Minister Netanyahu issued this statement in response:

"It has been the policy of all Israeli governments that united Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people and of the state of Israel."

Netanyahu pointed out that Israeli sovereignty means that residents of Jerusalem can choose to buy apartments in the neighborhoods where they want to live, like any other city in the free world.

"There is no ban on Arabs buying apartments in the western part of the city and there is no ban on Jews buying or building apartments in the eastern part of the city."

"This is the policy of an open city, an undivided city that has no separation according to religion or national affiliation."

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman noted that he had "never heard of the US or European Union complaining when Arabs build houses in Jerusalem.

Netanyahu drew a big bright circle around how bizarre the request was, comparing the State Department demand with a demand to ban Jews from living in certain parts of New York, London, Paris or Rome.

Netanyahu's comments put me in mind of a lesson I learned right after my oldest daughter got married.

We were visiting their house for the first or second time and I was throwing my weight around like I always did with my kids at home when Mike looked over at me and shot me out of the sky with this comment:

"Kinda forgot which castle you were king in for a minute there, didn't ya?"

Apparently, so did Obama.

Assessment:

Jerusalem continues to stand as testimony to the accuracy of Bible prophecy for the last days. It is also the best barometer there is for predicting the progress of the gathering storm darkening the region.

The prophets all speak of Jerusalem as a divided city in the last days -- that one fact by itself is mind-blowing, when you really look at it.

The Prophet Zechariah predicted that in the last days, Jersualem would be a 'burdensome stone for ALL people". (Zechariah 12:3)

What an amazing statement, given as it was from the perspective of a Babylonian captive some 520 years before Christ.

In Zechariaah's world, Jerusalem was a destroyed city, formerly under Babylonian occupation and now under occupation by the Persians in the second year of Darius.

There was little reason for Zechariah to be particularly optimistic for Jerusalem's future as the most important city in the world.

But he confidently predicted the effect it would have on every nation that attempted to take on the burden of its rule.

". . . all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it."

In 1917 when the British government issued its Balfour Declaration designating Palestine as a "Jewish Homeland" Britain was the reigning world superpower of almost three hundred years' duration.

In 1923, the British took back most of what was granted under the Balfour Declaration, including Jerusalem in favor of taking on the burden of administering the city directly under what was called the "British Mandate."

By the time the British Mandate finally expired in 1948, Britain was in shambles, its colonial empire gone, its economy destroyed.

In 1993, the United States burdened itself with overseeing the Oslo Agreement under which Israel would exchange part of it's historical homeland in Judea and Samaria for what were ultimately empty promises of peace.

Recall that in 1993, the US was flush with victory. The speed with which the US military cut through Saddam's Soviet-supplied war machine -- then rated the world's 5th most powerful -- was the final nail in the USSR's coffin.

By 1993, with Saddam caged, the Soviet Union in free-fall and the Cold War over, the most pressing issue facing the newly-elected Clinton administration was what to do with the so-called 'peace dividend'.

The country was on the road to a balanced budget and there was even a brief period when the National Debt Clock actually started to run backwards!

As his domestic problems began to pile up, Clinton took on the burden of Jerusalem and set his sights on resolving the conflict over Jerusalem as the legacy achievement of his presidency.

In 1998, Osama bin-Laden issued a fatwa declaring war against the Christian "Crusaders" for their "support of the Zionist entity."

Two years later, Yasser Arafat went to the Temple Mount to declare the outbreak of what Israel came to call the "Oslo War."

Ten years after that, the US economy is shredded, its military drained and exhausted by almost a decade of war. America's political infrastructure in free-fall, hamstrung by voter anger at runaway spending and political corruption.

And Jerusalem is even more of a US foreign policy burden today than it was then.

Zecharaiah's prophecy was made literally thousands of years before the fact. It isn't a singular prophecy . . . all of Israel's prophets speak of Jerusalem in the future tense, even those prophets who lived during the period of Jersualem's destruction.

Jerusalem is a small city (pop 747,000) in a tiny country located on the other side of the world from Washington. It is but one of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of cities around the world of similar size and population.

And here we sit, some 7000 miles away, with news of new killer earthquakes, famines, wars and pestilences bombarding us from every corner of the world, with death and destruction on an unimaginable scale becoming routine . . .

With all that going on, what issue has the undivided attention of what remains (for now) the most powerful nation in the history of the world?

A construction site in Jerusalem.

Sometimes I just have to sit back and reflect on just HOW awesome a time this is to live. It's almost overwhelming.

"And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up and lift up your heads for your redemption draweth nigh." (Luke 21:28)

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.moonconnection.com/moon-march-2010.phtml

Agreed with Netanyahu, Yerushalayim is undivided capital of Israel. Go on My. Netanyahu, your Boss is the Lord of Lords not the US or any other countries in this world ...

Jack Kinsell's
Omega Letter
Tuesday, March 02, 2010


Concerning Edom. . .

Edom is the name given to Jacob's brother Esau after Esau sold his share of his inheritance to Jacob for a bowl of red bean stew.

Esau and Jacob were the twin sons of Isaac and Rebekah. Esau, the first-born, was so named because he was born covered with red hair.

The root meaning of 'esau' is 'hairy'. The root meaning of 'edom' is 'red'.

Esau was a hunter and outdoorsman and evidently not the sharpest tool in the shed, whereas Jacob was more of a dreamer and schemer.

Jacob conned Esau out of his share of his inheritance from Isaac, which Isaac had inherited from Abraham, who 'inherited' it directly from God.

Being first-born carried great status; the first-born was presumed to be God's choice as default heir to the father's wealth, power and authority.

But even before Esau's birth, the Lord told Rebekah that her older son would serve the younger.

The Bible says the battle between the two brothers began in the womb; Jacob was born clutching Esau's heel, as if attempting to claw his way out first.

The Bible says that after an unsuccessful day of hunting, Esau came home "famished" and found Jacob cooking a pot of red bean stew, or 'pottage'.

He asked for some, and Jacob asked if he would be willing to trade his inheritance for it. Esau agreed. The whole story only occupies a few lines of Scripture, so I am sure the exchange was broader than that.

The Bible account makes it sound like Esau was being flippant: "thus he despised his birthright." Maybe Esau meant it, maybe he didn't. But Jacob clearly intended to take it seriously.

So Jacob made good on the deal by tricking Isaac into giving Jacob the blessing that traditionally would be reserved for the first-born.

The blessing, once given, could evidently not be retracted. When Esau found out, he swore to kill Jacob. So Jacob moved to Haran in what is now Iraq to work for Rebekah's brother. (Follow along with me, here. The lineage is important.)

Esau intermarried with the Hittites and the Ishmaelites, including Mahalalath, the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham's son.

After Isaac died, Esau took his wives, his children, his servants and his cattle and moved away from his brother to Mount Seir in Edom, a territory bordered by the Jordan River and including much of modern Jordan, including Petra.

After the Babylonian captivity the Edomites, (called Idumeans by the Greeks and Romans) were driven north by the Nabataeans to the areas around what is today southern Judah and Samaria in the West Bank.

The Idumean's chief city was Hebron, which was captured by Judas Macabeeus in 163 BC. The rest of the West Bank area was conquered by John Hyrcanus in 127 BC, who compelled the Idumeans to be circumcized and convert to Judaism.

King Herod Antipater and his son King Herod the Great were Idumeans, or Edomites, who were set up as puppet kings by the Roman occupation.

After Jesus was condemned by the Sanhedrin, He was sent to stand before the Idumean King Herod. Thus any lingering claim by Esau was satisfied as the descendent of Esau stood in judgment over a descendent of Jacob innocent of any sin of His own.

Justice was satisfied.

Assessment:

The city of Hebron is in the headlines this week following Israel's inclusion of the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron on its list of 'National Heritage Sites' earmarked for preservation by the Israeli government.

Hamas leader in Gaza Yahia Musa was quoted by the Chinese daily, Xinhua, calling for a third Intifada in Hebron as a consequence of the decision, saying;
"the Palestinians have the right to use all kinds of resistance because it is the only language the Israeli occupation understands."

For five consecutive days last week, from Monday to Friday, Palestinians threw stones and clashed with Israeli soldiers in protest.

And yesterday, the Palestinian Cabinet voted to move its weekly meeting from Arafat's old provisional capital of Ramallah to Hebron.

The Book of Obadiah is the shortest book in the Old Testament at only 21 verses. But Obadiah's theme could have been lifted directly from the pages of the Jerusalem Post.

"The vision of Obadiah. Thus says the Lord GOD concerning Edom; We have heard a message from the LORD, and an ambassador is sent among the nations, Arise you, and let us rise up against her in battle." (Obadiah 1:1)

It is all about the abuse of God's people, God's land, and God's Holy Hill, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

The villain, the guilty party, will end up devastated. Obadiah identifies the guilty party as Israel's twin brother Esau (Edom), together his physical (Edomite) and spiritual (Ishamelite) descendants.

Obadiah accuses Edom of "violence against your brother Jacob." (v 10) This is not an isolated incident of violence, but systematic, repetitive, unrelenting violence.

The Book of Obadiah reads as a formal indictment against Edom and their allies. One of the first things to examine in prophecy is the time frame in which it applies. Some prophecies were given for the near-term, others are for the long term.

In Obadiah's case, it is both.
Or, put another way, Obadiah looks at Edom from beginning to end in a glance. The abuses accumulate throughout history, and end with the establishment of God's rule on earth.

It is a broad chronological perspective ranging from the Destruction of the First Temple to the end of days.

Visions that prophets were given are not always restricted to a thin slice of time. Some encompass a very long period of time, as is the case in the Messianic prophecies.

Some were fulfilled at Jesus' First Advent, others will be fulfilled in His Second. Some verses contain prophecies that address both Advents in the same verse.

The prophecy concerning Edom is one such "dual-fulfillment" prophecy, as we've discussed in previous briefings.

Verse 10 indicts Edom of violence against 'thy brother, Jacob'.
Verse 12 indicts Edom for celebrating Israel's catastrophes;

"Neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction; neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distress."

Compare that verse to images of chanting crowds of Palestinians dancing for joy at the news of a new bombing attack against Israeli civilians. Or the cheering crowds that celebrated Saddam's missile attacks on Israel during the 1991 Gulf War.

Verse 13 indicts Edom for 'entering the gates of my people'. When the British Mandate ended in 1948, the Arabs immediately seized the Old City of Jerusalem.

It took until 1967 for the Jews to re-take the city. They still have no control over the Jewish Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount, remain at the heart of the Arab-Israeli conflict, as God said they would.

Completing Obadiah's identification of modern 'Edom' is his mention of the emblem of the Palestinian Authority.

"Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the LORD."

The PA's official emblem is the eagle. And the timing is right.

"For the day of the LORD is near upon all the nations: as you have done, it shall be done unto you: your reward shall return upon your own head."(v. 15)

"And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD has spoken it.

"And they of the south [the southern Kingdom of Judah - the Jews] shall possess the mountains of Esau; [The West Bank] and they of the lowlands the Philistines: [The Gaza Strip] and they shall possess the fields of Ephraim, [Judea] and the fields of Samaria: and Benjamin shall possess Gilead. [the Galilee.]" (v. 18-19)

Tick . . .tick. . .tick

Email: jmb7772009@hotmail.com

Website: www.scribd.com/full/27673222?access_key=key-1d6zo86qq965fdbyq6wc

Pushback [by Jack]

A new poll commissioned by CNN found that an astounding 56% of Americans think "the federal government has become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens."

Fifty-six percent! That's a lot more than the percentage of the population that is Muslim (0.7%) or is gay (2-4%) or atheist (4%) or liberal (20%).

That's more that it took to elect Bill Clinton (43%) in 1992 and 1996 (41%), more than it took to elect George Bush (47.5% 2000, 50.7% 2004) and even more than it took to elect Barack Hussein Obama (52.9%).

More than half the country believes the government poses an IMMEDIATE threat to rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the poll says. And the fact it was commissioned by CNN makes it doubly astonishing.

CNN led the liberal campaign to get Obama elected. CNN's fawning coverage of all things Obama was so unabashed that it prompted several books like Bernie Goldberg's "The Media's Slobbering Love Affair with Barack Obama."

The liberal media has so much of its credibility invested in Barack Hussein Obama that it is practically forced to spike any story that reflects badly on the Obama administration.

The spiking of the Tea Party rallies last year is a great example. Buffalo, N.Y. is a liberal city with a liberal government and a liberal media. On July 4th, thousands of Tea Partiers marched on Buffalo's downtown City Hall.

But if you didn't personally see it (or hear about it on FoxNews), you wouldn't know it even happened. I have talked to at least a dozen people who live within ten miles of downtown Buffalo who didn't know anything about it.

Even Buffalo's local media spiked the story-- despite the fact it was the biggest public demonstration that city has seen in a decade or more.

When the liberal media can't spike stories that reflect badly on the administration, it spins it.

Yesterday, I heard a CNN anchor blame the Republicans for 'blocking' a $10 billion unemployment extension because one Republican senator had the temerity to ask how it was to be paid for.

The Democrats have an overwhelming majority in both Houses of Congress. Blaming the Republicans for the failure of the Democrats to pass a bill is like blaming a tree for running into a car.

It isn't that the liberal mainstream media can't see the Obama administration for the train wreck that it is. It is just that they can't tell YOU about it -- not and maintain any pretense of objectivity.

Last year, they were telling you that Obama the Messiah had come. Chris Matthews reported on air that he felt a 'thrill run up his leg' (yuck!!) when Obama was speaking.

The NYTimes published a virtual photo album of carefully-retouched photographs of Obama, all framing him in iconic quasi-religious themes.

The coverage was SO fawning that Obama himself once joked; ". .contrary to popular belief, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on the Planet Krypton."

The joke would have been funny if it had been made ABOUT him. But it was made BY him. So it was hard to tell if he was kidding.

CNN tried to sugar-coat the story by saying the majority poll "reflected a partisan divide."

"The survey indicates a partisan divide on the question: Only 37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of independents and nearly seven in 10 Republicans say the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans."

Ok. Let's stop there. In a 2009 Gallup poll, only 21% of Americans self-identified as liberal, broken down as 16% who say they are “liberal” and 5% who say they are “very liberal.”

Thirty-five percent of Americans self-identified as "moderate."

In the same poll, fully 40% of Americans self identify as either “conservative” (31%) or “very conservative” (9%).

One-third of all Democrats, two-thirds of all independents (moderates) and 70% of Republicans believe that the federal government under the Obama administration poses a "threat" to American freedom.

Freedom is partisan?

Assessment:

Despite the fact that other polls show that a similar majority of Americans want Obama to scrap the health care bill and start over, the administration seems determined to ram through a modified version of this one by any means necessary, even at the cost of losing the Congress.

Nancy Pelosi admitted as much in a recent ABCNews interview. Whether she intended to or not is an open question -- you tell me.

"We're not here just to self perpetuate our service in Congress. We're here to do the job for the American people."

You see, they aren't there just to 'self-perpetuate their service' in Congress. There's other stuff they do besides that. Like doing a job 'for the American people'. Even of two-thirds of them don't want them to.

The whole comment put me in mind of a Boy Scout trying to earn a merit badge by helping a little old lady across the street -- whether she wanted to go or not.

The combination of 9/11, the war on terror, the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, the resurging Taliban and the collapsing economy created the perfect political storm.

By a quirk of fate, the Far Left found itself in control of both the legislative and executive branches of government, with the full support of an activist judiciary and the liberal media.

The resulting pushback, as reflected by these poll numbers, is actually strengthening their hand, at least temporarily.

The handwriting is already on the wall -- Pelosi knows she won't be Speaker next January. She probably won't even be in the Congress. Ditto for Harry Reid.

Most of the old school Democrats are lame ducks hoping to avoid indictment by retiring; Charlie Rangel, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, etc.; with the conventional wisdom saying that in November, most of the incumbents will get their walking papers.

So they have nothing to lose by ramming their health care bill through.

But I don't believe it's as much about health care as it is about clearing away some of the obstacles posed by the Constitution.

The Left has twin goals in this effort. The first is control, of course, but the second is aimed directly at the Constitution via the Tenth Amendment.

Obama once described the U.S. Constitution as having “deep flaws”-- in a discussion referring specifically to the Tenth Amendment.

During a September 2001 Chicago public radio program, he also that the country’s Founding Fathers had “an enormous blind spot” when they wrote it.

Obama also concluded in the same program that the Constitution “reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.”

The Tenth Amendment says that any rights not specifically given to the federal government are reserved for the states and for the people. Health insurance isn't in there.

(I heard one liberal argue that it is in the 'general welfare' clause, but that is clueless. "General welfare" doesn't mean using the IRS to fine people who don't buy IRS-approved health insurance.)

Obama’s statements came during a panel discussion that aired on Chicago’s WBEZ-FM on Sept. 6, 2001, titled “Slavery and the Constitution.”

The discussion that led to the statements took place on the now-defunct Odyssey program, which also aired statements by Obama bemoaning the fact that the Civil Rights movement had failed to bring about an economic redistribution of wealth in America.

Obama's no-holds-barred get-it-done-before-anybody-notices health care agenda is aimed at rectifying that shortcoming by forcing a Constitutional crisis over state's rights as guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment.

Ironically, 'states rights' is the same Constitutional issue that forced the last US Civil War.

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.torahcalendar.com/Calendar.asp

''Make Your Own Dirt''

Skeptics love to use logic to argue against the truth of God's Word. Indeed, skeptics like to call themselves purveyors of 'reason' against which they believe that faith cannot stand.

Bible skeptics wrongly assume that logic is the bane of faith. In truth, I find logic confirms my faith that God exists and that He remain intimately involved in the affairs of men.

If logic demands that the physical universe exists without a Creator, and logic exists throughout the universe, then who (or what) created logic?

It certainly wasn't man. Logic exists independent of man. If it did not, then one could not predict the weather. Why must man use logic? Man uses logic to predict weather based on his observations -- but the logic exists whether man uses it or not.

The problem in arguing the logic of God with a skeptic is that God IS logic. The skeptic's argument emerges from logic without God, which is illogical on its face.

A flawed premise produces a flawed argument. The next thing you know, you are running down 'rabbit trails' trying to answer circular logic questions like "Can God make a rock so big He can't lift it?" or "Who did Cain marry?"

It isn't a question of using logic to prove or disprove the existence of God. That's getting the cart before the horse. What is logic and how did it come to exist in the first place?

There is an old joke about the atheist scientist who challenges God, saying that, thanks to the latest scientific advancements, he too can create a man out of dirt. God accepts the challenge and offers to let the scientist go first.

The scientist goes out into the yard and scoops up a shovelful of dirt to begin his experiment. . . .

"Not so fast," God says. "First, make your own dirt."

Assessment:

Who made logic? What are the attributes of logic? Although logic exists in the physical world, like God, logic is immaterial.

There is nowhere in the physical universe where logic does not apply, or there could be no such thing as physics. So logic, like God, is universal.

And for logic to be logical, like God, logic must be unchanging, or it could never be applicable.

Logic is, therefore, a universal law binding on all that exists. Logic has no law enforcement apparatus, yet, to be logic, it must be unbreakable.

There is a logical statement about logic that one learns in logic 101. It goes like this:

"If any part of this statement is not true, then this statement cannot be true."

Therefore, for logic to be logical, it must also be pure. Polluted logic produces polluted results.

Reason is not possible without the application of logic. Logic is not possible in a purely physical universe. There are other laws of the universe that can be explained in purely physical terms; gravity, or the speed of light.

But gravity is logical, given the physical forces that cause it. And the speed of light is logical, given the application of the laws of physics.

But logic itself? Before one can apply it to the argument against the existence of God, one must first examine logic itself, on its own merits.

Over the years, I've been challenged by atheists seeking to feather their own caps by debating the existence of God and the truth of the Bible. I've since learned the foolishness of accepting such debates.

My friend Grant Jeffrey once told me, (and I've shamelessly plagiarized him ever since) that, "debating an skeptic about the Bible is like debating the circumference of the earth with a member of the Flat Earth Society."

Before one can apply logic and reason to any argument against the existence of God, one must first establish the origin of the immaterial, universal, pure and unchanging laws of logic being used.

If the unbeliever demands evidence, the fact is, whatever evidence you offer cannot be examined without the application of the immaterial, unchanging, pure and universal laws of logic.

The demand for 'evidence' is a rabbit trail. Before one can apply logic and reason to the evidence, one must apply logic and reason to the question of the origin of logic and reason.

On what basis can the skeptic judge the evidence apart from logic? So why debate 'evidence' -- while leaving logic and reason at the starting gate?

Another favorite skeptic's trick is to find apparent 'contradictions' in the Bible and demanding an explanation from YOU. That is another rabbit trail.

It rests on an unaddressed supposition: On what basis did the skeptic conclude there were 'contradictions'?

The skeptic cannot explain the existence of an immaterial, unchanging universal law while remaining within the confines of his worldview; ie; this is a purely physical universe whose existence -- and all that is contained therein -- was the product of chance.

He can explain the application of logic but that is another rabbit trail. The skeptic's application of logic is using rules he cannot explain to deny that which CAN be explained.

Can YOU explain. logically, the existence of logic? Can you explain logically how the application of reason and logic are not the same thing as explaining the existence of reason and logic?

Can YOU explain how logic and reason came to be? Of course, you can.

Then why are you wasting your time chasing your tail and trying to support your position with arguments you CAN'T explain?

Atheists and skeptics aren't looking for the truth. They are looking for a debate. The purpose is primarily to reassure themselves, so that they can continue to be comfortable in their unbelief.

The idea isn't to learn from you, but to ridicule you. If you allow yourself to be led down one of these rabbit trails about the unknowable or the inexplicable, they will inevitably succeed.

The trick they have to accomplish is to get you to not notice they are using the very evidence they are demanding FROM you AGAINST you.

The ultimate evidence is this. Logic cannot exist apart from God. So the application of logic demands the existence of God, since the Biblical God is the only logical explanation for the existence of logic.

Therefore, if the laws of logic did not exist, we could not know anything. There would be no basis for knowledge.

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." (Proverbs 1:7)

The 17 century atheist philosopher Rene Descartes is credited with the ultimate expression of the APPLICATION of logic; "Cogito ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am.")

All that established was what everybody else already knew. Atheists, logicians, philosophers, and even evolutionary scientists will be pleased to tell you what they think. But that doesn't prove anything.

Get them to tell you how. That's the punch line.

"Make your own dirt."

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.scribd.com/full/27844423?access_key=key-ivmte4602iqj8e78f2v

Whole Lot More Shakin' Goin' On

At least fifty-seven are dead following a 6.0 magnitude earthquake (yes, another one) that shook eastern Turkey this morning.

Fifty-seven people had been killed by the quake, which caused the most deaths in six villages around the epicenter in the Karakocan town of the eastern province of Elazig, according to the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily News.

The quake struck Basyurt region of Karakocan town at a depth of 5 km at 7:47 am Monday local time, or about 2:47 pm Sunday EST.

The Istanbul-based Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute of Turkey's Bogazici University reported 27 more strong aftershocks and warned that more are expected over the next hours and days.

On Feb. 21, a 4.3-magnitude earthquake was recorded in the Gokdere region of Elazig in Turkey, but no damage was reported.

On February 10, a 3.8 tremor rattled Chicago. On March 2nd, a 3.7 earthquake centered in southern Missouri was strong enough to be felt 150 miles away.

On March 3rd, a magnitude 2.5 tremor rattled central Oklahama. On March 4th, a magnitude 2.6 got residents' attention along the Ontario/Quebec border and on March 6th, a similarly-sized quake jolted southern Quebec near Beauport.

On March 8th, a flurry of eight small earthquakes rattled the area from southern Missouri to just east of Little Rock, Arkansas.

Assessment:

The U.S. Geological Survey expects 17 major earthquakes, those between 7.0 and 7.9, and one great quake 8.0 and higher, will affect the world in any given year.

There have been at least three major killer quakes in the past week; 8.8 in Chile, 7.0 in Japan, and today's quake in Turkey. The USGS also reported a 6.4 quake in Taiwan but with only minor injuries and a 6.5 in Sumatra.

The quake in Chile was so powerful that, like the 9.1 in southeast Asia in 2004 that spawned the Great Tsunami, it set the planet to vibrating like a giant tuning fork.

Like the '04 quake, it ripped a tiny hole in the space/time continuum, shaving some 1.26 microseconds off the length of a day.

NASA Scientist Richard Gross and his colleagues at Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California calculated that the earth's axis was moved by nearly three inches by the force of the temblor.

According to a report in the Chinese daily, Xinhua, the Chilean earthquake is a harbinger of things to come.
http://english.cri.cn/6909/2010/03/05/53s554382.htm

The article began by linking the doomsday movie, 2012, to recent global events:

"Extreme weather has been reported this winter in many places around the world: blizzards in Northern Europe, America and Asia, heat waves in South America and Australia, heavy snows in North China and severe droughts in the South. Now, Chile has been hit by a massive earthquake registered 8.8 on the Richter scale, less than two months after the devastating Haiti quake of 7.3 magnitude claimed nearly 290,000 lives."

It quoted Sun Shihong, a senior researcher with CEA China Earthquake Networks Center (CENC), who told the newspaper that the world:

"did look like it was entering a new phase of earthquake activity. The latest movements of the earth's crust undoubtedly demonstrated an "active state."

What I found most interesting about the article was that it was from offically atheist China. It reads like an updated paragraph from "The Late, Great Planet Earth" or, (if I may be so bold) "The Last Generation".

There is something sadly comical that comes from watching the distress and perplexity of the lost in their looking after the things that are coming upon the earth.

They thought they had figured out the killer hurricanes and tornado swarms and blamed it on global warming, which they blamed on human activity.

But then it turned out that global warming means fewer hurricanes, the worst hurricanes hit after global warming peaked fifteen years ago and mankind didn't cause it anyway, since its over.

The Bible said all along that the signs in the sun, moon, and stars would affect the sea and the waves roaring, but that as long as the earth remains;

"seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease." (Genesis 8:22)

For years, the USGS scoffed at the notion that earthquake activity showed any significant increase in frequency and intensity, mainly because Bible prophecy nuts starting pestering them for statistics.

"We continue to be asked by many people throughout the world if earthquakes are on the increase. Although it may seem that we are having more earthquakes, earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or greater have remained fairly constant."

Er, sort of. Except that earthquakes HAVE been steadily increasing since 1948 -- and have jumped off the chart since the turn of the 21st century.

And the fact we are better at detecting them, as the USGS disclaimer argues (I wonder when that was last updated?) doesn't explain the Chinese article.

It wasn't talking about earthquakes detectable only by seismograph. It was addressing whether the earth was gearing up for a 2012 doomsday scenario.

I rather doubt it was because Xinhua was being pestered by Chinese Bible prophecy students.

The scientific explanations about shifting tectonic plates and natural cycles and earthquake 'clusters' and better equipment are all 'rabbit trails' that lead away from the real issue.

What is significant is that two thousand years ago, as He sat upon the Mount of Olives, Jesus was asked by His disciples what would be the sign of His coming at the end of the world?

He warned of earthquakes, famines, wars and pestilences saying they would increase in both frequency and intensity as the time approaches.

He warned of signs in the sun, moon and stars, the distress (fear) of nations, with perplexity (confusion) the sea and the waves roaring, men's hearts failing them for fear from looking at the things that are coming upon the earth (re: the Xinhua article).

And He said that when these things BEGIN to come to pass, we should be looking up because our redemption draws near.

When the Chinese start looking up, it's really near.

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: whatsaiththescripture.com/index.html#I Come Quickly

Togarmah and Persia --BFF*

Turkey is a NATO ally and a supplicant for membership in the European Union. Its government is officially secular, despite the fact it is governed by the Turkish Islamist Party.

Ever since taking control of the Congress in 2007, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made it her mission to get a Congressional resolution passed condemning the mass killings of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire an act of "genocide."

It wasn't an easy task -- passing it meant undercutting America's own foreign policy regarding the Turks -- which is why when she finally got it past the House Foreign Affairs Committee in last month, it passed by only one vote.

Nevertheless, it was enough for Ankara to withdraw its ambassador in protest.

The Armenian genocide was a fact of history. In 1915 1.5 million Armenians "disappeared" in a genocidal effort at the hands of the Ottoman Empire's 'Young Turks' comparable to the Holocaust in its inhuman brutality.

But the Ottoman Empire was defeated in WWI by the Allies, who carved it up into what are now the nations of the Middle East. Every state in the modern Middle East is today less than 100 years old.

The first piece of the Ottoman Empire to be parceled out by the British was via the 1917 Balfour Declaration which committed Palestine as a homeland for the Jews.

The British and French between them created the modern states of Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Transjordan, Lebanon, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the rest of the Gulf States, UAE, etc., out of what had been the Ottomans'Islamic Caliphate, leaving what remained to the Turks.

While the Armenian genocide was condemned in 1915 by the Russians, British, French and Americans, no punitive action was taken against Ankara after the war. Several leaders of the genocide were tried and convicted in absentia, but had already fled to the safety of other lands.

Since then, Turkey has strongly denied any such genocide took place, calling it 'an historical fabrication.' The Congressional condemnation is therefore a direct slap in the face of the Turks

Turkey was the only Muslim nation in the Middle East to have formal diplomatic relations with Israel. But according to the Prophet Ezekiel, Turkey (Togarmah) turns its back on the West, allies itself with the Islamic confederation led by Iran (Persia) and is a participant in the Gog-Magog War.

This has always been something of a conundrum to Bible prophecy scholars, some of whom, having made the mistake of making Bible prophecy fit with current events, have concluded that Togarmah must refer to Armenia or Cimmeria (part of modern Russia).

Togarmah couldn't be Turkey. Togarmah is an ally of Persia (Iran) who is an ally of Gog (Russia) during the Gog-Magog War.

But Turkey, a NATO member since 1951, is an ally to both Israel and the West.

Or at least it used to be.

Assessment:

There are lots of reasons to condemn the Ottomans for the genocide, but the timing is interesting, given it occurred almost a century ago in part of what was to become the Soviet Union.

It seems counter-intuitive. The US still has combat forces in Iraq. The one reliable ally in the neighborhood has always been Turkey.

The genocide declaration is over a ninety-year old historical incident that doesn't involve the United States at all. Why stir up a hornet's nest, right there -- and right now?

The West's alliance with the Turks is precarious because it has always been politically unnatural for either side to sustain.

The biggest threat to the Turkish regime comes from Kurdish separatists within Turkey collaborating with those in Iran and Iran.

Turkey's natural allies are therefore Iran and an independent Iraq, whose regimes are similarly threatened by their own Kurdish separatist movements.

The problem is, America's natural allies in the region are the Kurds in both Iraq and Iran. But our alliance with the Turks required balancing alliances with both sides at once.

On March 1st, 2003, things began to change in the relationship between Turkey, the United States and Israel.

Immediately before the Iraq War, the Turkish Grand National Assembly vetoed a bill to allow passage to some 60,000 American troops through Turkish territory into northern Iraq.

Washington was bewildered because the Turks had always been seen as a reliable partner. The Turks felt that their sensitivities regarding the status of Kurdish northern Iraq was being ignored.

While largely unnoticed by the media, Turkey has quietly turned back to the east, strengthening its ties with Iran.

Noted Cybercast News Service:

The warming of ties over the past year or so has coincided with Ankara’s increasingly outspoken stance on the Israel-Arab conflict. Under Prime Minister Recip Erdogan's Islamist Party, Turkey has shifted from being a key mediator between Israel and its neighbors – notably Syria – to becoming one of Israel’s most ardent regional critics.

In a weekend interview with a Saudi newspaper Al Wattan, Erdogan expressed his support for the Palestinians, whether they were members of Mahmoud Abbas’ West Bank-based Fatah faction or Hamas, the Iranian-backed terrorist group ruling Gaza.

“I love my brothers in Fatah and my brothers in Hamas wherever they are,” the paper quoted the Turkish prime minister as saying, urging the rival factions to unite because division was only in the interests of their “enemies.”

Osama bin Laden's goal of re-establishing the Islamic Caliphate has captured the imagination of the ruling Turkish Islamist Party, who hope to reestablish their credentials as a leading power in the Islamic world.

Twenty years ago, the Soviet Union and United States were the world's undisputed superpowers.

The United States was at the pinnacle of its power and prestige. The Soviet's influence in the region had been scaled back to nothing.

Iran was decimated and in disarray following the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War. Iraq was firmly under the thumb of secular Ba'athist Saddam Hussein.

The European Union was still in its infancy, with neither a working Constitution nor a common currency.

And Turkey was the West's strongest ally in the region.

Turkey was the second-to-last puzzle piece to fall into place regarding Ezekiel's Gog Magog Invasion Force.

The final piece will come when Israel finds itself dwelling at peace and safety in a land of unwalled villages.

Given current circumstances, that seems like it could take a long time. But just seven years ago, Turkey was our best friend in the region.

It's amazing what a difference just seven years can make.

Tick.. .Tick. . Tick

*BFF = Best Friends Forever

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.karaite-korner.org/holiday_dates.shtml

Syria Announces Nuclear Plans

Another piece of the Middle East puzzle fell into place with Syria's announcement that it intends to develop nuclear energy for 'peaceful purposes'.

The announcement was made at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development conference in Paris on Tuesday.

"The peaceful application of nuclear energy should not be monopolized by the few that own this technology, but should be available to all," Deputy Foreign Minister Faysal Mekdad said in Paris on Tuesday.

The announcement was new; Syria's quest for nuclear power, on the other hand, is both well-established and well-advanced.

Syria has been building covert nuclear facilities, with technical and logistical support from North Korea and Iran, for several years.

The facility destroyed by an Israeli airstrike in September 2007 was a nearly completed nuclear reactor of North Korean design intended to produce weapons-grade plutonium.

The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Association) reported that the collection of uranium particles found at the site in June 2008 was evidence of nuclear activity there.

Syria has not allowed IAEA inspectors to return to that site or any other since then.

Both leaders have said they want to see Israel 'wiped off the map'.

"We are brothers. We have mutual interests, as well as common goals and enemies," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at a joint press conference in Damascus with Bashar Assad, his Syrian counterpart, on February 24.

Ahmadinejad addressed the escalating rhetoric between Israel and Syria, warning the "Zionist regime" that any military operation against either Iran or Syria "would spell its end forever".

"The Zionist entity will eventually disappear…With Allah's help, the new Middle East will be a Middle East without Zionists and imperialists [the U.S.]," Ahmadinejad blustered.

The two leaders were joined at the Damascus meeting by Hezbollah's secretary general Hassan Nasrallah. The meeting has since been dubbed in the Arab world as 'the nuclear meeting.'

The meeting is a reflection of the near-completion of Ahmadinejad's strategy to realign forces in the Middle East. Assad's Syria and Nasrallah's Hezbollah are two of the main pillars of that strategy.

Ahmadinejad also has plans for Hamas, but not in any strategic way. Hamas can be counted on to attack the way a mean dog can be counted on to attack a roomful of cats.

(And since the bulk of Hamas is within the target strike zone, Hamas strategists might not survive to carry it out anyway.)

Currently, the balance of power in the region is between Israel and the Arab world -- which hates Iran almost as much as it does the Israelis.

Iranians are not Arabs, they are Persians.

The enmity between the Arabs and Persians dates back to the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus the Persian, (also called Darius the Mede.)

It's most recent flare-up was in 1980 between Saddam Hussein (who fancied himself as the "second Nebuchadnezzar") and Iran after the fall of the Shah.

That war lasted eight years and destroyed an entire generation of the Iranian population, which is why 70% of Iran's population is under 35.

Ahmadinejad's ultimate goal is to transform the balance of power away from the relatively moderate Arab countries like Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia and claim leadership of the region's Islamic population.

Bible prophecy says otherwise.

Assessment:

Bible prophecy speaks of two great wars involving Israel in the last days. The first involves Israel and her traditional enemies among the Arab world.

". . . Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot." Psalms 83:8

The Tents of Edom refers to the Palestinians of the West Bank and southern Jordan. The Moabites refers to the Palestinians and central Jordanians.

The Hagarites corresponds with Egypt, Gebal with Hezbollah and the Lebanese. Ammon includes the Palestinians and northern Jordanians, Phillistia corresponds with Hamas and the Gaza Strip.

Finally, Assyria refers to Syria and northern Iraq; Tyre to Hezbollah and south Lebanon.

The second great war is less of a war than it is an invasion and is recorded by Ezekiel in his narrative of the Gog-Magog War.

"Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet: Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee." (Ezekiel 38:5-6)

Persia is Iran. Ethiopia and Libya encompass what is modern Islamic North Africa. Gomer includes the area around Azerbaijan; Togarmah refers primarily to Turkey, "and all his bands, and many people with thee."

Turkey, as we addressed yesterday, seemed an unlikely member of the anti-Israel alliance until only recently. As the time approaches, it is being moved into proper alignment for its appointed role.

Note who is where. None of the nations from the Psalms 83 war play a role in Gog Magog. By the time of the Tribulation Period, they have vanished from the prophetic record.

Egypt is not named anywhere in the Tribulation. Neither are any of the nations immediately proximate to Israel; Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, etc.

There are no references to any entity resembling the Palestinians; at the time of the invasion, Israel is a land of unwalled villages living in peace and safety.

Persia plays a major role in Ezekiel's scenario rating first mention among Russia's (Gog's) Islamic allies, but is not named among the Psalms 83 protagonists.

So can what is shaping up now be one of those two great wars? Possibly.

Debkafile is an Israel-based intelligence website that is occasionally a bit too eager to step out on a limb. Consequently, sometimes they are spectacularly right; whereas other times they are spectacularly wrong.

But they are better-positioned that most, and they are right more often than they are wrong. Having made that disclaimer, a recent Debka report seemed particularly relevant.

They report that Ahmadinejad pledged to come to Syria's and Hezbollah's aid in the event that they came under Israeli attack, but that Iran would not necessarily fight alongside them.

The Debka Report lends itself to the scenario outlined by Bible prophecy, particularly in light of Syria's official announcement it intends to seek nuclear power.

Ahmadinejad's strategy seems to be to goad Israel into a preemptive attack against Syria's nuclear facilities, which he hopes will spiral into a wider regional war with Iran's surrogates, but not necessarily directly with Iran.

Ahmadinejad can always show up at the last minute to administer the coup de grace and claim victory over the Zionist enemy . . . or should it go badly for Syria, he can sit back and live to fight another day.

Ultimately, if we are on the cusp of one of the two great prophesied Middle East wars of the last days, then that is how it will ultimately play out.

Time will tell. But one thing is certain. The Bible's scenario hasn't failed so far.

"Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure Isaiah 46:10-11)

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.scribd.com/scuggers1

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest
Vol: 102 Issue: 22 - Monday, March 22, 2010


A Measure of Wheat For a Penny

For a few brief, shinng moments, the most important man in America was freshman Congressman Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania.

Joe Sestak was one of a handful of improbably-named 'pro-life' Democrats, a political oxymoron assigned to those who believe killing babies is ok, provided the federal government doesn't pay for it.

Sestak led a group of similarly-confused pro-life Democrats who refused to vote in favor of giving the IRS control over individual American health care if it meant the government would directly fund abortions.

At the eleventh hour, Sestak worked out a deal Obama -- he would vote away individual freedom of choice if Obama would give him cover by issuing an Executive Order banning federal funds from paying for abortion.

It is a meaningless gesture -- an executive order can be overuled by the Senate or rescinded by either Obama or the next president. The guarantee is therefore as solid as the president is honest.

Sestak ought to know that. (He also knows this is the same president that has broken practically every campaign promise he's ever made.

But Sestak is a Democrat. Compromising principles in exchange for power is part of the package.

As tens of thousands crowded the Capitol chanting, "Kill The Bill" the Democrats in Congress voted 219-212 to force Americans to buy IRS-approved health insurance or face the wrath of the 16,000 new IRS agents the bill authorizes hiring to enforce it.

Thirty-two Democrats and 100% of Republicans voted against it, making it one of the most unpopular and one-sided pieces of legislation in history.

On Thursday, Nancy Pelosi admitted that the bill would impose a new tax on unearned income, (quoting Pelosi) "whatever category that is."

The tax would be applied to Medicare to make up for the reduction in revenue that came from scrapping the tax on so-called "Cadillac" insurance plans enjoyed by big labor unions.

The unions opposed taxing their benefits -- so the Democrats dumped it in favor of taxing everybody else to pay for it.

Pelosi also described the new tax as “help for health,” calling it a “health fee” on all those who have what she again described as “unearned income” that would "keep Medicare solvent for years to come".

(Sure it will. And if you put a tooth under your pillow, the Tooth Fairy will leave you a quarter.)

“This is essential to strengthen Medicare, and in this legislation we will make it solvent for nine more years,” Pelosi claimed. "The Medicare fee is 'help for health.' In our bill we have a surcharge at the high end – this is a health fee on unearned income.”

What is 'unearned' income? If you have whole life insurance, your dividends are taxable. So is interest, other dividends, annuities, royalties, rents, and so on. You will pay a 'health fee' on it.

The plan also breaks Obama's campaign promise not to increase taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year.

“Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase,” Obama said on Feb. 4, 2009. “Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

In fact, the plan levies the tax specifically at any “married taxpayer filing a separate return” who makes more than $125,000 per year.

For everyone else, including those who file as a head of household or who file singly, the threshold is $200,000 per year.

The tax would also hit any inheritance a person might receive if that person falls into the categories above: joint filers making more than $250,000 per year and everyone else making more than $200,000 per year.

So-called "high earners" will pay 3.8 percent more in Medicare tax, on top of a promised increase, from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, in their income tax rate.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Senate bill passed by the House would require American families to buy a health insurance plan that costs a minimum of $12,000 per year.

That's about $1000 per month -- minimum -- and the IRS will be watching.

The government will subsidize payments for a family of four making $88,200 per year. If you earn more than that or don't have enough kids, you are on your own.

So much for that new fridge, car, TV set, home improvement or long-awaited vacation. And if you work in manufacturing or selling such items, now might be a good time to start looking for a new job.

If you can find one. Economists of every ideological stripe agree that raising taxes in a recession will slow or prevent recovery (jobs).

Do you know anybody who works for a poor person? If your taxes go up, are you going to look for ways to cut your tax bill? Why wouldn't employers?

But evidently that's not that important -- in the midst of a recession.

This is about YOU, not those evil rapacious employers. Honest.

Assessment:

The Apostle John outlined the four stages of Tribulation; the rider on the white horse (antichrist) the rider on the red horse (war) the rider on the black horse (economic collapse) and the rider on the pale horse (death).

Revelation 6:6 details the rider on the black horse.

"And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine." - (Revelation 6:6)

A meaure of wheat or three measures of barley are representative of a day's food. A penny represents a day's wages. Oil and wine are symbolic of great wealth.

So John is predicting that during the Tribulation period, it will take a day's wages to buy a day's food for the average working person. The disparity between rich and poor will grow even wider.

We are not yet in the Tribulation. The antichrist has not yet made his appearance. But the conditions described by John don't happen overnight. They are, however, the same conditions that brought down the old Roman Empire.

In an effort to maintain peace within the Empire, the Romans expended vast sums in entitlements, (what the historian Gibbon called 'bread and circuses') until the Empire essentially spent itself out of existence.

It only took a generation, but to the generation to whom it was happening, it certainly appeared to be gradual.

Twenty years ago, America was debating how to spend the peace dividend. A decade ago, America had not only balanced the budget, but had begun paying down the national debt.

Today, we're looking at deficits as far as the eye can see -- and the government's response is to increase spending.

According to Bible prophecy, during the Tribulation the world is divided into four spheres of global power.

There is the revived Roman Empire under antichrist, the 200 million-strong Kings of the East, the Kings of the South and Gog-Magog.

There is no fifth global superpower resembling the United States of America.

There are several possible explanations. The first is the war -- we could lose it. It's certainly possible, particularly given our current Commander in Chief.

The second is economic collapse. A bankrupted America would almost certainly have to subordinate itself to its creditors. With deficits running into the trillions, America is already bankrupted. We've just not admitted it yet.

The third possibility is the Rapture of the Church. Of all the countries in the world. America will be among the hardest hit by the sudden disappearance of millions of Christians.

Twenty years ago, Option #1 wasn't even on the table. The Soviets were defeated by the Taliban -- with America's help. Back then, they were mujahadeen and we cheered their every victory.

Then America's blitzkrieg victory over Iraq in 1991 left America the undisputed and only world superpower. There was no power on earth that could stand against America. (That's why the Soviets folded up their tents)

Twenty years ago, Option #2 was nullified by the sudden appearance of both the vast Internet marketplace and the peace dividend. Both are not only on the table today, but are distinct near-term possibilities.

I believe that the Bible teaches that the Rapture comes first -- and given the rest of the signs, the trumpet could blow at any second.

"And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh." (Luke 21:28)

Are you ready?

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: thebiblicalcalendar.org/

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest
Vol: 102 Issue: 20 - Saturday, March 20, 2010


Why Do The Heathen Rage?

My good friend Terry James asked me some months back to write a chapter for an anthology he's working on, together with some other prophecy teachers.

My assigned chapter topic is about humanism and its role the devolution of society.

In researching the subject, I stumbled across a 1987 article in a publication called "The Probing Mind" entitled,"Creation Science and the FACT of Evolution."

In reading through the article, it occurred to me that everything necessary to link evolutionary thinking with social devolution was contained in Frank Zindler's various arguments.

"Because any intelligible use of the term creation must imply the existence of a creator, and because the creator of all of nature must be, quite literally, super-natural, we see that the fundamental force operating in "creation science" is a super-natural force - which is a polite term for magic. Science, however, involves the study of natural forces only, and ceases to be science when it attempts to explain phenomena by means of super-natural forces."

So when science attempts to explain how the human mind works, has it ceased to be science?

A brain can be explained by empirical study -- a mind cannot. Mr. Zindler's ability to reason comes from that supernatural, unrecreatable, inexplicable and mysterious consciousness that according to his worldview cannot exist.

There are no 'natural forces' to explain human consciousness. The effort Zindler expended to disprove the existence of God in his column is itself inexplicable if his theory is correct and that there is no God.

There is no such similar organized and sustained effort to disprove the existence of the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny. Why do you think that is? Obviously, because it is unnecessary because they really don't exist.

"Creationism, far from being a science, is actually a special department of fundamentalist apologetics. Its commission is to defend the biblical book of Genesis, which posits the magical and sudden creation of all forms of life on the planet just a few thousand years ago."

It is worth keeping in mind that Zindler's cause is evolution -- a theory requiring endless faith in the theory of accidents without cause.

Evolution posits that something came out of nothing and then began to systematically improve itself -- in defiance of all known laws of science and physics.

All empirical observable phenemenon supports the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics -- which says the exact opposite.

Evolutionary theory rests on the Big Bang theory of the universe. The Big Bang posits that the universe came into being from a single cosmic explosion.

During this explosive expansion, all the matter of the universe supposedly expanded outward from a tiny pinpoint. All modern cosmological models start with the assumption that the universe has neither a center nor an edge.

When these assumptions are plugged into Einstein’s general theory of relativity, the result is an expanding universe which is billions of years old at every location.

"[The creationist] "evidence" for creation is really nothing more than intentionally or unintentionally garbled evidence against evolution - as if they could prove the Genesis mythology by disproving Darwin!

As a matter of fact, most creationists are so devoid of any understanding of logic that it is not at all rare to hear one claim, "If I can disprove Darwin's theory of natural selection, the only thing left is the biblical theory."

First off, Zindler rests his argument on disproving Creaton. His 'logic' rests upon faith in the theory of the "Big Bang" -- before which there was nothing. Then came the Big Bang, and in an instant, all the matter in the universe suddenly existed.

How did that happen? If there was an explosion, Who lit the fuse? Zindler doesn't know.

What he KNOWS for a FACT, however, according to the title of his argument, is that Genesis 1:1 isn't the explanation.

That is just ignorant, primitive superstition devoid of understanding.

Assessment:

"Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?" - (Proverbs 2:1)

My book chapter assignment was to link secular humanism with the steady erosion of the most powerful society the world has ever seen.

Draw an imaginary line in your mind around that part of the world traditionally dominated by Christianity.

Now draw another imaginary line one around that part of the world traditionally dominated by pagan religions or are officially atheist.

Now, draw a circle around the traditional Islamic world.

One world lives in the 21st century. One world is emerging from the 19th.

(I read recently that there are millions of Indians, Africans and Chinese alive today who have never seen either a light bulb or a flush toilet.)

The third is still trapped somewhere between the 6th and 14th centuries where the penalty for adultery is death by stoning.

In the middle, surrounded by 14th century warlord societies, is cutting-edge 21st century high-tech Israel where its Western-style representative democracy is a perfect fit to its historical religious faith in the God of the Bible.

The social differences are staggering -- yet we all occupy the same planet. The ONLY common denominator is religion. Where Christianity dominates, society flourishes. Consider Israel, America, Australia, Canada, Europe, etc., during the 20th century.

Where paganism and atheism flourish, society stagnates and collapses. Witness Russia, China, the Communist world, the 'Third World', the Islamic world, etc., over the same period.

Zindler's polemic was penned some 23 years ago. I chose it for discussion because it reflects the secular humanist thinking that has dominated institutions of 'higher learning' for decades.

One needn't be a social scientist to track the corresponding devolution of Western society. The Apostle Paul explained it almost two thousand years ago and the formula remains valid to this day.

"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:28-32)

The attack on God and Christianity and the rise of secular humanism have brought us to the point of bankruptcy, alone and virtually friendless in an increasingly hostile world, under attack by enemies from within and without, while a raging internal culture war tears at the fabric of American society.

What is coming upon the earth, the Lord predicted, in Luke 21:24-26, will shake the foundations of heaven. It will so terrify and confuse the nations that men's hearts will fail them for fear.

To the world it is chaos and confusion. But to the Christian, it is confirmation that God remains on the Throne and that He will do all His pleasure (Isaiah 46:10).

It's coming, there is no longer any question about that. Our society is as solid as our retention of God in our collective knowledge. Which explains why it's crumbling before our eyes.

Now to the central question I want you to ponder over the weekend. Are you scared? Think about why.

Because if you're scared, then here is a followup question I leave you with.

Do you trust Him? I mean, really trust Him?

"Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths." (Proverbs 3:5-6)

Trust Him -- and allow Him to transform your fear into awe. He's coming soon!

Maranatha!

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: thebiblicalcalendar.org/

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest
Vol: 101 Issue: 16 - Tuesday, February 16, 2010

The Covenant -

Our Bible is divided into two parts that we generally refer to as the Old Testament and the New Testament. The word 'testament' comes from the Latin word, tesamentum which means, "covenant with God."
The Old Testament is the record of the covenant made between God and Abram's seed.
"And I will establish My covenant between Me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." (Genesis 17:7)
"And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words." (Exodus 24:8)
"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." (Acts 3:25)

The New Testament is a record of the fulfillment of the the Promise of the Old.
"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:" (Jeremiah 31:31)
"And to Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh bether things than that of Abel." Hebrews (12:24)

Before going on, I want you to notice something. These are blood covenants. What is a blood covenant? In ancient times, it was the only covenant that mattered.

Oftentimes before getting a bank loan, the creditor is required to put up collateral to secure the loan. My mortgage is secured by the value of my home. If I default on my mortgage, the bank can seize the property.

The collateral on my car loan is my car. If I default on my car payments, they can seize my car.

So a blood covenant is an agreement in which one puts up one's life as collateral against a default.

In Genesis Chapter 15, we find Abram questioning God's promise that his seed will be numbered as the stars of heaven and that they would inherit the land to which God had led him.
"And he [Abram] said, LORD God, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" (15:8)
It was then that God proposed a blood covenant after the manner of the Chaldeans.
"And he [God] said unto him, [Abram] Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon."

Abram knew what to do next, since this was something he was familiar with. He recognized the elements necessary for a blood covenant.

"And he took unto him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another: but the birds divided he not."

The blood covenant worked this way. The animals were slaughtered and cut up. The pieces were intermingled and then carefully arranged to form a kind of aisle through which the two parties to the covenant would walk together, hands joined.

The principle of a blood covenant, and the symbolism of the rended animal parts was clearly understood to Abram. Whoever broke the covenant would end up like those piles of animals.

A blood covenant was, by common custom, a joining of 2 or more persons, families, clans, tribes, or nations, where the participants agree to do or refrain from doing certain acts.

More specifically, God had proposed a patriarchal covenant. The patriarchal form of covenant is a self-imposed obligation of a superior party, to the benefit of an inferior party, as between a father and his son.

God's proposal included not only Abram, but extended to Abram's seed forever.
Genesis tells us that, having prepared the covenant ritual, Abram waited for God to show up so the two of them could walk through the grisly aisle together, sealing its terms.

Instead, as Abram waited for God, a deep sleep fell upon him. During that deep sleep;
"it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces. In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:" (Genesis 15:17-18)

The burning lamp was the Shekinah Glory of God. The smoking furnace symbolized the spiritual darkness of this world. The penalty for defaulting on a blood covenant was death.

The covenant was further refined at Mt Sinai and codified as the Ten Commandments. But note that Abram did NOT walk through the aisle with God.
God passed through the aisle alone.

Assessment:

“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Jesus Christ was cursed on our behalf, ‘hanged on a tree’ (the Cross) to fulfill the terms of the Old Covenant.

The New Covenant did NOT replace the Old Covenant with Israel, it extended it to all men.

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” (Matthew 5:17)

The Old Covenant is exclusively between God and the seed of Abraham and is represented by the Law of Moses.

The curse of the law was two-fold in that; 1) it was impossible to keep, and 2) the penalty for not keeping it was death.

The New Covenant is not with a people, but with the individual, whether he be Jew or Gentile. The New Covenant is between Jesus Christ and “whosoever will.”

The Apostle Paul was, before his conversion on the road to Damascus, a Pharisee, or a religious lawyer, one well qualified to explain the law of covenant oaths.

As Paul explains, "Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. (Galatians 3:9) Further. that “they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham." (3:9)

And also, "But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." (3:11)

Of the covenant that God signed on behalf of Abraham, Paul explains "Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto." (3:15)

The covenant could only be confirmed when the price demanded for its violation was paid in full.

The blood Covenant demanded satisfactory payment for its violation, and no one who had broken that covenant was qualified to stand in payment.

It is for that reason that Jesus Christ stepped out of eternity and into space and time. To keep the provisions of the original covenant and be the true Son that it demanded.

And having kept its terms on behalf of sinful humanity, He made payment as justice demanded, for its violation by those on whose behalf the covenant was signed.

He allowed Himself to be torn and rended like the animals that formed the corridor through which God alone passed.

"But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed." Isaiah (53:3)

To make restitution on behalf of the seed of Abraham. You. Me. And everyone who ever sinned. All of us.

Jesus made that payment on our behalf. On the Cross, as He gave up the ghost, Jesus cried with a loud voice "Teletelstai!" (using the same word that would be written on a slave's manumission papers), meaning,"Paid in Full".

The terms of the violated Covenant were met, its price was paid by its Signer. God's justice was fulfilled.

That is why Jesus took on human form and allowed Himself to be crucified by His own creation. That is the reason the Blood of Christ is so precious. Why nothing less would do.

And why nothing more is necessary.

Archives of past issues of The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest plus many other Omega Letter member features can be found at: www.omegaletter.com

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest,

Vol: 103 Issue: 26 - Monday, April 26, 2010,

Peeking Behind the Curtain: What's the Danger?

In the famous prophecy of the 70 Weeks, the Prophet Daniel views the future history of the Jews from the rebuilding of the Temple to the Crucifixion of the Messiah.

“And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for Himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.” (Daniel 9:26)

Notice the colon following the word, “Himself” in the verse. That colon represents a jump in time forward from the Cross, skipping completely over the Church Age and picking up again at the beginning of the Tribulation Period.

This illustration by Clarence Larkin demonstrates the ‘twin peaks of prophecy’ with this chart from “Dispensational Truth.”


The “people of the prince” were the Romans that sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple in AD 70.

“And he [the ‘prince’] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: [7 years] and in the midst of the week [3 ½ years) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, [indicating active Temple worship] and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, [fulfillment of prophecy at the 2nd Coming] and that determined [judgment] shall be poured upon the desolate.” (Daniel 9:27 italics mine)

The ‘prince’ of whom Daniel is speaking is a prince of the political entity that destroyed Jerusalem and ended Temple worship in AD 70. At the end of the age, that “prince” restores it by confirming a covenant between Daniel’s people [the Jews] and “the many” different peoples that surround it.

So there are number of prerequisites that must first be in place before Daniel’s 70th week can begin.

First, there must be a recognizable nation of the Jews, situated in Jerusalem and in possession of the Temple Mount. The State of Israel captured West Jerusalem in 1948 during the War of Independence against her Arab neighbors following its recognition by the UN. It has fought five separate wars and lived in a state of constant hostility ever since.

Secondly, there must be a revived form of the empire that initially destroyed the Temple in existence during this same period in history.

According to Nebuchadnezzar’s image, the final form of this empire will be the ten toes of iron and miry clay, led by ten ‘kings’ who share power and empower an eleventh, the diplomatic ‘prince’ who ultimately negotiates a settlement with the Arabs that restores Temple worship.

In 1948 the six nations that served as WWII’s main Western battlefield, Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, West Germany and the Netherlands came together to form the “European Coal and Steel Community” which became the forerunner of the Western European Union, or WEU.


In 1973, Denmark, Ireland and the UK officially signed on to the EEC. And then there were nine. In 1981, the Greeks joined the EEC. And then there were ten. Prophecy teachers began making bold predictions about the return of Christ in 1988. Then, in 1986, Portugal and Spain signed on.

Jack Van Impe made a valiant attempt to reconcile this with prophecy, arguing the next member would subdue three of them, leaving them with ten kings and one ‘prince’.

But 1988 came and went and the Church remained. And efforts towards full unification seemed hopelessly deadlocked.

Then, in late 1990 the 1st Gulf War unfolded live and on television, showcasing American military technology in what came to be known in some circles as “the Nintendo War”.

Saddam Hussein’s military was battle-hardened, well trained and well-supplied with the latest in Soviet weapons technology. It was considered the fifth-most powerful military force in the world at that time.

The buildup of military forces in Saudi Arabia began in August under the code-name Operation Desert Shield. On November 30, Operation Desert Shield became Operation Desert Storm as the first wave of bombings began.

By February, following a 100 hour ground campaign, the much-vaunted Iraqi military was surrounded, shattered and forced to surrender. The Soviet Union, shocked at the ease with which America destroyed the cream of its military technology on the battlefield, dissolved before year’s end.

The Europeans, equally shocked at the raw display of American power, set aside most of their differences and formalized their new Union, with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty the following year.

The Maastricht Treaty created the European Union and set into motion the mechanisms necessary for the creation of the single European currency, the euro.

The European superstate was born. But it had too many heads.

In 1995, the ten original members of the WEU; France, Germany, Italy, UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain and Greece agreed to form the core of the European Common Foreign and Security Policy, responsible for Europe’s collective self defense.

In June 2000 the EU and WEU agreed to consolidate their respective ‘kingdoms’ under one subordinate ‘prince’ under the ponderous title of “High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, and Secretary-General of both the Council of European Union, and the Western European Union.”

That position was created by a recommendation of the WEU Assembly, article 12, Recommendation 666.

Assessment:

Recommendation 666 had much the same effect as did Greece’s entry into the EEC in 1981. Everybody declared the EEC the fulfillment of Daniel 2:44, concluding that the Lord would return in 1988.

When Javier Solana was named High Representative for both the EU and WEU under Recommendation 666, some prophecy watchers declared Javier Solana to be the antichrist.

I know of several formerly-staunch pre-tribulationist preachers who switched over to become advocates of a ‘pre-Wrath rapture’ to allow for the Church to be present during the Tribulation Period.

Javier Solana was promptly declared the antichrist by many. Type Javier Solana into Google. The first two entries are about Javier Solana the politician. The next two are about Javier Solana the antichrist.

Until Solana retired in 2009 and was replaced by Catharine Ashton. As a British baroness, she qualifies for High Commissioner and Secretary General. But she doesn't qualify as the antichrist.

The antichrist will not be revealed on this side of the Tribulation. The Church will never know who he is. I have little doubt that the position created by WEU Recommendation 666 is the 'prince' position forecast by the Prophet Daniel, but that doesn't mean the current office holder is automatically THE 'prince.'

The EU isn't ready. It has its requisite ten members, but not necessarily the ten that will emerge as the ten leading 'kings'.

Greece seems highly unlikely to emerge as one of those leaders -- its economic collapse threatens the entire economic Union. It's more likely to be expelled than it is to survive to become one of the Final Ten.

Going back to the 1991 Gulf War, it seemed obvious to me that for Bible prophecy to play out, both the Soviet Union and the United States must decrease and some form of Europe must rise to supremacy.

That process is well underway, but it isn't there yet. The EU is itself on the verge of economic and political collapse, but it cannot revert back into its former status as a collection of independent nations anymore than a pickle can revert back into a cucumber.

What must emerge, if a united Europe is to survive, is a leaner, smaller and more cohesive unit of like-minded states -- what exists now is too fractured and fractious -- it's neither "old Europe" nor "new Europe" and until it becomes one or the other, it will remain neither.

This in no way suggests that the Tribulation (and the Rapture that precedes it) is somehow still years away. Two years ago, the United States appeared perfectly sound -- today we're already composing America's eulogy.

The linchpin of Bible prophecy is still Israel. America has begun to distance itself from Israel, but it is still the principle peace broker between Israel and the Arab world.

For now. But with Barack Obama in the White House, that equation could change overnight.

What I want to highlight in this briefiing is the inherent danger that comes from filling in the blanks in Bible prophecy instead of letting God do it. There are some things God intended for us to know, so that we would know that it was near, even at the doors.

All the signs that point to this generation as the one that will see the fulfillment of all things are in evidence. God wanted us to know when it was near so we would be able to impart that sense of urgency to others.

But there are some things God has drawn a veil of secrecy around. Counterintuitvely, THOSE things are the ones that make all the headlines.

God has drawn a veil around the identity of the antichrist. We won't know who he is because he can't be revealed until after the Rapture. Mark ministries that claim they know who the antichrist is being in defiance of Scripture.

We won't know when the Rapture will take place. Jesus said no man knows the day or the hour, not even the angels in heaven. He said we won't even be able to guess -- but that doesn't stop people from trying.

Mark ministries that promise you the Rapture will take place on this day or that day because of some complicated numbering scheme or based on deep research into the Scriptures. They are certain to disappoint -- no man knows the day or the hour.

Jesus not only said nobody could know when, He explained why. Salvation is by faith.

"But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up." (Matthew 24:43)

If we knew the date of the Rapture, then there'd be a world-wide revival the day before -- a revival as sincere as an Obama campaign promise. We only know what we know because God wanted us to. We can't know what He has concealed from us.

The real purpose behind identifying the antichrist or calculating the date of the Rapture is not to glorify God, but to glorify oneself. There are limits imposed by God. Seeking a way around those limits is an act of rebellion against His Word.

Bible prophecy is not given to us to be sensationalized into some kind of parlor trick to win converts to a ministry -- it is given as a warning sign of His soon return to win converts to salvation.

Converts to a prophecy ministry often fall away when the minister's prophetic interpretation is proved wrong. If their faith was in the interpreter, rather than the prophecy, then the foundation of their faith is destroyed. They won't trust the next guy, even if he is giving them the real Gospel.

I've seen it happen a hundred times in the past. They gave their faith once, and had it trampled. They are unlikely to be that trusting again.

We are eyewitnesses to the unfolding of future history as it was written thousands of years in advance. That is more than ample testimony that these are the last days.

What can be more sensational than that?



PS - I don't agree with what Jack says about knowing the date/time of the Rapture. I believe it can be known! :) :)

Email: scuggers1@gmail.com

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

http://www.omegaletter.com/briefs/briefings.asp?BID=2810

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest

Vol: 104 Issue: 3 - Monday, May 03, 2010

The Hole in the Melting Pot

I grew up during one of the most racially troubled periods in modern history. I recall watching the marches. I remember seeing police officers setting dogs on the peaceful marchers.

I was a teenager when the whole country, it seemed, was set afire by the race riots.

The Watts riots set off similar riots in Chicago and Detroit. Growing up in and around Buffalo, I recall signs in shop windows proclaiming the shopowner to be a “Soul Brother” --in hopes of warding off rioters.

I never personally experienced racism until I was in Marine Corps boot camp in 1969.

My drill instructor was a guy named S/Sgt. J. R. James. When he found out I was Canadian, he nicknamed me 'Wacky Jack' -- whenever another DI stopped by, Sgt. James would invite him to inspect 'his pet Canadian' whereupon I would race to the center of the squadbay to be 'inspected.'

They'd look me over and say helpful things like, "No wonder the Canadians sent him down here." and, "they don't grow 'em too sturdy up there, do they?" and other kind words of encouragement.

(I kept part of the nickname -- I dropped the 'Wacky' part and only had to put up with it when I ran into somebody from my old platoon)

One of the guys in our platoon was a great, big loudmouthed lout by the name of Brunson who decided he just didn’t like Canadians. And given that Pvt. Brunson towered a foot over me and outweighed me by 100 lbs, it was a problem.

One day that problem came to a head in the squadbay when Brunson pushed me to the point where I had to either respond or make myself a target for every other bully in the platoon.

Of course, a fist fight in the squadbay meant serious trouble for everybody so we were quickly pulled apart, still hurling insults at one another. Red with fury, my brain searched for a good one:

"Hmmm, the Marine Corps builds men – he’s not a man, he’s a bully,” I thought. So I hit him with what I thought was the ultimate insult to him as a Marine and said, “You’re not a man. You’re nothing but a boy.”

(Did I mention Pvt Brunson was black? Honestly, until that moment, I hadn’t really noticed.)

And until that moment, most of the friends I had among the platoon were black guys, and none of them liked Brunson anymore than I did. The racial connotation of the word ‘boy’ never even occurred to me.

But it did to all of them. Who was the racist? Me, because I was white? Or Brunson, who bullied me solely because I was an immigrant? Like all things, this too is a matter of perspective.

If you were me, then I was the victim of anti-immigrant prejudice. If you were Brunson (or the rest of the black guys in my platoon), then although it was Brunson threw the first punch, I was the closet racist that threw the first epithet.

The Brunson Incident was a watershed moment in my life. Until that time, I didn’t really have much of a grasp on ‘racism’ as a concept. When I realized how my comment had been received, I was devastated – I don’t think I ever felt worse in my life.

But that was 1969. It was a different time. We’ve come a long, long way from the days of “Soul Brother” signs and race riots.

We’ve finally integrated. Haven’t we?

Assessment:

The American black population is set by the CIA World Fact Book at 12.85% of Americans. The American Hispanic population is estimated at between 14% and 15% of the 79.96% of Americans classified as ‘white’

(For contrast, about 15% of Americans are die-hard members of the Tea Party.)

The President is black. The chairman of the GOP is black. So are the Attorney General, a member of the Supreme Court, and dozens of other top federal officials.

The most recent Supreme Court appointment went to an Hispanic, Sonia Sotomeyer. The US Surgeon General is Antonia Novello.

Dozens of US representatives in both Houses of the Congress are Hispanic. Hispanics are represented in government, sports, entertainment, movies, science, engineering, technology, etc.

Univision and Telemundo are television networks totally dedicated to Hispanic interests, whereas “Black Entertainment Television” (BET) is totally dedicated to the “American Black Experience.”

I don’t believe I’ve ever seen America more race-conscious for less reason than it is today.

In every instance where one hears the word ‘racist’ it is being hurled by a minority at the white majority, who for the most part are as confused by it all as I was in 1969.

But in the 21s century, calling someone a ‘racist’ has become a meaningless insult.

You can’t turn on a news program without hearing that the Arizona immigration law is ‘racist’ and aimed at Hispanics – which comes as a great surprise to those Americans that, like the CIA and the Census Bureau, didn’t even know by being Spanish they weren’t ‘white.’

It is the Hispanic population that segregated itself into an identifiable racial group – although I STILL can’t tell you why Charlie Sheen, Lynda Carter or Bill Richardson aren’t ‘white’ – and I don’t think that they can, either.

I watched the May Day (originated by Karl Marx) marches during which thousands of Hispanics marched carrying signs equating immigration law in general and anyone who supports existing federal immigration law with ‘racism.’

Those that weren’t decrying anti-Hispanic ‘racism’ were carrying signs identifying them as members of the Hispanic separatist group, “La Raza” – Spanish for, “the race.” It isn't just that the American Melting Pot has a hole it it -- the heat has been turned up so high that it is dissolving before our eyes.

Noted US Representative Charlie Norwood in a column published by Human Events:

“It is past time for all Americans to know what is at the root of this outrageous behavior, and the extent to which the nation is at risk because of "La Raza" -- The Race.

There are many immigrant groups joined in the overall "La Raza" movement. The most prominent and mainstream organization is the National Council de La Raza -- the Council of "The Race".

To most of the mainstream media, most members of Congress, and even many of their own members, the National Council of La Raza is no more than a Hispanic Rotary Club.

But the National Council of La Raza succeeded in raking in over $15.2 million in federal grants last year alone, of which $7.9 million was in U.S. Department of Education grants for Charter Schools, and undisclosed amounts were for get-out-the-vote efforts supporting La Raza political positions.

The Council of La Raza succeeded in having itself added to congressional hearings by Republican House and Senate leaders.

And an anonymous senator even gave the Council of La Raza an extra $4 million in earmarked taxpayer money, supposedly for "housing reform," while La Raza continues to lobby the Senate for virtual open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens.”

I am not a racist and I am getting a little tired of the real racists out there tarring me with their racist brush.

I am tired of Barack Obama’s supporters telling me that I don’t support his policies because of either his race or my race.

Statistically, Obama is as white as I am and I am probably as black as he is, genetically speaking. We’re all mixed race if you go back far enough.

My family is ‘Black Irish’ – meaning we came from a part of eastern Ireland that had been occupied by Spaniards in the days of the Spanish Armada.

Does that mean I am Hispanic? Or that I am black? Or that Obama and Charlie Sheen are both white? Ummm, yes. Maybe. And yes.

Immigration is not a racial issue. It is a legal issue. One is either a legal immigrant, or one is an illegal alien. Legal immigrants come from black countries, Hispanic countries, white countries, and countries that don’t care what color somebody’s skin is.

Illegal aliens ALSO come from black countries, Hispanic countries, white countries. . . . race is nothing more than a convenient camouflage aimed at circumventing the law.

La Raza is about nothing else except race – it means “The Race” but what is its agenda?

In the words of their own charter, their agenda is the reconquest of the American southwest from the whites for “their” “race”.

Their motto: “Fuera La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada.” ("For the Race, everything. Outside the race, nothing.”)

One of our members recently emailed me about a new book called “Breaking the Code of History” written by a secular futurist. He was particularly impressed because the writer, David Murrin, who assessed the impending demise of the Western Christian Empire, was a total secularist.

Murrin’s assessment of the demise of Western Christendom is that it is an American Empire, which he says is the last – this collapse, he says, will be the end of Christendom. And that its collapse will come very rapidly.

“At the same time the system that rises challenges far quicker as it moves into the vacuum created by the old system, and that's the East. The surprise will be the rate of that change. And we view the new administration in America as new hope. Unfortunately, if you look at historical precedents of underclass and the mechanisms of an underclass actually coming to the fore demographically, it is not new hope, it's the beginning of the end. And we're seeing that very quickly take place.”

We’ve already discussed a similar scenario advanced by Russian futurist Igor Panarin. Panarin envisioned the economic collapse of America and its division into six regions, with the southern region, from California to Florida going to La Raza.

Secular futurist Gerald Celente’s forecast is equally dismal.

Each of these forecasts were derived by analyzing trends and projecting where these trends will lead.

All three project the demise of the world’s most Christian country and the collapse of Western Christian civilization – and all three see it coming within a matter of years, not decades.

All three tie it to the aging of the Baby Boom generation, which is defined as those persons born between 1948 and 1964, and Western support for Israel since its refounding in 1948.

When that generation passes, say these secular futurists, then what will follow is wars, famines, the economic collapse of the West and probable global dictatorship.

It sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Revelation 6:1-8 outlines the first four judgments of the Tribulation, embodied by Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse:

1) the rider on the white horse – the antichrist;

2) the rider on the red horse – war;

3) the rider on the black horse – economic collapse/famine

4) the rider on the pale horse – Death.

That is pretty much the same forecast (dictatorship, war, economic collapse and national death) that secular futurists examining current trends say is the most probably outcome – and that once begun, it will proceed very rapidly.

The futurists tie it to 1948 and the Baby Boom generation.

They say that by the time the Baby Boomer generation has passed away, their forecasted catastrophes will have come to pass.

Jesus Christ tied His return to the restoration of Israel, “the fig tree”, saying that when its branch is yet tender and puts forth leaves, it is a sign that summer is near.

He used the symbol of the fig tree to put parentheses around one generation, somewhere in time, so that specific generation would be able to recognize itself and distinguish itself from all the generations that would come and go in the interim.

“Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:”

The ‘fig tree’ blossomed on 14 May, 1948 bearing fruit for the first time in 2000 years.

“So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.”

That is exactly how the futurists see it, too. Not because they read their Bibles – because they are reading the signs of the times. They are reading the same signs that we are and coming up with the same conclusions and the same time frame from the same evidence.

“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” (Matthew 24:32-34)

That’s ALSO what the futurist guys are saying. Except that the Bible beat them to the punch by some twenty centuries.

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

Guns of Summer-Print Link

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest
Vol: 104 Issue: 5 - Wednesday, May 05, 2010

The Guns of Summer

Mahmoud Abbas looks pretty comfortable in the driver’s seat as the first of the “proximity talks” opened with US Middle East envoy George Mitchell serving as the proxy.

The Palestinians refuse to meet with the Israelis directly because, as Abbas told CNN, he doesn’t like Prime Minister Netanyahu. He called Netanyahu’s government “extreme” and uncooperative, before grousing, “Since they are an elected government we have no choice but to work with them.”

But not really. The Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee heard Brig.-Gen. Yossi Baidatz, head of Military Intelligence’s Research Division, also give a very pessimistic assessment of the Palestinian Authority's intentions, saying they were “already preparing the ground for the failure” of the proximity talks.

The Palestinian plan is to set Israel up by making a demand he knows Israel cannot meet and then to portray Israel as the party responsible for the failure of talks. The region is bristling with weapons and ready for war.

What they really need is an excuse – and with the Obama administration’s eager assistance, they are certain to find one.

King Abdullah of Jordan, often feted in the West as a ‘pro-Western moderate’ has evidently been chosen by the Arab side as their point man.

“Israel is playing with fire concerning Jerusalem and it must stop all unilateral moves in the occupied territories,” said the Jordanian monarch.

“Israel has to choose between life behind walls, and living in peace with all Arab and Muslim countries on the basis of the Arab peace initiative,” he said. “This can be achieved by withdrawals from occupied Arab land and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.”

Israel already made that choice in 1993 when it agreed to negotiate with Yasser Arafat. Israel chose peace. But it didn’t get peace.

On the 7th anniversary of Oslo, and after Israel negotiated away everything it had gained in five wars, Yasser Arafat declared the start of the Oslo War in September 2000.

The Palestinian side never wanted peace. It doesn’t want peace now. Neither do any of the rest of the Arab states. They claim to want peace, but they define peace as the absence of Israel.

A two-state solution was the "only solution" to the crisis, says King Abdullah, warning that if no progress is made toward peace soon, then a new cycle violence will erupt for which "the whole world will pay the price."

He called Israel’s plan to build 1600 apartments in a Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem in an area that is not under dispute an “effort to change the identity of Jerusalem and empty it of its Arab Christian and Muslim residents.”

Nice touch, adding that part about the Arab ‘Christians’ being displaced –no point in only inflaming Muslim sensibilities.

The Arab Christian population of Jerusalem is tiny – one could house Jerusalem’s entire Christian population in that one apartment complex everybody is talking about. There are only about 10,000 Christians left in East Jerusalem – and they live primarily in the Jewish sections.

The Arab Christian population of the West Bank and Gaza has all but collapsed since Oslo as Christians fleeing radical Islam migrated either to Israel proper or to the West.

King Abdullah’s allegedly moderate position gives him great credibility in the Western world -- if King Abdullah thinks Israel is the problem, then Israel must be the problem.

The only reason King Abdullah enjoys his ‘moderate’ reputation is because Jordan signed a peace deal with Israel after Israel began floating what it called “the Jordan Option” for the West Bank.

Israel wants to give the West Bank back to Jordan, from whom it captured it in 1967.

But Abdullah doesn’t want it and he says that nobody can make him take it back.

“No one can enforce such a solution and whoever speaks of such illusions is talking about an impossible scenario,” he said.

It’s an ‘impossible solution’ because Abdullah, like everybody else in the region, isn’t interested in a Palestinian state beside Israel.

The only solution that is acceptable is a Palestinian state instead of Israel.

Assessment:

We’ve probably been over this a hundred times. It isn’t a secret and it isn’t revisionist history. But to listen to the media and the White House, you’d think the “Palestinian people” were as historically valid as, oh, I dunno – the Jews?

They aren’t. They don’t even really exist, except as a modern illusion.

The ‘Palestinians’ are really Jordanians to begin with. Until 1948, ‘Palestinian’ was a pejorative nickname for Jews, not Arabs.

The West Bank had been part of Jordan since Winston Churchill created it after WWI and it remained part of Jordan until the 1967 Six Days’ War. But when Israel captured it in 1967, Jordan refused to repatriate its citizens, instead putting them into internment camps.

It was in one of these internment camps that the myth of the “Palestinian people” was invented.

The other Palestinian people live in Gaza, formerly part of Egypt. The Egyptians are walling off their border with Gaza to keep the so-called “Palestinians” out of their country.

Hamas has accused Egypt of pumping poison gas into the tunnels. Egypt denies it, saying instead that when it blows up the mouth of a tunnel, it burns up all the oxygen suffocating anyone inside.

Egypt blames Israel saying that it had to seal its borders because Israel sealed off its borders and now the Gazan Egyptians, (oops, I mean Palestinians) are turning to their former home country for help.

Like Jordan, Egypt also refuses to help its former citizens, saying the Gazans are Israel’s problem.

So we have the two most allegedly 'moderate' Arab countries -- and the only two that have signed peace deals with Israel -- warning that because of Israel, a 'new cycle of violence' is about to descend on the region (and perhaps the whole world).

Those are Israel's alleged friends. Now on to her enemies.

To the north, Hezbollah has amassed an arsenal of rockets and missiles larger than that of most standing armies. Lebanon is completely given over to Hezbollah now, with Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah bragging that Lebanon is "our land."

US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates admitted last week that,

"Syria and Iran are providing Hezbollah with rockets and missiles of ever-increasing capability. We are at a point now where Hezbollah has far more rockets and missiles than most governments in the world. And this is obviously destabilizing for the whole region, and so we’re watching it very carefully.”

Since the US knows that Iran and Syria are arming and equipping Hezbollah and has even admitted it publicly, one would expect that Washington would turn up the heat. But not on Syria or Iran, or even on Hezbollah.

According to the UK Guardian, the US is instead planning to turn up the heat on Israel, telling Mahmoud Abbas that the US may stop using its veto power at the UN Security Council to protect Israel.

A Palestinian source quoted by the UK paper said David Hale, a deputy of US Middle East envoy George Mitchell, told Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas last week that if there was "significantly provocative settlement activity," including in east Jerusalem, Washington may consider allowing UNSC resolutions censuring Israel to pass.

According to the paper, the source said "it was understood that meant the US would abstain from voting on a resolution rather than use its veto." (God help us!)

Abbas confirmed it in an interview with the Chinese Xinhua news agency on Wednesday when Abbas claimed the US had vowed to stop "any provocative activities" by Israel in a bid to resume Middle East peace talks.

Abbas told the paper that when "the credibility of the US pledges are demonstrated," the negotiations "would restart immediately."

The credibility of the US? That gives some sense of the insanity that is passing for diplomacy in the brave, new 21st century.

It is the credibility of the US and Israel that are on the line -- not the credibility of the leader of a non-existent people whose entire claim rests on the contention it is the Jews who are the non-existent people who are "occupying Arab Jerusalem". (Jerusalem is a Hebrew word meaning 'city of God'.)

To the Arab world, being 'credible' means agreeing with the Palestinian claim that Jerusalem is an Islamic-Arab city.

It appears that the die has been cast. The Arabs are planning a new war this summer, believing that they have the United States at least tacitly in their corner.

Everything is in place, including an Arab-friendly antisemite in the Oval Office.

(Unless you really believe that Obama sat under Jeremiah Wright's preaching for twenty years but never listened to or agreed with any of his sermons. I can't. To quote Hillary Clinton, "it stretches the limits of credulity.")

For the Arabs, it looks like the Perfect Storm. Indeed, it is almost TOO perfect. It is hard to see how they could fail to seize the advantage while they see it. The Bible says that they will.

"For, lo, Your enemies make a tumult: and they that hate You have lifted up the head. They have taken crafty counsel against Your people, and consulted against Your hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they make a covenant against You: The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagrites; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assyria also is joined with them: they have helped the children of Lot. Selah." (Psalms 83:2-8)

It is often said that the strongest man is the one who stands alone. A man who knows that the odds are against him and knows there is no help forthcoming has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

The Bible says that it is when Israel stands alone and friendless and facing certain annihilation that the Lord will take up the battle for them, in the process revealing Himself to His Chosen people.

"That men may know that You, whose Name alone is the LORD, are the Most High over all the earth." (Psalms 83:18)

Is this the Psalms 83 War? I don't know. But I think it just might be. We won't know for sure until the Guns of Summer fall silent.

Unless we hear the Trumpet sound first.

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

scuggers

Guns of Summer-Print Link

July 19th 2010 9th of Av

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest

Special Report: Zechariah's Puzzle

A nuclear Iran is the most dangerous enemy Israel has ever faced in her four thousand years of existence.

A nuclear strike ordered by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would almost certainly be met with a massive Israeli counterstrike, but Iran is a huge country. Vast expanses are sparsely populated and much of it shielded by mountains.

Ahmadinejad is betting his country could survive a single counterstrike. Tiny coastal Israel would not survive to strike a second time. Ahmadinejad believes it is his religious duty to destroy Israel, even at the risk of starting a nuclear war.

He believes Allah has tasked him with bringing about the return of the 12th Imam, Islam's messianic figure. Ahmadinejad believes that once he starts a global war, the 12th Imam, or Mahdi, will return and lead Islam in a global conquest of the infidel world.

Ahmadinejad will not be deterred by American naval forces in the Persian Gulf. Nor will he be deterred by the risk of a nuclear response from Israel.

Ahmadinejad sees himself as Islam's ultimate suicide bomber strapped with Islam's ultimate suicide bomb. Ahmadinejad also shares the Muslim conviction that Jerusalem is the third holiest place in Islam.

So the most likely target of an Iranian attack would be Tel Aviv, on Israel's coast, preserving Jerusalem as a prize for the Mahdi.

The Book of Zechariah dates from the early 5th century and is centered around Jerusalem. The majority of his prophecies are concerned with the future of Jerusalem, from the rebuilding of the Temple to the First Advent of the Messiah and through to His Second Coming at the end of the age.

Assessment:

Zechariah Chapter 13 addresses the First Advent of the Messiah, His rejection, and His betrayal.

"And one shall say unto Him, What are these wounds in thine Hands? Then He shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of My friends. " (Zechariah 13:6)

Modern Israel could make the same lament. As the war with radical Islam goes on, more and more nations are reconsidering the price demanded of them for their continued support of the Jewish state.

At the UN, diplomats eagerly await another opportunity to distance themselves from Israel to appease their own militant Islamic populations back home. Even a war-weary US is slowly backing away from its former policy of unhesitating support for Israel.

The Iran Study Group recommended meeting with Israel's enemies to discuss trading parts of Israel for parts of Iraq. It recommended Israel be excluded so negotiations wouldn't be hampered by Israeli objections. And it is being considered as a viable option.

The US-backed land-for-peace initiative resulted in Oslo War that has already deeply wounded Israel.

Zechariah's Messianic prophecy continues, "Awake, O sword, against My shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones." (Zechariah 13:7)

The Shepherd, of course, is Jesus. Jesus came first to 'redeem the lost sheep of Israel.' When Jesus sent the Twelve on their first missionary journey, He told them not to go to Samaria, or to the Gentiles, but instead, He commanded: "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 10:6)

"But He answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 15:24)

The lost sheep rejected the Shepherd, and a generation later, were themselves scattered by the Romans into a two thousand year exile. The Shepherd was smitten, and the lost sheep of Israel scattered, fulfilling Zechariah's prophecy to the letter. After that, the prophet predicted, God will return His attention to His lost sheep.

The next two verses of Zechariah weave it all together into a cohesive pattern: The burden of Damascus. The absence of Israel's neighbors from Ezekiel's enemies list. The Ahmadinejad nuclear factor. The missing alliances.

And, like the burden of Damascus, it is a yet future event. It is a bone-chilling scenario to consider, given the present circumstances in the Middle East.

"And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on My Name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is My people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God." (Zechariah 13:8-9)

Ahmadinejad is confident his nation could survive an Israeli nuclear strike and he is probably right. Indeed, Ezekiel's List says that he is right, since Persia is on his list.

Syria, on the other hand, would not -- and Ezekiel omits Syria from the Gog-Magog Alliance.

A nuclear strike against Damascus would certainly turn it into the ruinous heap envisioned by Isaiah, which would explain Syria's absence from Ezekiel's List.

Ahmadinejad's religious ideology demands the destruction of the Jewish State. But Jerusalem's status as Islam's third holiest shrine ensures Jerusalem would not be targeted.

On the other hand, Tel Aviv is forty miles east of Jerusalem. Protected by distance and the mountains, Jerusalem would mostly probably survive a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv.

While Jerusalem is Israel's most ancient and most religious city, Tel Aviv is its newest and most secular. Two thirds of Israel's total population live within a few miles of Tel Aviv. The remaining third, including most of Israel's religious Jews, live closer to Jerusalem and the West Bank.

An Iranian nuclear strike on Tel Aviv would therefore cut off two thirds of Israel's population in a single strike. The surviving third therefore would consist mostly of religious Jews in and around Jerusalem.

Zechariah predicted the sudden 'cutting off' of two thirds of Israel, specifically noting the surviving third would be brought "through the fire", emerging as "His people".

Ezekiel predicted the restoration of Israel in stages; first as bone, sinew and skin, but "there was no breath in them." (Ezekiel 37:8)

After Israel's restoration, Ezekiel predicted that, from the four winds "breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army." (37:9-10)

The first stage of Israel's restoration was the ingathering. It began with the First Zionist Congress in 1897 and the rush of early Jewish emigration to the Holy Land.

The second stage took place with Israel's declaration of Independence and the five wars that left Israel in possession of one of the most powerful military machines in the world.

The third stage, Ezekiel says, is when God shall "put My Spirit in you. . ." after which:

"Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God. (37:14a, 23)

Zechariah's prophecy seems to indicate that final stage takes place following the destruction of secular Israel and the preservation of Israel's religious community.

As I said, it is a chilling scenario. But no more chilling than the prospects now already facing Israel. But it is hard to imagine the current scenario unfolding any other way.

Admittedly, this a morbidly gloomy and admittedly speculative report. And there are no doubt some who think it pretty callous. But I am only quoting the prophet, not inventing the prophecy.

And I am anything but callous about the horror it portends. And I didn't invent the horror, either. That is in the process of being invented by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

One needn't consult Zechariah to arrive at the identical conclusions in the event that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is successful in his quest for the Bomb.

A nuclear strike on Tel Aviv would affect two thirds of Israel's population. It is a fact that it would affect Israel's mainly secular population. It is equally true that the surviving third would include the majority of Israel's religious community.

Ahmadinejad's war is unlikely to bring about his dreamed-of Islamic victory, however. A more likely consequence will be a global backlash against Islamic militancy and new resolve for develop a global government to prevent its re-emergence.

Iran would survive, without its nuclear program, more dependent than ever on its alliance with Russia.

What remains of Israel will be centered around Jerusalem, and it seems likely that the survivors of the world's first nuclear sneak attack will enjoy some period of global patronage, similar to the outpouring of sympathy it received in the years immediately following the Holocaust.

The new Israel, centered around Jerusalem's religious community, would have no need of a wall, and would enjoy some measure of peace and global sympathy for their situation.

Ezekiel's Gog-Magog scenario calls for a land of unwalled villages, dwelling in apparent peace and safety, under the protection of the Western world. We aren't there yet.

But Zechariah's scenario would get us there in a blinding flash of light.

As I said, this is speculative. But Bible prophecy can be likened to assembling a jig-saw puzzle. As more pieces fall into place, the picture begins to get clearer and the puzzle pieces get easier to figure out.

Zechariah's Scenario may well provide the next missing piece.

Website: biblebelievers.com/

''Technology Threatens Freedom!

The Omega Letter is a running day-by-day chronicle of the “New Normal” of the 21st century, having gone live online back on October 14, 2001.

Our archives contain more than 2800 daily reports recording the West's steady implosion -- in slow motion and as it happened. As the daily chronicler of all these unfolding events and how they've related to Bible prophecy, you wouldn’t really expect me to be easily surprised.

But I practically spilled my coffee yesterday when I heard the President of the United States that access to unfiltered information represented a threat to democracy!

In a commencement address at Hampton University, Virginia President Obama told the graduating class that too much information is a ‘distraction’ -- especially when that information is critical of him.

“With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. . . All of this is not only putting new pressures on you, it is putting new pressures on our country and on our democracy.”

OK. That surprised me. University commencement addresses are by definition, speeches aimed at the best and brightest of the next generation of leaders.

That he would even attempt to argue that 'too much information is a threat to democracy' reveals much about the Left’s successes in keeping Marxist theory alive for another generation.

The “Too Much Information Theory” has been the mantra of dictatorship throughout modern history. What “too much information” really means is information that Obama's government hasn’t approved. As he told the students;

“You're coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't always rank all that high on the truth meter.”

Can you imagine an American president saying out loud, let alone in public, that “being exposed to all kinds of arguments” threatens democracy? Or that the government should be the ones in charge of the ‘truth meter’?

The Founding Fathers should be spinning in their graves.

Obama hinted that such exposure to non-government approved content would be responsible for “breath-taking change” -- as if freedom of thought as guaranteed by the Constitution had proved itself a failed experiment:

“We can't stop these changes... but we can adapt to them . . .” Obama told the students. And the best way to adapt, Obama said, is through Obama-approved education.

“And education is what can allow us to do so. It can fortify you, as it did earlier generations, to meet the tests of your own time.”

(The government controls the educational system and the institutes of higher learning are overwhelmingly staffed by the Far Left disciples of Marx and Engels and Chairman Mao.)

So, to summarize, education is good. But the availability too much unfiltered information is a distraction what Obama defines as ‘the truth’.

Seems I’ve heard this before.

“The Party is the core of the revolution, and its principles are based on Marxism-Leninism. Party criticism should be carried out within the Party”

“Socialism must be developed in China, and the route toward such an end is a democratic revolution, which will enable socialist and communist consolidation over a length of time. It is also important to unite with the middle peasants, and educate them on the failings of capitalism.” (Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book, Chapter 1)

Assessment:

The newspapers were all abuzz about the fact that in his speech, Obama dissed the iPad, Apple’s newest technological gizmo. How dare he blame technology!

Most were quick to point out the blinding hypocrisy, given that Obama’s use of the internet is credited by most analysts for his capturing the White House.

“Obama, who at one time had rapper Ludacris on his iPod and still has a White House-provided profile on Facebook, warned that the world is at a moment of "breathtaking change."
"Yet in a speech before members of a generation that never knew life without a computer, Obama came close to declaring technology -- and the information it spawns -- the enemy."
"With so many voices clamoring for attention on blogs, on cable, on talk radio, it can be difficult, at times, to sift through it all; to know what to believe; to figure out who's telling the truth and who's not," Obama said.
"Let's face it -- even some of the craziest claims can quickly gain traction. I've had some experience with that myself. Fortunately, you'll be well positioned to navigate this terrain.”

But it isn’t the hypocrisy that is either surprising or newsworthy. And pointing out hypocrisy in the Obama administration is like pointing out fish at Marineland.

What is newsworthy is when the president starts hinting that the goverment is openly coming after the bloggers in order to 'protect democracy'.

The fact that is somehow deemed less newsworthy than the discovery of hypocrisy in the Obama administration is staggering.

While Obama is openly extolling the virtues of government-approved 'truth' his FCC is moving full steam ahead with its 'Net Neutrality' plan, despite a federal appeals court ruling that the FCC had no jurisdiction to regulate the internet.

There are many strong arguments in favor of the FCC's "Net Neutrality" policy -- all of them sound logical and reasonable and in the public interest. And they probably are. (If by 'neutral' one means, 'government approved.')

'Fascism' is a political system in which the needs of the state, which is embodied by its leader, take precedence over the rights of the individual. The leader of the state is the embodiment of the state and what hurts the leader hurts the state.

It seems clear, at least to me, that the election of Barack Obama to the White House was an accident of history -- and most opinion polls seem to bear that out.

(Well, maybe an 'accident' is the wrong word. God sets up rulers according to His own purposes.)

In the natural, there seems no logic, rhyme or reason to explain how such an obvious fascist managed to get so far, so fast, not to mention doing so much damage along the way and with the full advice and consent of his party.

"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:" (2nd Thessalonians 2:9-11)

Obama may just be another dictator-in-waiting, rather than the actual antichrist. But if ever anything qualified as 'strong delusion' it was that Obama represented either 'hope' or 'change'.

Because if the country could believe that, it can be made to believe anything.

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

A Riddle, Wrapped in a Mystery, Inside an Enigma


During a radio broadcast in October, 1939 Winston Churchill was responding to questions about what side he thought Stalin would take in the event of war with Germany.

"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."

That quote often comes to mind when it pondering the strange case of President Barack Hussein Obama – IF that is his real name. IF he is really even eligible to be the president.

And it comes to mind even more often when I ponder why the press isn’t more curious.

After all, there are a LOT of ‘ifs’ surrounding Barack Hussein Obama – more than any other president in American history. Without exception.

And I can’t remember an American president that showed less respect for the media, so the media's fawning affection is makes it even more mysterious and enigmatic.

The Constitutional eligibility of the nation’s chief executive has never been an open question before. According to a recent Washington Post poll, fully twenty percent of the adults polled said they don’t believe he was born in the US.

The Washington Post analyzed the poll results this way:

“The results make clear that while suspicion about the president's place of birth is far from widespread, there is a certain -- and not entirely insignificant -- segment of the population that carries doubts.”

I suppose that, compared to the 77% of Americans polled who (inexplicably) don’t know and don’t care, the doubts aren’t that widespread.

Not entirely insignificant? Twenty percent? That is one in five Americans! That is more than the entire African-American population of the United States! That is more than the entire Latino population of the United States!

That is TWICE as many Americans as those who claim to be atheists. It is THREE times as many as claim to be gay. It is THREE times the American Muslim population.

It should come as no surprise that more Republicans think Obama is a fraud than do Democrats, but FIFTEEN percent of self identified Democrats say they believe there is solid evidence that Obama was born outside the country and another SEVEN percent say they are ‘suspicious’.

Added together, that is a ‘not entirely insignificant’ twenty-ONE percent of Democrats that question Obama’s eligibility!

But the Post is more concerned with the Republicans.

“Establishment Republicans have done everything they can to downplay chatter about Obama's citizenship, believing, rightly, that it is a stone-cold loser for the party. But, elements of the GOP base seem unwilling to leave the issue behind and a handful of candidates around the country -- including former Rep. J.D. Hayworth who is running for the Senate in Arizona -- seem unwilling to rule out the possibility in what seems like an attempt to win the votes of the most conservative of conservatives within the GOP base.”

Why is it a ‘stone-cold’ loser for Republicans? Better yet, why isn’t it a white-hot issue for the press?

Assessment:

A report in today’s Worldnetdaily uncovered yet another Obama anomaly, together with more evidence suggesting internet giant Google is actively covering up for Obama by manipulating its search results on the story.

The Legend of Barack Obama says that he lived in Hawaii with his grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, where he graduated from high school in 1979 before moving to Los Angeles to attend Occidental College.

According to the legend, Obama’s first job was at a Baskin-Robbins store in Hawaii in 1975. But according to Social Security records, Obama’s Social Security number was not issued until sometime between 1977 and 1979.

How did he get a job without a Social Security number? And that's really only a peripheral issue. The real issue is not as much 'when' as it is 'where'.

Social Security numbers are prefixed and coded by state of residency. For example, in New York State, where I was issued mine, the first three digits are between 050 and 134. My prefix falls within that range.

Social Security prefixes issued to Hawaiian residents range between 575-576. California residents are issued numbers with prefixes between 545 -576.

Obama’s Social Security number should therefore begin with 575 or 576 whether issued from California or Hawaii. Obama’s Social Security number begins with a Connecticut prefix!

Moreover, there are questions about the record. The date of birth field has three different entries – the first was 1890, the two others were Obama’s birth-date, and his birth-date with month and day reversed.

According to private investigator Susan Daniels, the 1890 date might mean Obama was assigned a previously issued Social Security number that had gone dormant due to the death of the original holder.

Or it might not. All anybody has to go on is the Legend of Obama. There are no supporting records.

In 1981, according to legend, Obama traveled to Indonesia to visit his mother. From there, he traveled to both Pakistan and then India spending three weeks there allegedly visiting with the families of his Occidental roommates.

If he traveled on a US passport, nobody can find a record of it. And in 1981, travel to Pakistan on a US passport was as difficult as visiting Cuba on a US passport today.

It wasn’t until after Obama returned from Pakistan that he somehow got transferred from Occidental College to New York’s prestigious Columbia University where the Legend says he graduated in 1983.

He then worked in New York City for four years before moving to Chicago’s South Side as a community organizer, legend says. In 1988, Obama spent three weeks traveling Europe before spending five weeks in Kenya.

When he returned to the States, according to legend, he was accepted at Harvard.

Harvard is in Connecticut, but the first occurrence of Obama's association with the number was in 1986 in Chicago -- two years before he went to Harvard.

Returning to my earlier question, why isn’t this news? Nobody has ever seen Obama’s actual birth certificate except Hawaiian government officials and their claim is unsupported by any other evidence.

Since when does the press unquestioningly take the unsupported word of politicians? Especially about other politicians?

I caught part of one of Glenn Beck’s broadcasts last week during which Beck pondered a similar question. Inexplicably, Beck doesn’t question the Legend of Obama, and joins with the rest of the "Establishment" in ridiculing 'birthers' -- but he’s certainly made a case against the Obama record that isn’t under wraps.

Glenn Beck has an audience of millions – it is the highest rated and most popular program on what is the most highly rated and popular cable news network in the world.

Beck is regularly smeared by the White House, so they can’t plead ignorance of the charges he regularly lays against the administration.

Beck even had a special red phone installed on set and claims he sent the number to the White House so they can call and correct the record at any time. The phone never rings.

Given the case Beck has outlined and considering his audience numbers in the millions and includes every major Obama administration official and members of every single news organization in the country, (if not the world) -- why isn’t it news?

Sure, Beck acts a little crazy. And his charges are so over-the-top as to sound a little crazy. So why doesn’t the mainstream press go out and prove that he is crazy? If all those charges aren’t true, that should be easy to prove.

But if all those charges ARE true, then it Watergate pales into insignificance by comparison. In 1974, Nixon was only trying to cheat on an election. The press hounded him from office even before the Congress could vote articles of impeachment against him.

If Beck is telling the truth, what Obama's already accomplished has eclipsed even Nixon's most ambitious attempts at an Imperial Presidency. If Beck is telling the truth, the Obama administration is the most corrupt in a century and without doubt the most dangerous in history.

If Beck is telling the truth, America is now in the hands of the enemy.

If Beck is telling the truth, the entire Congress and the majority of the mainstream press are in collusion to cover it all up.

But if Beck is NOT telling the truth, then why are all the attacks leveled at him personally, rather than the material he is offering up as fact?

The same question applies to Obama's eligibility. Anyone that questions it is marginalized as a 'birther' (even by Beck). Why is the response to the question an attack on the questioner, rather than a reply to the question?

The questions aren't sinister. They aren't even hard. I cross the US-Canadian border all the time. The first question I must answer in order to obtain entry on either side is always, "Where were you born?"

The second is, "What is your citizenship?" The questions are always accompanied by demands for supporting documents, birth certificate, passport, etc.

An ordinary person cannot get a federal job without those documents. Anyone seeking a sensitive federal job must pass an extensive background check.

Barack Obama is the President of the United States. To get that job, all he had to produce was an autobiography containing the Legend of Barack Obama.

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma was a distinctly Churchillian way to describe a crafty and dangerous enemy. But for at least 20% of the country, it also describes the President of the United States.

But it is the other riddle wrapped in mystery inside an enigma that I find even more disturbing.

Why isn't any of it news?

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

Friday, May 14, 2010

The Planned Destruction of America?

Last weekend, Attorney General Eric Holder said that Arizona’s immigration law has the possibility of leading to racial profiling. He had earlier called the law's passage "unfortunate.”

In the same “Meet The Press” interview, Holder questioned whether the law was unconstitutional because it tried to assume powers that may be reserved for the federal government.

Arizona countered that criticism by saying they are simply picking up the ball after the federal government dropped it.

“Not so,” Holder said, hinting broadly on all the Sunday talk shows that he is considering filing a federal lawsuit against Arizona.

The Arizona law requires local and state law enforcement to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally, and makes it a state crime to be in the United States illegally.

It sparked protests across the country, including a City Council-approved boycott of Arizona businesses by Los Angeles. Evidently, being an American citizen makes one part of a 'race' and so opposing illegal immigration therefore makes one a 'racist'.

On ABC’s “This Week” Holder warned that the Arizona law puts America “on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they’ve done.”

That sure does sound ominous. I don’t think I could support a law that will 'pick on people for how they look'. Where is that provision in the law, Mr. Attorney General? I’ll be happy to add my voice to yours in opposition.

Evidently, he'll have to get back to us on that. Yesterday, the US Attorney General admitted under oath that before he actually decides to sue Arizona for passing an unconstitutional law, first he plans to read it.

That’s right! He hasn’t read it yet! But just because he doesn’t know what the law says is no reason to reserve judgment on its Constitutionality.

Holder objects to Arizona’s ‘reckless and offensive racist law’ because it requires existing federal immigration law to be enforced by state law enforcement. Next thing you know, Arizona police will start enforcing other violations of federal law, like bank robbery, kidnapping and terrorism.

(Oh? They already do? You mean every state does? Really? Then what’s all the hubbub, Bub?”)

There are no federal laws prohibiting states from enforcing federal laws -- including immigration. There is no Constitutional conflict – states have the authority to regulate their own borders.

Arizona’s immigration law is now being studied for adoption by at least nine other states.

When asked how Holder could have ‘constitutional concerns’ about a law he hadn’t even read, America’s top law enforcement officer told the Congressional panel;

“Well, what I've said is that I've not made up my mind. I've only made the comments that I've made on the basis of things that I've been able to glean by reading newspaper accounts, obviously, television, talking to people who are on the review panel...looking at the law."

Is the Attorney General saying he forms his legal opinions based on what he reads in the newspaper? Well, sort of. He hasn’t made up his mind, but that is no barrier to his wanting to make up yours.

What is going on?

Assessment:

I know. That is the same question I was asking in yesterday’s briefing. What is going on? Has the entire government gone off its collective rocker?

Doesn’t the administration realize there is an election coming in November? Has he not noticed that Barack Obama was the last Democrat to be elected to national office in America?

Every open seat since, whether in Congress or the governor’s mansion has been filled by a GOP candidate. Every Senate primary has seen the incumbent defeated by candidates sympathetic to the Tea Party.

If the Congress flips the way that it looks like it is going to, the Barack Obama presidency will come to an end in six months and Obama will spend the next two years overseeing a powerless lame duck caretaker government.

Doesn’t he know that? Doesn’t he have any advisors that can tell him? Doesn’t he care? And if he doesn’t care, why not?

I caught all of Glenn Beck’s broadcast yesterday and I think maybe Beck has it figured out. Beck did a sort of 'Big Picture summary' on his program of what he’s uncovered a piece at a time over the past 18 months.

And if Beck is right, then I know why Obama isn’t worried about November. Because by November it will be too late. The plan will have passed the point of no return. Beck’s theory is that Obama is part of Maurice Strong’s cabal of leading internationalists dedicated to the creation of a global government, necessitating the collapse of this one, first.

I recognized the 1990 quote Beck used in which Maurice Strong outlined the plan to collapse Western civilization – I analyzed it in 1992 in a column published in This Week in Bible Prophecy magazine.

At the time, I was examining Strong’s relationship with the UN’s official publishing arm, Lucius Trust. Lucius Trust was founded in 1920 by Alice Bailey under its original name, “Lucifer Trust.”

The title page of Alice Bailey's book, 'Initiation, Human and Solar' was originally printed in 1922, and clearly shows the publishing house as Lucifer Publishing Co in 1923.

According to Constance Cumbey, the author of the excellent expose, “The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow,” Bailey changed the name to Lucis Trust, because she decided that “Lucifer Trust” revealed too much about the New Age Movement.

At one time, the Lucis Trust office in New York was located at 666 United Nations Plaza.

William Jasper, author of "A New World Religion" describes the religion of the UN:

"...a weird and diabolical convergence of New Age mysticism, pantheism, aboriginal animism atheism, communism, socialism, Luciferian occultism, apostate Christianity, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism".

Strong’s thesis, as articulated in 1990, was carefully framed as a ‘what if’ scenario.

‘What if a group of world leaders realized that the planet was being destroyed by Western civilization and the only way to save the planet was to collapse the Western economic system?’

That same year, Al Gore’s “Earth in the Balance” was published, kicking off what has turned out to be the biggest con game in the history of the earth. But the damage has already been done – the administration can do pretty much anything it wants in the name of ‘green technology’.

Immigration, the environment, the economy, foreign relations, the conduct of the war, health care, bailouts, runaway deficits and unsustainable spending . . . I’ve said before that it looks like whenever the administration has two directions it could take, it always chooses the most destructive, expensive or dangerous option.

Why is it that Eric Holder refuses to hold radical Islam responsible for the attempted terror bombing in Times Square? What is with the effort to extend Constitutional rights to enemy combatants?

Why would anybody consider trying Khalid Sheik Mohammed in downtown New York City?

Why doesn't the government want to secure the borders with Mexico? Why is it telegraphing its military strategy to the enemy via the New York Times?

Beck believes that what he has uncovered is a deliberate push to bring about Maurice Strong’s scenario by overwhelming, and then collapsing, the American system, bringing America down by using the methods pioneered by Columbia University professors Richard Clowen and Frances Piven.

(Recall that Obama managed, mysteriously enough, to transfer from California’s Occidental College to Columbia University in 1981)

What is the Cloward-Piven strategy? They articulated it in a 1966 article published in the liberal “The Nation” magazine.

"The article was published on May 2, 1966 and laid out what is now known as the ‘Cloward-Piven Strategy’. The plan calls for the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions,” explains a synopsis on the Worldview Radio website."

“Cloward and Piven studied Saul Alinsky just like Hillary Clinton and President Obama.”

Actually, President Obama didn’t just ‘study’ Cloward and Piven and Saul Alinksy. He taught it as a community organizer for ACORN. There is no doubt that he knows exactly what he is doing. It isn't merely inexperience and incompetence.

It's deliberate.

There isn't much that Beck has come up with that I found particularly new -- I ghost-wrote a book called "Blood, Money and Greed" in 1997 that pretty much covered the same ground. Despite researching it all myself, I still had trouble believing it was ALL true.

But I know what Bible prophecy says is in store for the last generation, and my research dovetailed with Scripture's outlook, so I figured it was probably all true, but I still had trouble believing it.

But since I was ghostwriting the book for someone else, my job was to write what I found and let the client explain what it meant.

Glenn Beck put together his scenario the same way, except that Beck didn't have the framework of Bible prophecy to work with as a guide. Beck was simply putting the pieces together without any idea of what the final picture would look like.

When he was done, he had drawn the same picture drawn by the Bible for the last days. Except that Beck didn't find it in Daniel, Ezekiel or Revelation.

It was the same picture -- but Beck got his from the headlines.

"And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh." (Luke 21:28)

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

A great assessment of the pre-trib rapture viewpoint...

In Which Day?

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

World Watch Daily - Online Now

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/

this was good . . .

Jack Kinsella Today

Website: www.biblebelievers.com/