Prophetic Significance of the "Clash of Civilizations"

To Honor Jesus Christ, Glorify God, Encourage Believers, & Warn All
Est 12-07-2002    Updated  09-12-2010

This information is offered with the hope that YOU can come to KNOW the Lord personally.

Revelation 6:4   And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another : and there was given unto him a great sword.

Several questions are before us on this page.

Question 1: Should Christians support the inevitability of a war between Christianity and Islam?

Question 2 : Is there a deliberate attempt being made to create a "war" between Christians and Muslims?

Question 3 : Is there a relationship between the coming "war" and Bible prophecy ?

Question 4 : Are religious offers being made to broker a "peace" to prohibit this "war" and is this related to Bible Prophecy?

Question 5 :  Is a solution being proposed to solve the Islamic "problem" which has Biblical significance?

Question 6 :  Will the "Clash of Civilizations" lead to the 2nd horse of the Apocalypse? (Revelation 6:4)

Question 7 :  Does the Clash give an explanation which would make the Biblical invasion of the "kings of the East" plausible?

Question 8  :  Will the Clash of Civilizations have a continental United States element?

Regardless of the specific merits of this web page, one  needs to understand that the coming of the Lord is  sooner than we think.

What are we to DO about all this?   Answer- Nothing.  Any participation will further inflame the situation.  Reading this should convince a reasonable person that with what is coming soon, the world will offer NOTHING for hope . We do not need the Bible to figure this out.
The hatred that is being engendered from these events is incalculable.

However, what DOES THE BIBLE say? -  

Mat 24:7 for NATION shall rise against NATION , and kingdom against kingdom.  According to Mat 24:8 these are part of the BEGINNING of SORROWS .  Then, what happens?

Mat 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you : and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

The word NATION above is Strong's Concordance word number 1484 in the Greek Dictionary. It means " tribe ", specifically non-Jewish. It is, therefore, "tribal" conflict and fits into the mold of Huntington's Clash of Civilizations.

Mat 24:10   And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
(the accusations will lead to betrayal (to authorities) and hatred will abound (specifically toward any fundamentalist).

Mat 24:11   And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
(deceivers will make matters worse)

Mat 24:12   And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
(lawlessness, disregard for true authority, will abound)

The above verses refer to the tribulation period and the tribulation saints, when the Clash of Civilizations will be underway .  

The only thing we should do - get right with the Lord now and wait patiently for His coming.

Question 1 : Should Christians support the inevitability of a war between Christianity and Islam?

Jesus Christ answered this question a long time ago for all Christians.  So, let the world know now that advocating war against a religious group, such as Islam, is contrary to the express statements of the Bible.  Statements to the contrary attributed to people like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell do not represent my beliefs, the teachings of the Bible, or my informed Christian friends.  In fact, I believe that many so-called "fundamentalists" have become unwitting tools in the hands of others.

John 18:36   Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

The kingdom of Christ is not of this world, so Jesus opposed his servants' fighting to promote it.  So, when you read anywhere that Christian fundamentalists seek to promote the second coming of Christ by war on inhabitants of the Mideast, these writings do NOT represent the views of Biblical Christianity.   All true Christians should be opposed to an inevitable "Clash of Civilizations" in which Christians must conquer Muslims and vice versa.

When Muslims read this idea of "promoting the second coming of Jesus Christ" [which is an impossibility to start with], they are being LIED to by people who WANT Muslims to fight Christians.  They want Muslims to believe Christians intend to conquer them.  I know of no informed Christians who believe in the "promoting of the second coming of Jesus Christ" by ANY means, let alone war.

Criminals should be apprehended, but, an entire culture can not be apprehended, especially in the name of Christ.  The only way to "apprehend" a culture is to "apprehend" a single man by the preaching of the gospel of Christ plus or minus NOTHING.  The idea of conquering an entire culture is the same kind of thinking that has spawned the murderous Crusades of the late 11th century and all other "religious" wars since then, most of which were conducted at the behest of the Vatican hierarchy whose objective was self aggrandizement.

What does the terminology "Clash of Civilizations" mean and  where did it originate?  
What is the significance of this concept?

From the following website of Boston College, a Roman Catholic college in the United States
published March 13 , 2002, we can read about "The Struggle for the Soul of Islam: Inclusive and Exclusive Tendencies Since September 11"

The following questions are posed on the website.

Will the post-9/11 "war on terror" turn into a war between Islam and the West?

Is there a "clash of civilizations" that makes conflict and war inevitable?

The website further states:
These questions are being raised both within Islam and in public debate in the West about Islam.  Whether or not the "clash of civilizations" becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy depends, in part, on [a proper dialogue].

So, the reason that the "clash of civilizations" is significant is that a public debate has ensued over whether or not the post 9-11 war on terrorism is an inevitable "clash of civilizations" between the West and Islam.

In fact, if you go to and search for "Clash of Civilizations", you will find many links (a number of which have connections of varying degrees with Roman Catholicism.)  Are the "Crusades" being launched again?  

At this point reading the author's " Is the Aftermath of 9-11 in the Book of Revelation? " might be enlightening.

Where did the "Clash of Civilizations" concept originate?

From another Roman Catholic website -
we read a portion of a review of a book entitled.  [In fact this website is for "youth ministry".]

The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order .
By Samuel Huntington. (1996). New York: Simon and Schuster.

The Clash of Civilizations is an impressive book: its analysis of ancient and recent events that have shaped the world is breath-taking, well referenced and a superb introduction to international relations (even for a youth worker).

From Huntington's book-
"It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will be the battle lines of the future . "

Samuel Huntington, a professor of political science at Harvard University, wrote this book in the aftermath of the Balkan conflict, the dismantling of communism and the Gulf War, but since the 11 September 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre, it has become extremely popular.

Huntington defines 8 major civilizations: Sinic (China, Vietnam and Korea); Japanese; Hindu; Islamic; Orthodox Russian; Western; Latin-American and African

He sees friction growing as America’s efforts to promote Western culture grate against religious identities in the other civilizations. He says that the wars of the future are likely to arise out of “ Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance and Sinic assertiveness.

Perhaps, most significant is this interpretation of the "Clash of Civilizations" giving us a philosophical and even geographical definition of the conflict-

But the division is not only between the West and the Rest but also between Western Christianity, on the one hand, and Orthodox Christianity and Islam, on the other. The most significant dividing line in Europe may well be the eastern boundary of Western Christianity in the year 1500 . The peoples to the north and west of this line are Protestant or Catholic; they shared the common experiences of European history -- feudalism, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the French Revolution, the Industrial Revolution; they are generally economically better off than the peoples to the east; and they may now look forward to increasing involvement in a common European economy and to the consolidation of democratic political systems. The peoples to the east and south of this line are Orthodox or Muslim; they historically belonged to the Ottoman or Tsarist empires and were only lightly touched by the shaping events in the rest of Europe; they are generally less advanced economically; they seem much less likely to develop stable democratic political systems.

To see that the Roman Catholic Hierarchy (Western Catholicism) has been the traditional enemy of Eastern Orthodoxy and the Muslims and that the United States represents an enemy of the Vatican hierarchy (even though a sometimes partner), read Malachi Martin's book The Keys of this Blood , the Struggle for World Dominion Between Gorbachev, the Capitalist West, and John Paul II, (Simon and Schuster, 1989).   Martin says that the US is "the archvillian of all human history."   The Vatican has desired to conquer the East since 1054 AD [the year the Vatican and the Eastern Orthodox Church both declared themselves the sole universal church].   Would the "Clash of Civilizations" not involve the destruction of both Vatican historical enemies?
Brief quotes from the Keys of this Blood [and an analysisof Babylon the Great] are found here  .

From the Clash of Civilizations on page 158 we find:
The most compelling and pervasive answer... is provided by the GREAT HISTORICAL LINE THAT HAS EXISTED FOR CENTURIES separating Western Christian peoples from Muslim and ORTHODOX peoples. This line dates back to the division of the Roman Empire...Europe ends where Western Christianity ends and Islam and Orthodoxy begins. (emphasis added)

This line is referred to on page 160 as a cultural fault line.  In Huntington's book he describes fault line wars .  What we have then (in Huntington's book) is a "war" between Western Christianity on one side and the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Muslims on the other side.

Pope John Paul II has said "The Clash of Civilizations" is Seemingly Inevitable
Pope Speaks of "Clash of Civilizations"

VATICAN CITY (AP) Friday, 29-Nov-2002 4:20PM" ` Pope John Paul II lamented on Friday the terrorism and violence across the world, referring to a "clash of civilizations that at times seems inevitable." The pope, speaking at a pontifical university, urged students there to have "an open sensitivity to the values of various cultures in relation to the evangelical message." "Without renouncing the affirmation of the force of the evangelical message, it is an important work in the torn world of today that Christians be men of dialogue and work against that clash of civilizations that at times seems inevitable." The pontiff told the audience that these are not easy times. "Violence, terrorism and war only build new walls between people," he said. The Vatican newspaper Osservatore Romano emphasized this remark in a front-page banner headline, followed by an editorial that promoted efforts to find ways out of the world's conflicts. "This is perhaps the most concrete challenge that humanity must confront in the century that has just begun," it said.' "
Story from AP Copyright 2002 by The Associated Press (via ClariNet)

Question 4 : Are religious offers being made to broker a "peace" to prohibit this "war" and is this related to Bible Prophecy?

The choice between two alternatives (1) East-West Religious unity OR (2) the Clash of Civilizations is stated succinctly on this website:

A “clash of civilizations” or a “Europe that breathes again with both its lungs?” A lot of the history of the twenty-first century—and most particularly the future of Russia, which can only pull out of its catastrophic social and economic nose-dive by closer cooperation with the West—will depend on whether Samuel Huntington or Karol Wojtyla is the more acute student of European cultural history.

Huntington is the author of the Clash and Karol Wojtyla is Pope John Paul II.  So, either Rome gets its long desired reunification with (domination of?) the East  -  OR  -  we have the Clash of Civilizations described by Hungtington.

The vision of Nebuchadnezzar (interpreted by Daniel) of Rome dividing into 2 "legs" representing the East and West empires was history written in advance, which has already been fulfilled .  

The reunification process of the 2 "legs'" by virtue of the "ten toes" made of "iron and clay" is also history written in advance and will be fulfilled immediately prior to the second coming of Jesus Christ . The Bible says that the iron and clay do not mingle -"the kingdom shall be divided."  So, the Bible says the ATTEMPT to reunify will only partially succeed and at THAT time will Jesus return to destroy the "ten toe[ed]" kingdom.  

Read more about the prophecy of the East-West Roman religious reunification attempt . as a solution to the Clash of Civilizations.

On another website, a "religious" solution is called for as well:

Jack Miles, the author of Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God (Alfred A. Knopf), an ex-Jesuit priest has published on the web his take on the Clash of Civilizations.  [By the way, Jack's view of God in the aforementioned book has God being culpable in the world's problems.  So, when it comes to doctrine particularly, I can not agree with Mr. Miles.]

At - we read

by Jack Miles

Mr. Miles attaches enormous significance to the thesis of Samuel Huntington "Clash of Civilizations" first published in Foreign Affairs in 1993.

JACK MILES, Senior Advisor to the President at the J. Paul Getty Trust and a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy, is the author of Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God (Alfred A. Knopf).

In the 1990s, the most important foreign policy intellectual in the United States may yet prove to have been Samuel P. Huntington. The second-most-popular article in the history of Foreign Affairs has been his controversial 1993 "The Clash of Civilizations," an attempt to see what lay beyond the end of Kennan's Cold War.

What Huntington saw was, on the one hand, economic and cultural globalization and, on the other, resistance to it by those who saw it as merely the latest form of Western, historically Christian, and at this late date specifically American imperialism. Though Huntington noted that many non-Western powers had cast their lot with the emerging global order, it seemed equally clear to him that China and world Islam had not done so, might never do so, and might even join forces in a joint counteroffensive against the West.

After stating that China has been admitted to the World Trade Organization and has [so far] not been in conflict with the west, he asks.

But what of world Islam? The border separating what Muslims call dar al-islam, the "House of Submission (Islam) ," from dar al-harb, the " House of Warfare " seems increasingly to define a long irregular battlefront, one that as of September 11, 2001, stretches across four continents . With striking frequency, those post-Cold War conflicts typically termed "local" or "parochial" or at most "sectarian" turn out to be battles between historically Muslim and historically non-Muslim populations. An incomplete list would include, moving from east to west:

Roman Catholics vs. Muslims on Mindanao in the Philippines
Roman Catholics vs. Muslims on Timor in Indonesia
Confucians and Buddhists vs. Muslims in Singapore and Malaysia
Hindus vs. Muslims in Kashmir and, intermittently, within India itself
Russian Orthodox Catholics vs. Muslims in Afghanistan
Russian Orthodox Catholics vs. Muslims in Chechnya
Armenian Catholics vs. Muslims in Nagorno-Karabakh
Maronite and Melchite Catholics vs. Muslims in Lebanon
Jews vs. Muslims in Israel/Palestine
Animists and Christians of several denominations vs. Muslims in Sudan
Ethiopian Orthodox Catholics vs. Muslims in Eritrea
Anglicans and Roman Catholics vs. Muslims in Uganda
Greek Orthodox Catholics vs. Muslims in Cyprus
Serbian Orthodox Catholics vs. Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo
Roman Catholics vs. Muslims in Algeria
Anglicans and Roman Catholics vs. Muslims in Nigeria.

No single statement in Huntington's Foreign Affairs article attracted more critical comment than " Islam has bloody borders. " In the subsequent book, Huntington wrote: " I made that judgment on the basis of a casual survey of intercivilizational conflicts. Quantitative evidence from every disinterested source conclusively demonstrates its validity ." The book assembles that evidence, and further evidence has accumulated since.

Miles goes on to argue of the chasm between the West and Islam-

Unless this chasm can be bridged, the world may slide into a war of terrorist reprisal and counterreprisal with no end in sight. Where should the work begin?

In my judgment, it should begin with theology ... and the moment may be at hand for religion -- and for theology as its intellectual dimension -- to come in from the cold as a topic in international diplomacy.

One wonders who would be the abitrator of such a "religion."   You do the math.  Miles goes on to say-

Yes, friends, theology. And secretaries of state may have to learn some theology if the current clash between Western and Muslim civilization is to yield to disengagement and peaceful coexistence, to say nothing of more fruitful kinds of relationship . If Osama bin Laden is a spiritual leader with military designs on the United States, the first, crucial insight should be that he and his movement must be dealt with as what they are. To suppose that we can achieve security by dealing with him as a common criminal and with the Muslim governments that harbor his movement as secular governments unconcerned with the religious dimension in his appeal is to fight this new war as if it were the last war.

Engaging a jihad for the soul of Islam as if it were an international manhunt for a common criminal is a battle plan guaranteed to fail. How can we make war against all the nations that have harbored the agents of Osama bin Laden when the United States itself is one of those nations? We have done so unwillingly and unwittingly, but how witting or willing was Egypt to harbor the Muslim Brotherhood agents who assassinated President Anwar Sadat? So far, the paper trail left by the World Trade Center saboteurs has led to friendly Arab states like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates rather than to Syria, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Is this not just what one would expect of a movement out to conceal its tracks and frustrate retaliation? Though bin Laden declared himself the enemy of virtually every Muslim government except the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, some Muslim regimes clearly stood higher on his enemies list than others. How very clever to implicate just those regimes in his crimes.

How very clever, indeed.  One wonders who really is this clever.  I doubt seriously it is Al-Qaeda, bin Laden, and the Taliban.

Question 2 : Is there an attempt being made to create a "war" between Christians and Muslims?

In fact, this criticism of the "Clash of Civilizations" has already been anticipated in the book Clash of Civilizations on page 264.
Defenders of Islam often allege that its Western critics believe there is a central, conspiratorial, directing force in Islam mobilizing it and coordinating its actions against the West and others.  If the critics believe this, they are wrong.

The assertion that "there is a central, conspiratorial, directing force in Islam mobilizing it and coordinating its actions against the West and others " may well be the justification behind the verse in Rev 17:16 which says that

"...the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast , these shall hate the whore , and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh and burn her with fire."-Rev 17:16
According to the following website, the answer is YES, there is an attempt to create a war.

Who are the Radicals?

Published 04-11-2002

In a very practical sense, the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were a tremendous success . September 11, 2001 dramatically advanced the agenda of a tiny group of radicals who perceive that the only way to achieve their goals is by driving the worlds of Islam and Christianity into a cataclysmic confrontation .

These radicals are not just Muslims; they are Christians and Jews as well. Under examination, the ultimate goals of the radical pro-Israel fringe, extremist Christian fundamentalists, and Al Qaida are startlingly similar. The line between the camps becomes quite fuzzy, a subject that A True Word hopes to examine in future articles.

The 9/11 conspirators, of course, had a good idea that war would be the consequence of their efforts , though they must be disappointed in the outcome as it stands today.

A coterie of lobbyists, media commentators, and US government bureaucrats, pursuing their own unique but overlapping agendas, work together in an unlikely alliance under the assumption that such a war will benefit their peculiar and obscure causes . Those causes have very little to do with the interests of America and her citizens, Western countries, or humanity in general.

The average American doesn't believe that a war between Muslims and the West to usher in the return of Jesus Christ is a sensible policy goal, but quite influential lobbyists do .   [I am amazed that anyone can get away with saying "lobbyists" believe they can promote the second coming of a sovereign God and not be laughed to scorn.  In fact, name just one lobbyist who even believes in Jesus Christ].

The interests of America and peace are sacrificed as opinion-makers and lobbyists drive a wedge between our country and the Muslim world as a means of shoring up an illegitimate regime in the Holy Land .

[I assume by this means that the author of the website is opposed to the present [any?] Israeli government].

Career spooks and defense contractors scramble for ways to justify their existence in a post-Soviet world with no enemy looming outside America's gates, no convincing threat to its survival. [He's saying elements within the CIA are promoting conflict.]

But the problems of these fringe special interests are not humanity's problems, and what they believe is the solution to their problems- unlimited war -is not the solution to humanity's problems. And thus, we have a responsibility to begin identifying those for whom war is an end in itself, to analyze their arguments, and to expose their incongruence, falsehood, and danger.

The point here is that FUNDAMENTALISTS of ALL types will become "terrorists" if the Clash of Civilizations is accepted as true.  The website above says the Radicals are Muslims, Christian fundamentalists, and Jews.  This war on fundamentalists is described in the Book of Revelation where we read of the police state and guillotine.  The enemies of  Islam and the Christian West want there to be a Clash of Civilizations.

To demonstrate that ultimately Protestant Fundamentalists will be categorized along with Islam, see the Clash Of Civilizations itself by Huntington:

p 111 "Lutheranism and Calvinism, Shi'ite and Sunni fundamentalism, and even parallels between John Calvin and the Ayatollah Khomeini ... the central Spirit of both the Reformation and the [Islamic] Resurgence is fundamental reform.."

p 117   "For years to come Muslim populations will be disproportionately young populations...the Protestant Reformation is an example of one of the outstanding youth movements in history."

As predicted, fulminations against "fundamentalism" as the true enemy have begun. Eventually, this website will be illegal because it will be a " deviant" representation of the Bible.  Eventually, once the Day of the Lord begins (and the line has been drawn by the Almighty), teaching the literal truth of the Bible will be " deviant ".   This is being pointed out for ONE REASON ONLY - there is NOTHING for us to do politically (pro or con); the ONLY thing to do is to repent and trust in Jesus Christ as your saviour , before it is too late.

See this webpage:

The Americans, however, make the mistake of seeking largely a military solution. You must use force. But force will only deal with the tip of the problem. In killing the terrorists, you will only kill the worker bees. The queen bees are the preachers , who teach a deviant form of Islam in schools and Islamic centers, who capture and twist the minds of the young.”

Here we see clearly that it is not the terrorists, but, religious leaders who are the real problem.  Read Revelation Chapter 13 to find out what happens to non-conforming religious leaders in the future.  This is a serious case of conformity .

Moderate, modernizing Muslims, political, religious, civic leaders together have to make the case against the fundamentalists .  

There is no doubt in the author's mind that the " war on terrorism " will be a major causal factor of  events in the Book of Revelation.
Read this to see how "peace" will actually become forced compliance to an "ethical standard."

On a similar note is a USA Today article of 12-01-2003 quoting Lieberman as saying "a loss in Iraq opens the door to a GLOBAL RELIGIOUS WAR in which Islamic radicals will attack Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism...every other religion, including every part of Islam that doesn't agree with these fanatics. " (emphasis added)

End 12-01-2003

from the news of today on the following web page we read-

The Pope's 25th Anniversary Comments Brand "Fundamentalism" as the ENEMY OF DIALOGUE AND PEACE.

In a document released Thursday, the pope criticized the use of religion as a banner to commit violence -- an apparent reference to fundamentalism , which he branded the " constant enemy of dialogue and peace ."
(emphasis added)

Dear reader, the time for the Lord's return is fast approaching.

End 10-17-2003

Question 2 : Is there an attempt being made to create a "war" between Christians and Muslims?

Graham E. Fuller, former Vice-Chairman of the National Intelligence Council at the CIA and former Senior Political Scientist at the RAND Corporation in Washington DC, speaks with Ismail Royer on the prospects of averting Armageddon .

What ultimately are the chances that we will begin to move away from hostile relations between Islam and the West, and towards dialogue?

In the short term, I have a rather pessimistic point of view. If Osama bin Ladin’s goal was to poison relations between Islam and the West, and any conversation between them, he has succeeded quite dramatically. Therefore, I think that the idea of an inevitable clash of civilizations is growing, both in the West and among many Muslims, because that’s what’s happening.

Do you believe Osama wanted this much attention?  I don't.  If you remember, "Operation Enduring Freedom" was originally titled "Operation Infinite Justice ."  The latter moniker was abandoned for the former.  If you consider that the destruction of the United States (as we know it) could well be one of the long term results of this religious "war", would not the enemies of the United States deem it "Infinite Justice"?  Contrary to what is being trumpeted in the media, it is not Christian Fundamentalist Dispensationalists who are promoting this "war."  The enemies of Christian Fundamentalists are.  

Question 5 :  Is a solution being proposed to solve the Islamic "problem" which has Biblical significance?

What problem has the author of Clash of Civilizations identified which prohibits a solution?   The answer is found on page 177 and page 264 of the Clash of Civilizations .

p 177   The ABSENCE OF AN ISLAMIC CORE STATE is a major contributor to the ... conflicts which characterize Islam.

p 264   Islam is a source of instability in the world because it LACKS A DOMINANT CENTER.

So, according to Huntington, if Islam had a dominant central state, the problem would be solved.

The Bible prophesies of such a "state" in the endtimes.  The location is in the modern Iraq/Jordan area.

Just remember one thing, dear reader - that which has been blamed on Islam already can [in the future] be blamed on Christians. In fact, how do you think that the coming  world police state [as predicted in the Bible] will gain  the acceptance of many?  "Muslims" and "Christians" will be blamed for terrorism and people will demand a police state to solve the problem.

We are near the second coming of Jesus Christ.  The Clash of Civilizations is the intellectual justification to precipitate the events of the Book of Revelation.  Our job is to do nothing politically.  Our job is to wait upon the Lord Jesus Christ.  Do not become one of those who (in the attempt to "Christianize" our society) becomes involved with those intent upon giving "Christians" a bad reputation.

The following verses speak of conditions that could arise during a "Clash of Civilizations."

Matthew 24:8-12   All these are the beginning of sorrows.  Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.  And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.   And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.  And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

John 16:2   They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

The world, post 9-11, is now changed forever.   Major forces have been released whose momentum will propel us into an uncertain era (for the lost).  Of course, those who are already saved will depart before these things unfold.  Those left behind will face the " hour of temptation which shall come upon all the world to try them ."

The legal landscape of the United States is already changed to allow the political climate that is prophesied in the Book of Revelation.  This happened when the United States Senate voted 98-1 to pass the USA Patriot Act as a response to terrorism. Anyone can go on the internet and find pros and cons for the Patriot Act.  As always, this author is neither for it, nor against it.  It just is part of the world in which we live.  Many say that the Patriot Act enables future constitutional abuses; others say it is a  necessity for national security.  Our concern here is - can the Patriot Act help produce an environment similar to that found in the Book of Revelation? The following is what I found-

from the Cornell Law website-

The Patriot Act modifed portions of the United States Code.  Upon completion, the modfications yielded the following DEFINITION of TERRORISM .   To me, as far as prophecy is concerned, the definition of TERRORISM is the essence of the matter.  Of course, emphasis is added.

United States Code Title 18 Sec 2331
(5) the term ''domestic terrorism '' means activities that -
     (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United
            States or of any State;
     (B) appear to be intended -
           (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
          (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
         (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
     (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States

The expressed objections of many are that search and seizure restrictions, the legal warrants issuance by judges for probable cause, limits on "spying", "intelligence gathering" and so forth are violated.  Though this may be a concern, it is not the focus of this discussion.  The issue is- on whom can these activities be conducted, i.e., on which "terrorists?"

The code says anything that is " dangerous to human life."   Does this include more than one's physical life?  How about "mental health?"   Is that included?   For example, is "cultic indoctrination" dangerous to human life?  The case of the girl who was kidnapped by a "cult preacher" comes to mind.  Was the perpetrator a "terrorist?"  As we move along, watch for more and more crimes involving "religious groups" being reported by the media.  This will enable the eventual branding of tribulation saints as 'terrorists."   Why?  They will speak out against the world and for the coming of Christ.  Then, they will be in violation of a new criminal law .   This law will eventually be forced worship of the antichrist, but, at first it could well be the enforcement of some universal ethical standard.   This "ethical standard" will include the notion that NO ONE is allowed to publicly promote the idea that their religion is the SOLE TRUTH, which is exactly what the Bible and the Koran claim.  Public exhibitions of conflicts will increase, such as in Alabama over the 10 commandments, (until the desired objective is reached).

Section (5) (B) says acts that appear to be intended...
Given the fact that judges apparently make laws in this country, based on their personal viewpoints, how hard will it be for the country to take the next step?   Appear is a purely subjective term.   Appear to whom?  Recently, a supreme court justice criticized mandatory sentencing laws as inappropriate in some cases (and they are inappropriate in some cases), but, it was the failure of the judges to enforce the law that resulted in the need for mandatory sentencing laws.  The bottom line is that when a judge says something appears to be so and so; that will be the law.

If this website were to ever be associated with groups of "Christians" who decide that using a gun to defend themselves is a proper course of action, then, I would myself become a terrorist, by association.   Eventually, perhaps after the Rapture , the intelligence community of the police state will infiltrate "Christian" groups and foment violence.  It does not appear that this website will always be legal.

I have stated repeatedly on this website that this world is not ours.  We are just passing through.  Life is but a vapor that vanishes away.  Let men do whatever they want with this world.  The world will be judged by Jesus Christ, not us.  Therefore, take no action but to encourage others to believe the Bible and be saved.  Saving the world system is not going to be an option.

Living safely in the coming world is not going to be an option either.

 ..yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service  John 16:2

that they should kill one another… Rev 6:5

…I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for he word of God , and for the testimony which they held:  
Rev 6:9

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. Rev 20:4  

Question  6 : Will the "Clash of Civilizations" lead to the 2nd horse of the Apocalypse? (Revelation 6:4)

Could this Biblical scenario develop?:
After much back and forth jockeying over the Iraqi arms position and the status of Saddam Hussein, a peace treaty is signed which apparently averts disaster.  Then, suddenly the following unfolds:

An invasion occurs in the Mideast-
Revelation 6:2   And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

Revelation 6:3   And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.

The Clash of Civilizations erupts-
Revelation 6:4   And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another : and there was given unto him a great sword.

Question 7 :  Does the Clash give an explanation which would make the Biblical invasion of the "kings of the East" plausible?

See page 239 of the Clash of Civilizations .
What the Christians and the Jews are now saying: we were determined to crush Communism and the West must now crush Islam and Confucianism... we hope to see a confrontation between China that heads the Confucianist camp and America that heads the Christian crusader camp - Mu'ammar al-Qadhafi, March 1994

Once the US invades Iraq and "rewrites the mideastern map", the Confucians may well interpret this as a Western invasion.  Apparently, someone told Qadhafi that the Southern Baptist Convention is invading the middle east.  This sounds ludicrous, but, amazingly, there are posters from the Southern Baptist Convention calling for an "invasion of the east" or words similar.  To the Southern Baptists this means "conversion" but to the Islamists this means "conversion" of a different kind ( Christian crusader camp ).  The next time you see troops being baptised in the field, think of how this is being portrayed to the Muslims.  Dear believer, remember that the Bible says that Egypt and Assyria shall be one with Israel during the millennium. (Isa 19)

Today, on National Public Radio, interviews were aired from Egypt .  One was a professor, others students at universities in Egypt . The emphasis that came out in these interviews was that the war in Iraq was not against Iraq, but, it was a war against Islam perpetrated  by the "Christian West", a "Clash of Civilizations."  The point here is not the veracity of such a statement.  The point is that the "Clash of Civilizations" doctrine is believed by the Islamic world (in some parts).  To the extent that this is believed by Russia, China, Iran, Egypt, Syria, and other Muslim states, this will lead to the campaign of Armageddon.  Armageddon is actually a campaign, not just a single battle.  Now that the doctrine of a PREEMPTIVE STRIKE for regime change is a reality, the CONQUERING of Revelation can be justified.   Regime changes in prophecy can proceed .  For a possible timeline, read this .
Egypt is specifically mentioned in Daniel as a territory to conquered by the antichrist.
See also this page on Egypt .

Daniel 11:42   He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries : and the land of Egypt shall not escape .

End 04-09-2003


From the the following website,  
we read
"Everybody wants to fight. The whole nation of Iraq is fighting to defend Iraq. Not Saddam. They've been given the high sign, and we are courting disaster. If we take fifty or sixty casualties a day and they die by the thousands, they're still winning. It's a jihad, and it's a good thing to die. This is no longer a secular war ."
--"Robert Baer, a former C.I.A. Middle East operative"

"The Syrians are coordinating with the Turks to screw us in the north--to cause us problems. Syria and the Iranians agreed that they could not let an American occupation of Iraq stand."
--"[a] former U.S. intelligence officer"
End 04-11-2003

Revelation 16:12   And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.

Revelation 16:13   And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

Revelation 16:14   For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

Revelation 16:16   And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon .

From the following webpage,5673,1195727,00.html
We read some excerpts from an article blaming "fundamentalists" for our warlike policy in the Mideast.

Their beliefs are bonkers, but they are at the heart of power

US Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy

George Monbiot
Tuesday April 20, 2004
The Guardian

[after a discussing of the backward legislation in Texas]

In the United States, several million people have succumbed to an extraordinary delusion . In the 19th century, two immigrant preachers cobbled together a series of unrelated passages from the Bible to create what appears to be a consistent narrative: Jesus will return to Earth when certain preconditions have been met. The first of these was the establishment of a state of Israel. The next involves Israel's occupation of the rest of its "biblical lands" (most of the Middle East), and the rebuilding of the Third Temple on the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosques. The legions of the antichrist will then be deployed against Israel, and their war will lead to a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. The Jews will either burn or convert to Christianity, and the Messiah will return to Earth.

What makes the story so appealing to Christian fundamentalists is that before the big battle begins, all "true believers" (ie those who believe what they believe) will be lifted out of their clothes and wafted up to heaven during an event called the Rapture. Not only do the worthy get to sit at the right hand of God, but they will be able to watch, from the best seats, their political and religious opponents being devoured by boils, sores, locusts and frogs, during the seven years of Tribulation which follow.

The true believers are now seeking to bring all this about. This means staging confrontations at the old temple site (in 2000, three US Christians were deported for trying to blow up the mosques there), sponsoring Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, demanding ever more US support for Israel, and seeking to provoke a final battle with the Muslim world/Axis of Evil/United Nations/ European Union/France or whoever the legions of the antichrist turn out to be.

The believers are convinced that they will soon be rewarded for their efforts. The antichrist is apparently walking among us, in the guise of Kofi Annan, Javier Solana, Yasser Arafat or, more plausibly, Silvio Berlusconi. The Wal-Mart corporation is also a candidate (in my view a very good one), because it wants to radio-tag its stock, thereby exposing humankind to the Mark of the Beast.

By clicking on, you can discover how close you might be to flying out of your pyjamas. The infidels among us should take note that the Rapture Index currently stands at 144, just one point below the critical threshold, beyond which the sky will be filled with floating nudists. Beast Government, Wild Weather and Israel are all trading at the maximum five points (the EU is debat ing its constitution, there was a freak hurricane in the south Atlantic, Hamas has sworn to avenge the killing of its leaders), but the second coming is currently being delayed by an unfortunate decline in drug abuse among teenagers and a weak showing by the antichrist (both of which score only two).

We can laugh at these people, but we should not dismiss them. That their beliefs are bonkers does not mean they are marginal . American pollsters believe that 15-18% of US voters belong to churches or movements which subscribe to these teachings. A survey in 1999 suggested that this figure included 33% of Republicans. The best-selling contemporary books in the US are the 12 volumes of the Left Behind series, which provide what is usually described as a "fictionalised" account of the Rapture (this, apparently, distinguishes it from the other one), with plenty of dripping details about what will happen to the rest of us. The people who believe all this don't believe it just a little; for them it is a matter of life eternal and death.

And among them are some of the most powerful men in America. John Ashcroft, the attorney general, is a true believer, so are several prominent senators and the House majority leader, Tom DeLay. Mr DeLay (who is also the co-author of the marvellously named DeLay-Doolittle Amendment, postponing campaign finance reforms) travelled to Israel last year to tell the Knesset that "there is no middle ground, no moderate position worth taking".

So here we have a major political constituency - representing much of the current president's core vote - in the most powerful nation on Earth, which is actively seeking to provoke a new world war. Its members see the invasion of Iraq as a warm-up act, as Revelation (9:14-15) maintains that four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates" will be released "to slay the third part of men". They batter down the doors of the White House as soon as its support for Israel wavers: when Bush asked Ariel Sharon to pull his tanks out of Jenin in 2002, he received 100,000 angry emails from Christian fundamentalists, and never mentioned the matter again.

The electoral calculation, crazy as it appears, works like this. Governments stand or fall on domestic issues. For 85% of the US electorate, the Middle East is a foreign issue, and therefore of secondary interest when they enter the polling booth. For 15% of the electorate, the Middle East is not just a domestic matter, it's a personal one:
if the president fails to start a conflagration there, his core voters don't get to sit at the right hand of God. Bush, in other words, stands to lose fewer votes by encouraging Israeli aggression than he stands to lose by restraining it. He would be mad to listen to these people. He would also be mad not to.

As we have been saying - the fundamentalists will be held liable for the war policies of the United States.  By making this accusation, the media is confirming the Clash of Civilizations explanation of current events, which is, in reality, a lie - propaganda which will eventually result in the events of Revelation 6:4.  They have already made it clear to us that the fundamentalist Muslims are OUR problem and now they are making sure that the Muslims understand that it is the fundamentalist Christians that are THEIR problem.  It is part of a plan to destroy both.

What you can understand about the media and the world is that they have no concept of a sovereign God.  Therefore, they quite naturally believe that men necessarily must cause these events by their own volition.
End 04-21-2004


I have been looking all week at various information sources on the net to help in a discussion which shows that the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal and the beheading of U.S. civilian Nick Berg are part of the Clash of Civilizations motif which emerges fully during the future tribulation period as the second seal of the Book of Revelations .  A syndicated article appeared in the local paper yesterday entitled-
Uncivilized Behavior Sets U.S. up for a Clash of Civilizations.  More on this article later.  What I do want to show is that deep within the recesses of the intelligence community the "bad guys" apparently want there to be a Clash of Civilizations and they are behind the problems. It appears that they encouraged the creation of a situation which was photographable and then encouraged the taking of photographs, not to "humiliate the detainees into talking" (as was reported and as was believed by the actual photographers) , but to enrage the Arab world against the United States.  Of course, it is virtually impossible without intimate details to know where the duplicity begins, but, it is probably not with individuals who are in the limelight.

 There is a great deal of information available about Abu Ghraib, including the actual text of the official US Army report by Major General Taguba who testified to the US Senate (along with Stephen Cambone, an aide to Donald Rumsfeld, Under Secretary of Intelligence at the Department of Defense, apparently a new position created in March of 2003 because Rumsfield reportedly did not trust the CIA.)  The interesting part of their testimony, to me, was that it lead to my being in agreement with Ted Kennedy for the first time ever that I can recall.  

It seemed that MG Taguba and Cambone could not agree on the role of MPs in "setting conditions" for future interrogations, a key part of Taguba's report, in which he said -

The recommendations of MG Miller's team [former GITMO commander] that the "guard force" be actively engaged in setting the conditions for successful exploitation of the internees would appear to be in conflict with the recommendations of MG Ryder's Team and AR 190-8 that military police "do  not participate in military intelligence supervised  interrogation sessions."  The Ryder Report concluded that the OEF template whereby military police actively set the favorable conditions for subsequent interviews runs counter to the smooth operation of a detention facility

So, MG Taguba was stating that the use of MPs to enhance future interrogations (via psychological effects on detainees) was in conflict with Army regulations and policy.

Here's the relevant text of the testimony in the Senate:

KENNEDY: Do the interrogators for military intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, and also the contract intelligence, do they all have identical rules and regulations in terms of interrogating the detainees or prisoners of war or combatants? Or is there any distinction between the three?

CAMBONE: Within Iraq, the rules of the Geneva Convention apply, so therefore the rules are same for all three.

KENNEDY: I'm not -- that isn't my question. That's not my question.

My question is: Do they have different kinds of rules of questioning? Do each of those services have rules? If they do have rules, how are they different?

CAMBONE: I can speak for the DOD and contractor and military personnel, and those rules are the same.

KENNEDY: Identical?

CAMBONE: The people we hire, in most cases, are required to have had that training in the military in order to become interrogators.

KENNEDY: And they are bound by the same set?

CAMBONE: Yes, sir.

KENNEDY: So your testimony is the private contractors, military intelligence and the military interrogators all operate -- and the CIA -- all operate with the same rules of interrogation?

CAMBONE: I can only speak for the last inside of Iraq, sir.

KENNEDY: You're going to provide those rules to us?

CAMBONE: I can do that.

KENNEDY: Let me just ask you, finally, in the opinion of General Taguba, the setting of conditions for favorable interrogation is not authorized or consistent with Army regulations. You seem to reach a different conclusion in your testimony today.

Do you agree -- you and General Taguba there differ on that -- those issues? Correct?

CAMBONE: We do, and in this sense...

KENNEDY: Well, I think it's important that we understand when we were talking about the abuses that are taking place with the military police and you have two entirely different kinds of viewpoints on this issue , how in the world are the military police that are supposed to implement going to be able to get it straight, particularly when you have General Miller there that is following what you believe, Mr. Secretary?

KENNEDY: How do you expect the M.P.s to get it straight if we have a difference between the two of you?

So, what we have here is the U.S. Army in disagreement with the Under Secretary for Intelligence of the Defense Department on what is the correct policy for MPs.   But, it can be safely concluded that it was not some MPs who took it upon themselves, with no directions, to commit abuses.  General Taguba said this very thing (intelligence personnel being responsible for what happened at Abu Ghraib prison) in his report, according to an article by Seymour Hersh.

From the we read a quote from Seymour Hersh's article (referring to MG Taguba's report)-

"General Taguba saved his harshest words for the military-intelligence officers and private contractors. He recommended that Colonel Thomas Pappas, the commander of one of the M.I. brigades, be reprimanded and receive non-judicial punishment, and that Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan, the former director of the Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center, be relieved of duty and reprimanded. He further urged that a civilian contractor, Steven Stephanowicz, of CACI International, be fired from his Army job, reprimanded, and denied his security clearances for lying to the investigating team and allowing or ordering military policemen 'who were not trained in interrogation techniques to facilitate interrogations by 'setting conditions' which were neither authorized' nor in accordance with Army regulations. 'He clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse,' Taguba wrote. He also recommended disciplinary action against a second CACI employee, John Israel. (A spokeswoman for CACI said that the company had 'received no formal communication' from the Army about the matter.)  "'I suspect,' Taguba concluded, that Pappas, Jordan, Stephanowicz, and Israel 'were either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuse at Abu Ghraib,' and strongly recommended immediate disciplinary action."
According to this report:

General saw ‘failure of leadership’ at Iraq prison
Report author says intelligence officers, contractors part of abuse
NBC, MSNBC and news services
Updated: 6:29 p.m. ET May  11, 2004

WASHINGTON - The general who first investigated allegations that U.S. soldiers abused prisoners in Iraq told Congress on Tuesday that the mistreatment resulted from a “failure of leadership from the brigade commander on down, a lack of discipline, no training whatsoever and no supervision.”

Taguba also left open the possibility that members of the CIA, as well as armed forces personnel and civilian contractors, were culpable in the abuse at the Abu Ghraib outside Baghdad.

Taguba told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that witnesses he interviewed at the prison “gave us names of those who are uniformed MI [military intelligence] personnel in the U.S. Army.”
He also said that his investigators had been told about participation by “other government agencies — a euphemism for the CIA — or contractors ” in the abuse.

There was a large contingent of common criminals (as opposed to intelligence sources) in the Abu Ghraib prison , which complicated the situation, and when the decision was made to GITMOtize the Abu Ghraib prison, [ i.e. run it like General Miller ran the Guatanamo Bay prison (GITMO), which housed actual Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives, in terms of creating "actionable intelligence" ]  the abuse situation became possible.  MG Tagabu said that people were running around Abu Ghraib wearing civilian clothes (including OGAs, other government agencies) making for confusion and there was a general lack of leadership and training.  According to the report above, OGAs is a euphemism for the CIA.

According to
Guy Womack, lawyer for Charles Graner, one of the accused MPs, said the Abu Ghraib photos " were obviously staged" by U.S. intelligence officials: "They were part of the psychological manipulation of the prisoners being interrogated. It was being controlled and devised by the military intelligence community and other governmental agencies, including the CIA."  
The soldiers, avers Womack, were simply "following orders."

What happened in the Abu Ghraib prison was a terrible thing.  What happened to Nick Berg was a terrible thing.  Nobody from the United States approves of these activities and certainly all Christians are disgusted and ashamed of all this. Both of these situations fuel the Clash Of Civilizations and that, in my opinion, is why they happened - at Abu Ghraib it was all about getting the pictures . Even Hamas and Hezbollah condemned the Berg murder.  A great deal of the responsibility for what happened at Abu Ghraib lies with the intelligence community, some of whom are enemies of the United States. Do you blame Rumsfield for not trusting elements of the intelligence community? One can only operate with the intelligence one is given. Strangely enough, there are circumstances surrounding Nick Berg that involve the intelligence community as well.  There are several unanswered questions about Berg.

Since there are so many websites devoted to conspiracy theories (especially those supposedly perpetrated by the United States), I make this observation - remember, an intelligence operation can be against the United States White House instead of by the United States White House.

we read that

(CBS/AP) As the family of slain American Nicholas Berg gathered Friday for a private memorial service, new details emerged about his contact with FBI terrorism investigators after Sept. 11, as well as his final days in Iraq.

Berg, a 26-year-old small businessman who went to Iraq seeking a role in reconstruction, was found dead Saturday. On Tuesday, an Islamic Web site posted video in which masked militants beheaded him. The CIA has identified the speaker in the video — the man who murdered Berg — as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a terrorist suspected in numerous attacks in Iraq.

CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin reports U.S. officials say the FBI questioned Berg in 2002 after a computer password Berg used in college turned up in the possession of Zacarias Moussaoui, the al Qaeda operative arrested shortly before Sept. 11 for his suspicious activity at a flight school in Minnesota.

The bureau had already dismissed the connection between Berg and Moussaoui as nothing more than a college student who had been careless about protecting his password
. [This is an unbelivable coincidence.  This seems statistically impossible, unless someone is setting up future detention reasons].

But in the wake of Berg's gruesome murder, it becomes a stranger-than-fiction coincidence — an American who inadvertently gave away his computer password to one suspected al Qaeda operative, Moussaoui, is later murdered by another notorious al Qaeda operative, Zarqawi.

The slain man's father, Michael Berg, told reporters Thursday that his son was cleared of any wrongdoing. He said Nicholas Berg met Moussaoui while riding the bus to classes, and had allowed the suspect to use his computer.

The 2002 FBI interview could also explain the bureau's interest in Berg while he was detained by authorities in Iraq shortly before the militants kidnapped and killed him.

Berg was picked up on March 24 and released on April 6. The details of that detention are the subject of a dispute between the Berg family and the U.S. government.

The family contends Berg was detained by the U.S. military, and even filed suit seeking his release on April 5. The U.S. military says Iraqi police detained him. Iraqi police deny that. [the Berg family says that the Iraqi police do nothing without the consent of the U.S. military and they are correct.]

To back its claims that Berg was in U.S. custody, the family on Thursday gave The Associated Press copies of e-mails from Beth A. Payne, the U.S. consular officer in Iraq.

"I have confirmed that your son, Nick, is being detained by the U.S. military in Mosul. He is safe. He was picked up approximately one week ago. We will try to obtain additional information regarding his detention and a contact person you can communicate with directly," Payne wrote to Berg's father on April 1.

Payne repeated that Berg was "being detained by the U.S. military" in an e-mail the same day to Berg's mother, Suzanne. The next day, Payne wrote that she was still trying to find a local contact for the family, but added that "given the security situation in Iraq it is not easy."

The government says the e-mail from Payne was false. State Department spokeswoman Kelly Shannon said Payne's information came from the Coalition Provisional Authority. The authority did not tell Payne until April 7 that Berg had been held by Iraqi police and not the U.S. military, she said.

"As Mr. Berg had been released, the consular officer did not convey this information to the family because he was released, thankfully," Shannon said. "And we thought he was on his way."

Coalition spokesman Dan Senor said Wednesday that Iraqi police arrested Berg in Mosul on March 24 because local authorities believed he may have been involved in "suspicious activities."

In Mosul, police chief Maj. Gen. Mohammed Khair al-Barhawi insisted Thursday that his department had never arrested Berg and maintained he had no knowledge of the case.

During his detention, Berg was questioned by FBI agents three times.

Berg is believed to have been kidnapped days after Iraqi police or coalition forces released him. The family has blamed the government for keeping him in custody for too long while anti-American violence escalated in Iraq.

Shortly before Berg's disappearance, he was warned by the FBI that Iraq was too volatile a place for unprotected American civilians and that he could be harmed, a senior FBI official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Wednesday.

Officials said the U.S. government warned Berg to leave Iraq, and offered him a flight out of the country, a month before his grisly death.

The Bergs said they want to know if the government had received an offer to trade Iraqi prisoners for Nicholas Berg. On the videotape of his death, Berg's killers made a reference to a trade offer, but U.S. officials have said they knew of no such offer.

Michael Berg said he wanted to hear President Bush address the issue.

Now, let's look to see if any one else believes that this entire business was to promote the Clash of Civilizations.

Here is the article that appeared in the local paper with the title- Uncivilized Behavior Sets U.S. up for a Clash of Civilizations .

May 13, 2004
Clash of Civilizations

Testifying before the Senate yesterday, General Richard Myers admitted that we're checkmated in Iraq.

"There is no way to militarily lose in Iraq," he said, describing the generals' consensus. "There is also no way to militarily win in Iraq."

Talk about the sound of one hand clapping. And they say John Kerry is on both sides of issues.

Sounding like Mr. Kerry, General Myers summed up: "This process has to be internationalized. The U.N. has to play the governance role. That's how we're, in my view, eventually going to win."

The administration's demented quest to conquer Arab hearts and minds has dissolved in a torrent of pornography denigrating other parts of the Arab anatomy. George Bush, who swept into office on a cloud of moral umbrage, now has his own sex scandal — one with far greater implications than titillating cigar jokes.

The Bush hawks, so fixated on making the Middle East look more like America, have made America look un-American. Should we really be reduced to defending ourselves by saying at least we don't behead people?

Gripped in a "I can't look at them — I've got to look at them" state of mind, lawmakers grimly filed into private screening rooms on the Hill to check out the 1,800 grotesque images of sex, humiliation and torture.

"They're disgusting," Senator Dianne Feinstein told me. "
If somebody wanted to plan a clash of civilizations , this is how they'd do it. These pictures [remember it is all about the pictures] play into every stereotype of America that Arabs have: America as debauched, America as hypocrites.

[The rest of this article is politics designed to attack Bush and Rumsfeld et al.  I have no interest in politics.  I will say that I do not believe that people deliberately cause their own destruction.  This would include Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Bush, and Rumsfeld.]

End 05-16-2004


On msnbc TV tonight two former White House legal advisors discussed the fact that the Bush administration SUSPENDED the Geneva Convention, not only for the al-Qaeda (because they are "criminals"), but also for the Taliban because they are part of a FAILED/FALLEN REGIME.   Now, in every war at some point the losers become part of a FAILED REGIME .  How, then, can it be justified to suspend the Geneva Convention against the Taliban?  So far, we have suspended the Geneva Convention and invaded a country on a preemptive basis.   The door is now open for all kinds of "inhumanity."

The administration suspended the Geneva Convention in GITMO.  When they GITMOtized Abu Ghraib, does this mean they suspended the Geneva Convention for cab drivers and others who found themselves in prison "by accidents or fate?"  We did invade Iraq and conquer them via a war.  I am not questioning anyone's motives here.  I am merely saying that some extremely bad precedents have been set.

 Does this mean that if and when the United States citizenry are part of a failed regime, they can be tortured without regard to the Geneva Convention?

This is precisely what this means because the precedent has been set.  The people in the White House do not intend this to be the result, but they have not read the final chapter of the story, the Book of Revelations.

Prophecy is truly an amazing thing that it can even come to pass.  But, consider this - The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.   - Proverbs 21:1

From the viewpoint of a "worldly" person, this is truly frightening .

End 05-18-2004

That the Clash of Civilizations is nearing the continental United States is being maintained by Samuel Huntington in a new book,
Who Are We?—The Challenges to America's National Identity
by Samuel P. Huntington
New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004
428 pages, Hardbound, $27.00
Is it the author's intention to pit Protestant America against Catholic Hispanic immigrants (and in so doing in the process portray America as essentially a product of traditional Protestant extremism?)  If this is the case, Huntington is preparing a cover story for a new "clash" to occur on American soil.  

The essence of this book is that the United States is essentially a Protestant nation which is likely to lose its identity under the threat of Hispanic (and therefore Catholic) immigration.  Huntington's claim is that Hispanics will not assimilate into the American culture (unlike 19th and 20th century immigrants).  The purpose of this book is to lay the intellectual groundwork for a future ethnic conflict within the United States.

End  06-20-2004


The government of Tony Blair is now seeking to make inciting religious hatred a crime punishable by imprisonment.  The question is  - when does espousing your own religion become a hate crime?

from the website-

We read-
The Washington Times

When does religion become a hate crime?
By Al Webb
Published July 19, 2004

LONDON -- The government of Prime Minister Tony Blair, with its eye on Islamist militants, has begun a nationwide campaign to make inciting religious hatred a crime punishable by imprisonment.
    Home Secretary David Blunkett said the government's aim is to extend anti-discrimination laws to stop hatemongers from targeting people because of their religious faith and to "sideline" extremists who claim to speak for them.
    The new law would be a "two-way street," Mr. Blunkett said. "It applies equally to far-right evangelical Christians as to extremists in the Islamic faith."
    Mr. Blair's administration hopes to turn the proposals into law within a year and to model the necessary legislation along the lines of existing statutes outlawing incitement to racial hatred, which carries a maximum prison term of seven years.
    In Britain, inciting racial hatred is defined as using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior "with intent or likelihood to stir up racial hatred."
    The new proposals announced by Mr. Blunkett in a recent address to the Institute of Public Policy Research use the word "religious" in place of "racial."
    But the government's campaign was seen in some quarters as an infringement on Britain's fundamental right to free speech.
    Rowan Atkinson, the comedic star of the "Mr. Bean" movie and television series, said he and others in his profession fear that they could be prosecuted for lampooning religious figures.
    Monty Python's hit movie "Life of Brian" -- about a fictitious neighbor of Jesus Christ who is mistaken for the Messiah -- never could have been made had the proposed law against religious hatred been in force, he said.
    The home secretary insisted that such a law would not curb the rights of anyone to express their views about others' religions.
    "The issue is not whether you have an argument or discussion, or whether you are criticizing someone's religion," he said. "It's whether you incite hatred on the basis of it ."
    Even some among Britain 1.5 million-strong Muslim population, which has become the target of numerous hate crimes since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, fear the effect such a law could have on the Muslims and on the right of the community's more extreme elements to speak out.
    "In the light of the well-recognized Islamophobic society that we have [in Britain] at the moment, this legislation could very well be used against Muslim communities," said Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission.
    Mr. Blunkett announced his campaign against religious hatred even as Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a fiery Egyptian cleric who preaches support for suicide bombings and for the beating of "disobedient" wives, arrived in Britain.
    "I am very clear that some of the noisiest and most high-profile political and religious extremists in this country have no mandate to speak for the communities they claim to represent and evoke a reaction which plays into the hands of racists," he said.
    Mr. Blair's government tried -- and failed -- to get similar legislation against religious hatred enacted in the wake of the September 11 attacks.
    The House of Lords, the upper chamber of the British Parliament, squelched that attempt. The new legislation might not fare any better.
    Indian-born Meghnad Desai, a professor at the London School of Economics who sits in the upper chamber, predicted that the Blair government again will face "a very, very difficult time" in the Lords.
    "We will get into a real muddle if we take religion as a basis for prosecution, rather than race," Mr. Desai said.
    "Once you step into the religious cauldron, the depth is bottomless," he said. "There are Hindus and Buddhists and so on. ... How are we to define a religion? Are the Scientologists to enjoy protection, and what about Druids, and Satanists?"
    Britain's main opposition Conservative Party sharply opposes the proposed legislation. Its home-affairs spokesman, David Davis, summed up its views about such a law: "It will impinge on civil liberties and only serve to make lawyers rich."

The day is coming when saying that the "Bible is literally true" and "these events are fulfilling Bible prophecy"  and  "the Coming of the Lord is soon" will be illegal.  The "tribulation saints" are going to be the ultimate "extremists" to be "sidelined."



from the website-
we read-

Mini clash of civilizations
By Arnaud de Borchgrave

The Netherlands has long been Europe's most permissive society — everything from window-shopping in Amsterdam for scantily clad hookers (50 to 80 Euros for 15 to 30 minutes) to hashish aroma in marijuana smoke-filled cafes
It was such Dutch tolerance, pragmatism and guilt about the country's colonial past that allowed hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Muslim Indonesia (a Dutch colony from the 17th century until World War II) to flood into tiny Holland. Today, Muslims are a majority among children under 14 in the Netherlands' four largest cities.
    There are 1 million Muslims (6 percent of the population) now living in Europe's most crowded small country. Some 30,000 new Muslims arrive every year. They tend to live among themselves, with their own schools, mosques and restaurants. Most are horrified by what they view as sacrilegious in their own religion. Their imams speak no Dutch and know nothing of the Netherlands' history and culture.
    Western Europe as a whole gets about half a million new Muslims a year. Most make their way from sub-Sahara Africa and North Africa, illegal immigrants smuggled by boat to Spain and Italy where they are free to travel with impunity to the rest of Europe. Thus, Europe's Muslim population has doubled to 20 million in the last 10 years.
    The anti-Muslim backlash spawned far right-wing parties. Belgium's highest court this week ruled the anti-immigration Flemish Bloc party — the most popular political force in Dutch-speaking Flanders — will lose the government subsidies allocated to all parties, and is now forced to disband. It quickly renamed itself the Flemish Interest Party, and toned down its inflammatory rhetoric.
    Europe's largest mosque is in Rotterdam, which is also Europe's busiest port. Half the people there are of foreign origin. Unemployment among the Muslims is high. And the Dutch live-and-let-live permissiveness made this nation, a quarter of it below sea level and protected by 1,500 dikes, ideal breeding grounds for Muslim fundamentalism and the kind of extremism that spawned one of Osama bin Laden's European fan clubs. But for years the government was in denial about Islamist extremism in what is otherwise a well-managed society.
    Dutch Muslims, repelled by the freewheeling lifestyle, sought solace with radical imams in the mosques. There men outnumber women. And women are relegated to a part of the mosque where they can be neither seen nor heard.
    What Dutch filmmaker and columnist Theo Van Gogh saw as the shabby treatment of females throughout the Muslim community led him to produce documentaries that portrayed Muslim men as tormentors of women, especially their wives. One recent scathingly critical Van Gogh film's carried the message that Islam promotes violence against women. Last week, Van Gogh, a grandnephew of the painter, was shot as he cycled to work. He managed to get up and stagger across the street to his building where he collapsed. The assailant followed him and slit his throat before pinning to his chest with a knife a five-page manifesto that called on Muslims to rise against the "infidel enemies" in the West.
    Dutch security authorities launched a nationwide manhunt for the murderer of the popular Van Gogh. A hand grenade injured four policemen as they went after two suspects in a working-class district of The Hague. Air space over the capital was closed for a day as Dutch Special Forces lay siege to a building and the two surrendered after a 14-hour standoff.
    Ten others were arrested, including the prime suspect, a Muhammad Bouyeri, a 26-year-old Dutch Moroccan, who was charged with murder and suspected links to an al Qaeda group. A two-time visitor to Saudi Arabia, he had doffed Western clothes in favor of Arab dress.
    Both Mr. Bouyeri and his close friend Samir Azzouz, 18, another Dutch Moroccan, moved between five apartments in an Amsterdam suburb favored by Islamist radicals. They were on Dutch intelligence's terrorist watch list as they communicated with like-minded extremist cells throughout Western Europe.
    Last year, Mr. Azzouz was stopped in Ukraine and turned back as he made his way to Chechnya to fight the Russians. Released by the Dutch and then rearrested because bomb-making equipment and detailed maps of public buildings were found with his fingerprints, he is in jail awaiting trial.
    Tit-for-tat terrorism quickly followed Van Gogh's assassination in widely scattered parts of the otherwise peaceful Netherlands . An arson attack against a Muslim school was followed in the same village of Uden by a Muslim attack against a primary school that was set ablaze and completely gutted. Then a small bomb damaged a Muslim school in Eindhoven. A score of mosques and churches were targeted by arson attacks in one week. Two young men were also arrested for putting a video on the Internet that promised 72 virgins in paradise for the "beheading" of Geert Wilders, a popular right-wing politician who decries the dangers of radical Islam.
    Two years ago, Pim Fortuyn, a populist politician who called for a halt to immigration, by simply saying the Netherlands was "full," was similarly gunned down.
    Over the past year, the presence of 1,300 Dutch troops in Iraq triggered repeated threats from Muslim groups. Last summer, a last will and testament was found when an 18-year-old man of Moroccan-born parents was arrested for plotting terrorist attacks in the Netherlands. The list of targets included the Dutch parliament, Schiphol and the nuclear reactor at Borssele. Floor plans of several public buildings were also found. The former student wrote in his will he wants his newborn son to live "in the spirit of jihad."
    Described by a police psychiatrist as "fearless and fatalistic," the student "gradually fell under the spell of ideas about the oppression of Islam." During a court hearing, his family remained seated as all present rose when the judge entered. The mother was covered in a head-to-toe chador in Muslim fundamentalist fashion.
    Islamist extremists even penetrated the Dutch intelligence service with a double agent. One officer was arrested last September. The government hastily drafted a Patriot Act-like law which enables it to strip citizens of their citizenship and deport them if they engage in extremist acts.
    Could the Netherlands be a curtain-raiser for a wider clash of civilizations in the old Continent? Hundreds of thousands of young Muslims in Europe are potential jihadis, according to European intelligence chiefs speaking not for publication. They have been warning their political masters about the tinderboxes that many Muslim communities have become. Jihadi volunteers are known to have left for Iraq from a number of Muslim slums on the outskirts of major European cities.
    Recruitment posters come on regular European and Arabic news programs — from the Abu Ghraib prison pictures to the battle of Fallujah.
    Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large of The Washington Times and of United Press International


from the website-$rec=151175
we read-

Pakistan bans issue of Newsweek over article

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- Pakistani authorities have banned an issue of Newsweek magazine for publishing material they said was offensive to Islam, local media reported Friday. The edition published "objectionable remarks which [were] tantamount to desecration of the Quran," Islam's holy book, the state-run agency Associated Press of Pakistan said. The issue carried a story about the slaying in the Netherlands of filmmaker Theo van Gogh and religious and ethnic divisions in Europe under the headline " Clash of Civilizations." The News, Pakistan's largest circulation English language newspaper, said Friday the banned Newsweek edition included an image taken from van Gogh's film about Islam's treatment of women that showed verses from the Quran written on the body of a semi-naked woman.


from the website-
we read how that "extremists" from South America may affect the United States-

BOGOTA, Colombia Nov 27, 2004 — Colombia's main rebel group asked followers to mount an assassination attempt against President Bush during his visit to Colombia last week, Defense Minister Jorge Uribe said. There was no evidence Saturday that rebels even tried to organize such an attack.

Uribe told reporters late Friday that informants said the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as the FARC, told followers to attack Bush during his four-hour visit in the seaside city of Cartagena last Monday, where he met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.

The defense minister, who is no relation to the president, said security forces were on full alert during the visit. About 15,000 Colombian troops and police, along with U.S. troops and Secret Service agents provided security. There was no indication Bush's life was ever in danger.

Uribe did not say where the informants had heard about the purported order to attack Bush.


from the website-
we read of the viewpoint of Prince Karim Aga Khan, spiritual leader of Ismailis, on the "Clash of Civilizations"

Muslims' profiling as terrorists questioned
By Our Correspondent

NEW DELHI, Nov 27: Prince Karim Aga Khan, spiritual leader of Ismailis, has described the strife in Jammu and Kashmir as an issue of extreme despondency, on a par with the conflict in the Middle East, The Times of India reported on Saturday.

The Aga Khan, currently on a visit here, told the newspaper that he was disturbed by the profiling of the world's billion-plus Muslims as terrorists.

"I am deeply worried about more than a billion people being tarred by specific historical and regional issues projected as religious one. Whether you look at the Middle East or Kashmir, there are issues of extreme frustration and despondency," he said.
Asked to explain his theory of the 'clash of ignorance ', the phrase he preferred to Samuel Huntington's notorious 'Clash of Civilizations', the Aga Khan said: "The West's understanding, its academic context is still Judeo-Christian. Its apprehensions rise from a lack of knowledge about Islam."

End 11-28-2004


from the website-
we read-
Taking a stand in Europe  
 By Avi Beker
David Amar, head of the Jewish community in Marseilles, says in an interview with the Shalem Center journal Tchelet (Azure) that in the last four years it is possible to distinguish two expressions of the rise of anti-Semitism in France: anti-Semitic actions against the dead and actions against the living.
The European press is now using the term "clash of civilizations ." With 20 million Muslims in Europe, the words of Bassam Tibi, an academic of Syrian origin now residing in Germany, echo. He said there is only one choice: "Either Islam becomes European, or Europe becomes Muslim."

One of the leading Orientalists in the world, Bernard Lewis, wrote recently that based on current demographic trends, by the end of this century there won't be any clash because by then Europe will be Islamic.

from the website-
we read about the nature of "Patriot Act II", at least according to the author the webpage-

"Patriot Act II"
I don't usually care for FOX analysts but I have to tip my figurative hat to Judge Andrew Napolitano for speaking out against what he calls Patriot Act II which was sneaked into the intelligence bill just signed by Bush.

Some of the "highlights" according to Napolitano are that:

1) Defendants have no automatic right to bail, guaranteed by the Constitution, but must now prove that they are NOT flight risks, rather than the government having to prove that they are.

2) Federal prosecutors can now leak grand jury testimony to other prosecutors where the defendant happens to be so that they can prosecute him there.

3) Government now has the power to, in essence, write its own search warrant for bank records and other personal property rather than have the oversight of a judge. (Comment: I think this was in Patriot Act I, but I wasn't clear from the discussion)

Some other remarks by Napolitano:

"When Attorney General Ashcroft begged for the Patriot Act... the Attorney General said, 'We need these powers to fight terrorism and we're using them to fight terrorism.' Alan, guess how many convictions of crimes of terrorism the federal government has obtained under the Patriot Act since it came into being in October of 01? Zero... It's a charade. We never need to sacrifice our freedom in order to enhance safety. It's Unamerican and it doesn't work ."

"It would take a great deal of courage to oppose this thing in this environment, especially when the leadership in the House and the Senate did not even allow debate on the Patriot Act II."

"When the Congress presumes to tinker with the Constitution, there really has to be a debate."

"The 9/11 Commission report begged for more spies and more centralized control over the spies. It did not beg for more law enforcement... There is nothing in there that asks for tinkering with the Bill of Rights. This stuff came out of the Congressional leadership and the White House."

"We hope that judges who understand the Constitution will strike it down or members of Congress who weren't permitted to read it will enact legislation to reverse it but I wouldn't hold my breath."

End 12-19-2004

Question 8  :  Will the Clash of Civilizations have a continental United States element?

As we reported in June of 2004 (see above) -
That the Clash of Civilizations is nearing the continental United States is being maintained by Samuel Huntington in a new book,
Who Are We?—The Challenges to America's National Identity
by Samuel P. Huntington
New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004
428 pages, Hardbound, $27.00
Is it the author's intention to pit Protestant America against Catholic Hispanic immigrants (and in so doing in the process portray America as essentially a product of traditional Protestant extremism?)  If this is the case, Huntington is preparing a cover story for a new "clash" to occur on American soil.  

The essence of this book is that the United States is essentially a Protestant nation which is likely to lose its identity under the threat of Hispanic (and therefore Catholic) immigration.  Huntington's claim is that Hispanics will not assimilate into the American culture (unlike 19th and 20th century immigrants).  The purpose of this book is to lay the intellectual groundwork for a future ethnic conflict within the United States.

In Foreign Affairs Magazine of 1993 Huntington's Clash of Civilizations thesis was first put forward to the public.  Eventually (in 1996) his thesis became the published book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.  Within 5 years of the publication of this first book we had 9-11 and the ensuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.   Is it reasonable to expect that a similar development will eventuate in regards to the so-called Hispanic invasion about which Huntington warns us?   Yes, it is.  The reason?  The Clash of Civilizations (as a concept) is an intelligence operation, not happenstance.  Before the "clash" begins the "battlefield" is "prepped".  That "battlefield" is your mind.  The intellectuals tells us that this is an issue and we are to believe it, the media is to report it, the Congress is to debate it, and the media political "talking heads" are to discuss it ad nauseum until we blindly demand a solution to the "problem".
(The reason I watch any television news or especially news talk is to discover the subjects about which I am supposed to think and what it is I am supposed to believe about the subjects .  We are a nation of morons.  Sorry.)

The gullibility of the American public is helping the [intelligence community] to gain control over the American people by creating demand...for increased federal control over their lives to stop terrorism for one thing.
-from an unpublished manuscript of this author, penned in 1993

Now witness-
Gang will target Minuteman vigil on Mexico border

By Jerry Seper
NACO, Ariz. -- Members of a violent Central America-based gang have been sent to Arizona to target Minuteman Project volunteers, who will begin a monthlong border vigil this weekend to find and report foreigner sneaking into the United States, project officials say.
    James Gilchrist, a Vietnam veteran who helped organize the vigil to protest the federal government's failure to control illegal immigration, said he has been told that California and Texas leaders of Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, have issued orders to teach "a lesson" to the Minuteman volunteers.

When this completely unfolds, the Constitution of the United States (if it exists now) will be forever lost in a war on "terror" and in an internal Clash of Civilizations.  (The immigration problem is being deliberately left unsolved to create exactly this scenario.)  It is one thing to see car bombings in Iraq; it is another to see "insurgents" in Texas, California, and Arizona.  The only reason I am telling you this is that you need to be prepared for the second coming of the Lord.  The hoof beats can be heard now, if you are listening.  There is NOTHING you can do to stop these scenarios from unfolding because the very act of doing something (ala the Minutemen) causes the problem to accelerate (and THAT is the plan of the intelligence community).  Some "patriot" is going to "protect" this country straight out of Constitutional government.  Pray for the salvation of God's people.  There are going to be no "democracies" on the planet.

End 05-07-2005


As we asked previously in Question 8 "will the Clash of Civilizations (aka war on "terror" ) have a continental United States element?"  The answer is becoming increasingly obvious.  The only question in my mind is "When? Before the tribulation starts or after it starts?"  Sound far-fetched?  When you consider that Vatican II declared that the United States is the "archvillian of all human history", is it any surprise that there could be an eventual effort to subjugate this country? 

According to Malachi Martin in The Keys of this Blood, page 260, during the reign of Paul VI (KGB sponsored accession June 1963)-
"Liberation was, therefore, no longer release from sin and its dire effects.  It was the struggle against oppression by big capital and by the authoritarian colonialist powers of the West - particularly the United States as the archvillian of all human history .

Is it any wonder that the 60s were so politically hostile?  The KGB had partnered with the Vatican (or controlled the Vatican). According to Avro Manhattan, The Vatican Moscow Washington Alliance, the Vatican Moscow Alliance (of Paul VI) was replaced by the Vatican Washington Alliance (1978, after the murder of the 33 day pope, the "neutral" John Paul I) , during the reign of John Paul II (CIA sponsored), for the purpose of undermining the Moscow sponsored communist empire (however, leaving communism per se in place, ostensibly for later use in "security"). See the cover story of the Feb 28, 1992, Time Magazine for a discussion of the Reagan -John Paul II alliance.  If this sort of thing seems irrational, you can read one of Avro Manhattan's books online, The Vatican and World Politics, at to see how such a thing would be plausible.  So, the question is, if the Vatican had a plan to eliminate Moscow, could the Vatican have a similar plan for the United States?  Malachi Martin said so in his 1989 Simon And Schuster published book, The Keys of This Blood.

Malachi Martin ( "a consummate Vatican insider and intelligence expert - is a former Jesuit and professor at the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Institute "  (cover of The Keys of This Blood) says- "The other two major contenders in the millennium endgame will be eliminated "   (p. 657)  One has already been eliminated during the pontificate of John Paul II.

We don't know who initiated the following plan, but, the plan (by definition) surely leads to the demise of the United States as such.  The plan? It effectively makes Mexico, Canada, and the United States one country!  And you wondered why we never proposed more secure borders!  Why?  The powers that be have not gotten what they want, yet.  Those borders will stay open until the "plan" is forced upon us in the interest of "security".  The "plan" was reported by Lou Dobbs on CNN on June 9, 2005.  Portions of the transcript are here -
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad? We'll have a special report.  Border violence raging in Mexico. Assassins murder a Mexican police chief in cold blood. Yet, incredibly, the Mexican government declares U.S. warnings about border violence unnecessary.

Background from Dobbs-
Our top story tonight, the widening investigation into an alleged radical Islamist terrorist plot in California. Federal agents arrested a fifth suspect today. The FBI says that there could be even more arrests.

But prosecutors have backed away from earlier assertions that those suspects were planning specific attacks on hospitals and supermarkets. Those officials now say the suspects were planning to carry out terrorist attacks in the United States and to kill Americans.
[remember what we said about the continental United States?]

DOBBS: Border security is arguably the critical issue in this country's fight against radical Islamist terrorism. But our borders remain porous. So porous that three million illegal aliens entered this country last year, nearly all of them from Mexico.

Now, incredibly, a panel sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations wants the United States to focus not on the defense of our own borders, but rather create what effectively would be a common border that includes Mexico and Canada.
[Did you catch that?  The "common border" is a ring around North America!!]

Christine Romans has the report.


CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On Capitol Hill, testimony calling for Americans to start thinking like citizens of North America and treat the U.S., Mexico and Canada like one big country.

ROBERT PASTOR, IND. TASK FORCE ON NORTH AMERICA: The best way to secure the United States today is not at our two borders with Mexico and Canada, but at the borders of North America as a whole.

ROMANS: That's the view in a report called "Building a North American Community." It envisions a common border around the U.S., Mexico and Canada in just five years, a border pass for residents of the three countries, and a freer flow of goods and people.

Task force member Robert Pastor.

PASTOR: What we hope to accomplish by 2010 is a common external tariff which will mean that goods can move easily across the border. We want a common security perimeter around all of North America, so as to ease the travel of people within North America.

ROMANS: Buried in 49 pages of recommendations from the task force, the brief mention, "We must maintain respect for each other's sovereignty." But security experts say folding Mexico and Canada into the U.S. is a grave breach of that sovereignty.

FRANK GAFFNEY, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY: That's what would happen if anybody serious were to embrace this strategy for homogenizing the United States and its sovereignty with the very different systems existing today in Canada and Mexico.

You can read the proposal here-
Trinational Call for a North American Economic and Security Community by 2010

March 14, 2005-Three former high-ranking government officials from Canada, Mexico, and the United States are calling for a North American economic and security community by 2010 to address shared security threats, challenges to competitiveness, and interest in broad-based development across the three countries.

Friends, what we are reading is a strategy to force the loss of United States sovereignty in exchange for "security".  Look for more "terrorism" to precipitate this eventuality and we know where this leads.  It saddens me greatly to report this.  Many people will have to suffer as this unfolds.   Whenever you see the phrase "security region", in the Middle east, the United States, or elsewhere, think eventual martial law and the eventual compulsory marking system.  That the USA is partner in this "security" strategy is undeniable.
No one's motives are being questioned here.  Every one is doing what they believe is morally correct. 

see the webpage
for more information on international interests inside the United States-

...The internationalization of U.S. roads has begun.  We’re not just talking about isolated instances of privately-built toll roads with foreign management, as we’ve seen in Southern California. We’re talking about networks of toll roads that may be built by foreign builders, managed by foreign operators, function primarily to accommodate foreign goods, and connect U.S. roads to similar networks in Canada, Mexico and, later, Central and South America.

End 06-11-2005


The propaganda to blame evangelical Christians continues -
Evangelical/Zionist/Neocon Middle East

MER - MiddleEast.Org - Washington - 20 June:   With poll numbers dropping and approval ratings sinking, with deaths and destruction rising in Iraq, and with Congress balking and talk of leaving Iraq escalating, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice rushed to many of the Sunday Talk Shows yesterday taking time out of her swing through countries in the Middle East.  Using the abundandant free airtime provided by the corporate media, and buttressed by supportive softball questions she knew she could count on from FOX, the Secretary of State used the opportunity to attempt to articulate a simplistic sound-bite veneer to the crusading neocon / Evangelical / Zionist vision of the new Middle East the U.S. -- coordinating closely with Israel and the U.K. -- is using the Pentagon and the CIA to force into being against considerable resistance and at considerable cost.   It is nothing less than a dramatic rearticulation of the New World Order, a brazen neo-imperialistic neo-colonial restructuring of the political, economic, and cultural realities of the entire Middle East region.   And it is being pursued so fervently, at such still escalating cost,  largely because of the power stranglehold held on Washington by a once unlikely coalition of American Christian Evangelical, American Jewish neocons and 'liberals', Israeli Lobby operatives, and on-the-take corporate/media conglomerates that now nearly totally in combination dominate and control the policies and resources of the United States.   The New World Order, first articulated by George Bush I, has now metasticized in the wake of 9/11 into a still expanding modern-day Crusade, a word George Bush II himself used in public just five days after 9/11, then rushing to the Saudi-controlled Embassy Row Washington Mosque attempting to soft-pedal what is indeed now a 'Clash of Civilizations'.

(emphasis added)



At the risk of sounding like a fool for implying that the governance of the United States has actually been based on the U.S. Constitution for the past 100 hundred years, I submit the following.  First of all, when you are commissioned an officer in the military of the United States your oath of office states -  I will support and defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

Fully aware that [depending upon who is in power in the executive and the personal inclinations of judges] the Constitution, as such, has been virtually ignored in the pursuit of convenience and special interests[ thus, slowly, but surely, eroding the freedoms of Americans]  I offer the following-

From the National Archives, the Constitution of the United States-
Article I Section 8 of the Constitution

The Congress shall have Power To...

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

This means that it is the responsibility of the Congress to determine the rules and regulations which the Armed Forces must obey.  The Constitution of the United States does not provide for the office of the president to perform such a task.

Of the "war on terror" many things could be said but one thing is for certain, we are not legally at war since the Congress did not declare war.  To declare war, one has to say on whom war is being declared. (Of course, this is not the first time we have been at war without declaring war.)  The issue of legal "war" aside, however, is it the first time we have been at "war" and imprisoned U.S. citizens without charging them with a crime?   The answer appears to be YES.  The motives of the executive branch is not being questioned here.  What is being questioned here is the precedent that is being set.  The only issue before us here is that precedents are being set that could allow some other "president" to eventually fulfill Bible prophecy.

(if you go to the wikipedia page, one of the most informative websites on the web, you can link to various related topics, see bold type below)
José Padilla (born October 18, 1970) (also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir) is accused of being a terrorist by the United States government. He is currently being detained without charge in a South Carolina military prison under orders of President George W. Bush.
The U.S. administration describes him as an illegal enemy combatant however this is not a legal definition because he has not been in front of a "competent [military] tribunal", as stipulated under Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention, to ascertain if he is an enemy combatant who has broken the laws of war.

Born in Brooklyn, New York City, New York, Padilla became a gang member after moving to Chicago, Illinois, and was arrested several times. During his gang years, he maintained several aliases, such as José Rivera, José Alicea, José Hernandez and José Ortiz. After serving his last jail sentence, he converted to Islam. He went to the Masjid Al-Iman mosque in Fort Lauderdale, Florida with Adham Amin Hassoun, who at that time was the registered agent for Benevolence International Foundation, a charity which U.S. investigators have accused of funding terrorist activities. Padilla and Hassoun became friends. U.S. authorities accuse Hassoun of consorting with radical Islamic fundamentalists, possibly including Al-Qaida. Hassoun was arrested in 2002 for overstaying his visa.

Padilla traveled to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. On his return, he was arrested by federal agents at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport on May 8, 2002 and held as material witness on the warrant issued in New York State about the 2001 9/11 attacks. On June 9, 2002 President Bush issued an order to Secretary Rumsfeld to detain Padilla as an "enemy combatant". The order legally justified the detention by leaning on the AUMF which authorized the President to "...use all necessary force against ... such nations, organizations, or persons." and in the opinion of the administration a U.S. citizen can be an enemy combatant (This was decided by the United States Supreme Court in the case of ex parte Quirin). Padilla is currently being detained without charge in a naval brig at Hanahan in South Carolina and is accused by the Bush Administration of being an illegal enemy combatant and a nuclear terrorist planning to set off a dirty bomb.

On December 18, 2003, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals declared that the Bush Administration lacked the authority to designate a U.S. citizen arrested on U.S. soil an "illegal enemy combatant" without clear congressional authorization (per 18 U.S.C. § 4001(a)); it consequently ordered the government to release him from military custody within thirty days. However, the court has stayed the order pending appeal.

On February 20, 2004, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the government's appeal. The Supreme Court heard the case, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, in April 2004, but on June 28 it was thrown out on a technicality. The court declared that New York State, where the case was originally filed, was an improper venue and that the case should have been filed in South Carolina, where Padilla was being held.

On February 28, 2005,  U.S. District Judge Henry Floyd ordered the Bush administration to either charge Padilla or release him .  He relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in the parallel enemy combatant case of Yaser Hamdi (Hamdi v. Rumsfeld), in which the majority decision declared a "state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."

Padilla and John Doe 2
Several websites including have pointed to the uncanny resemblance between Padilla and police sketches of an Oklahoma City Bombing suspect known as "John Doe Two." These sites claim he was likely a CIA agent and that he is being held as an enemy combatant as part of a coverup of his involvement in the Oklahoma City bombings while a CIA agent.

[the "war on terror" is a lot more than meets the eye]


We have indicated earlier that the Christians will be blamed for the Clash of Civilizations-

Here is an example of how this idea gets promoted either TO "Christians" or ABOUT "Christians"-

Serious Christians today play the leading role in addressing every challenge we face as Americans- defending our nation in the War on Terror, educating their children in functional values [translation - coopted activism], lifting the downtrodden out of poverty [translation - coopted activism], protecting the institution of the family [translation - coopted activism].  -Michael Medved

The areas of emphasis in the worldmag article are replete with the doctrine of immanence = all that matters is the here and now; since there is no hereafter.  The doctrine of immanence has long been a tenet of Marxism (to be used to overthrow society).

"To tell anyone in the West -any of the participants in the entrepreneurial activities of America and Europe, anyone in the Western media, anyone in the scientific community or in the academic faculties of colleges and universities- that ALL OF THEM, along with the leading theologians and Church dignitaries the world over, HAD BEEN THOROUGHLY GROUNDED IN THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF MARXISM would be to elicit hoots of derision and self-righteous cries of protest."

"Pope John Paul's answer to such hoots and cries, however, is to point to GRAMSCI'S GHOST, which HAS THOROUGHLY PENETRATED ALL OF THESE GROUPS with the Communist revolutionary sense of immanence."
page 265 of The Keys of this Blood - Malachi Martin

Question- What do the neo-cons, the Supreme Court, the communists, the Vatican, the Republicans, the Democrats, and apparently all of our society have in common?  They all practice the doctrine of immanence, to wit, it is up to us to make heaven on earth (based on our own individual definitions of "heaven"), even if we have to violate the constitution to do it.  One "small" example - the "public use" has now been changed to "public purpose" in the New London case.  What if someday we outlaw the preaching of the Bible [and confiscate their property] to serve the "public purpose" of mitigating the "clash of civilizations?"


Even I am having trouble reading this stuff (emphasis added)

Christ Inc.
Faith-Based Fascism

When a triumphal George W. Bush declared his intention to cash in on his “political capital” in the days after the election, he was merely reaffirming his commitment to hand over the reins of power to a higher authority than even Dick Cheney. The religious right, with its enormous political stake in the “End Times” outcome of America's latest Imperial misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, [I refute this idea here] have seized upon Bush's continued pledge to transform the “Homeland” into a locked down religious theme park with the organizational zeal they had previously reserved for bilking gullible parishioners out of their social security checks. 

Like Halliburton, Christ Inc. has become the latest recipient of taxpayer largesse, having won the contract to keep the media out of the news business, and to ensure that power speaks to truth, as opposed to the other way around. Purging the “news” of news is just the latest attempt by religious Brownshirts to stamp their poisonous insignia on every major institution that they don't control lock, stock and barrel.

In recent months the escalating violence in Iraq and mounting evidence of US-run torture chambers has been dutifully ignored by the Christian News Network, a.k.a. “The Missing White Girl Network” who never miss an opportunity, these days, to provide their theo-con masters with a platform to discredit the administration's naysayers and whistleblowers. Instead, news consumers get trumped up coverage of sensational celebrity trials, “heartwarming” tales of rescue and survival (always thanks to Jesus) and “special reports” revolving around the heroic law enforcement figures as they “secure our borders,” track down “terrorists”, and sniff out the latest Caucasian corpse du jour. The message has become implicitly clear: resistance is useless against an increasingly paranoid and authoritarian state apparatus that has its finger on the trigger, ready to blow away even unruly toddlers.

(This is just the first part; I stopped reading.  One does have to wonder about the "Missing White Girl Network."  That dawg don't hunt.  I guess we can keep talking about this until everybody demands a chip under their skin for security purposes.)


There's more-

Oh Rapture!

One of the major problems America faces is a large population of religious fundimentalists[sic] who have become as fanatical in their own way as any Middle Eastern Ayatollah. At present, they are caught up in their own version of the myth of the end of the world, and hope that by working to bring it about, they'll get to sit at the right hand of their diety[sic] and to hell with everyone else [Comment: read this, I implore you to repent]. No doubt fistfights will break out over who gets to sit closest, but that is a subject for another article.

So fervent is the belief of the mythoholics that they are ready and willing to sacrifice money, children, civil rights, freedom, even life itself (so long as it is someone else's) to bring about the final rapture and end of the world. Never mind that the guy selling this belief is a child molester and makes money off of these fables, the seekers (and there is one born every minute) do so want to believe!

(I stopped reading this one too.  These things are meant to undermine our society.  Nothing less.  The time is growing short, dear friends.)


The Crusaders

Christian evangelicals are plotting to remake America in their own image

It's February, and 900 of America's staunchest Christian fundamentalists have gathered in Fort Lauderdale to look back on what they accomplished in last year's election -- and to plan what's next. As they assemble in the vast sanctuary of Coral Ridge Presbyterian, with all fifty state flags dangling from the rafters, three stadium-size video screens flash the name of the conference: RECLAIMING AMERICA FOR CHRIST. These are the evangelical activists behind the nation's most effective political machine -- one that brought more than 4 million new Christian voters to the polls last November, sending George W. Bush back to the White House and thirty-two new pro-lifers to Congress. But despite their unprecedented power, fundamentalists still see themselves as a persecuted minority, waging a holy war against the godless forces of secularism. To rouse themselves, they kick off the festivities with "Soldiers of the Cross, Arise," the bloodthirstiest tune in all of Christendom: "Seize your armor, gird it on/Now the battle will be won/Soon, your enemies all slain/Crowns of glory you shall gain."

Meet the Dominionists -- biblical literalists who believe God has called them to take over the U.S. government. As the far-right wing of the evangelical movement, Dominionists are pressing an agenda that makes Newt Gingrich's Contract With America look like the Communist Manifesto.

(that's enough for now, you get the picture...)


Well, one more (emphasis added)-

The Covert Kingdom
Thy Will be Done, on Earth as it is in Texas

Not long ago I pulled my car up alongside a tiny wooden church in the woods, a stark white frame box my family built in 1840. And as always, an honest-to-god chill went through me, for the ancestral ghosts presumably hovering over the graves there. From the wide open front door the Pentecostal preacher's message echoed from within the plain wooden walls: "Thank you Gawd for giving us strawng leaders like President Bush during this crieeesis. Praise you Lord and guide him in this battle with Satan's Muslim armies."  If I had chosen to go back down the road a mile or so to the sprawling new Bible Baptist church -- complete with school facilities, professional sound system and in-house television production -- I could have heard approximately the same exhortation. Usually offered at the end of a prayer for sons and daughters of members in the congregation serving in Iraq, it can be heard in any of the thousands upon thousands of praise temples across our republic.

After a lifetime of identity conflict, I have come to accept that, blood-wise, if not politically or spiritually, these are my people. And as a leftist it is very clear to me these days why urban liberals not only fail to understand these people, but do not even know they exist, other than as some general lump of ignorant, intolerant voters called "the religious right," or the "Christian Right," or "neocon Christians." But until progressives come to understand what these people read, hear, are told and deeply believe, we cannot understand American politics, much less be effective.  Given fundamentalist Christianity's inherent cultural isolation, it is nearly impossible for most enlightened Americans to imagine, in honest human terms, what fundamentalist Americans believe, let alone understand why we should all care.

For liberals to examine the current fundamentalist phenomenon in America is to accept some hard truths. For starters, we libs are even more embattled than most of us choose to believe. Any significant liberal and progressive support is limited to a few urban pockets on each coast and along the upper edge of the Midwestern tier states. Most of the rest of the nation, the much vaunted heartland, is the dominion of the conservative and charismatic Christian. Turf-wise, it's pretty much their country, which is to say it presently belongs to George W. Bush for some valid reasons. Remember: He did not have to steal the entire election, just a little piece of it in Florida. Evangelical born-again Christians of one stripe or another were then, and are now, 40% of the electorate, and they support Bush 3-1. And as long as their clergy and their worst instincts tell them to, they will keep on voting for him, or someone like him, regardless of what we view as his arrogant folly and sub-intelligence. Forget about changing their minds. These Christians do not read the same books we do, they do not get their information from anything remotely resembling reasonably balanced sources, and in fact, consider even CBS and NBC super-liberal networks of porn and the Devil's lies. Given how fundamentalists see the modern world, they may as well be living in Iraq or Syria, with whom they share approximately the same Bronze Age religious tenets. They believe in God, Rumsfeld's Holy War and their absolute duty as God's chosen nation to kick Muslim ass up one side and down the other.

Pretty bad stuff, more lies promoting the Clash of Civilizations.  True Biblical Christianity does not take such an attitude as depicted in these articles.  We are not going to convert the world, nor are we supposed to; we are not supposed to be making the world "Christian" either.  There is a measure of truth in the criticisms of the naive right for a couple of reasons - one is their naive participation in their own undoing and the other is their self-deception regarding their supposed "Christianity."  However, both the right (really not Christians per se) and their critics are marching toward the cliff while it is the true believers within the United States whom these articles are attempting to blame. The point is to blame so-called "Christians" so that the future war-on-terror is directed at the real Christians.

If you think this is not going to happen or is too far-fetched, read all the Bible verses below.

End 06-26-2005


From the website lot more stuff
we read how the Pope has said that the terrorism is not a clash of civilizations but a small group of fanatics.

21 July 2005

INTROD, ITALY - Pope Benedict XVI has described terrorism as the action of small groups of fanatics rather than the result of a conflict between civilizations.

In remarks published Thursday in Italian newspapers, the pope said: "There is no conflict between civilizations. There are only small groups of fanatics."

Just remember that in Huntington's book, the Clash of Civilizations, he equates the Ayatollah Khomeini and John Calvin (the protestant reformer)-
p 111 "Lutheranism and Calvinism, Shi'ite and Sunni fundamentalism, and even parallels between John Calvin and the Ayatollah Khomeini ... the central Spirit of both the Reformation and the [Islamic] Resurgence is fundamental reform.."

The Pope would not dare say "fundamentalists".  That will be left up to the rest of the media which will equate "fanatics" and "fundamentalists."   For all intents and purposes, the word Calvinism may be equated with the gospel (the sovereign grace of God saving His people) as we understand it from the scriptures.  Paul taught "calvinism" in the book of Romans, Chapters 8-10.  In Huntington's book we see that Calvin is listed with the Shiite and Sunni fundamentalists and the leader of a country some of whose people took Americans hostages during the Carter administration.


There are now published reports of links of the London bombings to Pakistan and its madrassahs which gave birth to the Taliban movement (see Taliban by Ahmed Rashid).  The madrassahs are the schools for the Muslims.  People are beginning to call for a crackdown on these schools (madrassahs).  Now do you understand why I said for Christians to stay out of any attempt to oppose the World Order? 

End 07-21-2005


If you thought the Clash was a US - London only problem-

Unfortunately, there are a lot of prominent, albeit clueless, voices being raised these days about how to deal with the issue: Deal with them harshly, limit their entry into the country, deport the bums, whatever, unless you want the US and with it the rest of the “free world” to get rolled over by Islam.

Take the recent book, “The Cube and the Cathedral,” by George Weigel who argues that Europe cannot remain Europe if it allows itself to become “full of Muslims,” just as Samuel P. Huntigton (of the “Clash of Civilizations” fame) argues in his new book, “Who Are We,” that America cannot remain America if it is full of Hispanics.

That, said Anne-Marie Slaughter, who reviewed both tomes in the Washington Post last Sunday, “betrays the deepest values of the Enlightenment and the tolerance and individualism that are the West’s greatest strengths.” And, heck, that includes a betrayal of the American way as well.  But you get the picture. The public debate has gone bad in the teeth.

It's gonna get a lot worse.


The Government pressed ahead last night with plans to outlaw incitement to religious hatred despite warnings from Christians that the move would worsen relations between different faiths.

Representatives of more than 1,000 individual churches across the country - including Anglican, Roman Catholic and Presbyterian faiths - handed in a petition to Downing Street, urging Tony Blair to ditch the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill.

The Bill, which returned to the Commons for its final stages before it goes to the Lords, creates a maximum seven-year jail sentence for anyone convicted of intending to stir up religious hatred.

Do you realize that the Clash of Civilizations is the "cover" for much of the horrors of the Book of Revelation?

End 07-24-2005


from the website
we read of an advertisement for a new book designed to scare you into believing the Clash of Civilizations

Why Europe may be Muslim by the end of the century
The book President Bush wants you to read  (chuckle, are we that mindless and gullible?)

The West's Last Chance

Islamic jihadists are far closer than most people realize to taking over Europe. If they do, they'll impose governments there that would threaten the United States far more than Nazi Germany ever did. But there is still hope to save both Europe and America: in The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?, Tony Blankley explains what we must do now in order to survive the jihadist infiltration and subversion that now threatens Europe's very life.

We know where we are supposed to flee to in order to avoid this "crisis."

See also

At war with an enemy of an unspoken name

By Tony Blankley

 When President Bush declared war on terrorism, he did not, legally, put the country on a war footing.
    Up until now, we have never accurately named the enemy or the danger. If the government can't speak the real name and nature of the enemy, it becomes impossible to explain, or even design, a policy for victory.
    This is why Mr. Bush -- who has tried to talk around the problem of radical Islam -- has seemed (to his critics) foolish or deceitful, neither of which he is.
    What we need is a clear congressional declaration of war, as prescribed by the Constitution. Congress should declare war on the Islamist jihadists.
    Naming the formal enemy limits the focus of our war effort to the militant Islamists who have declared jihad against the West. There are many terrorist groups in the world. Many are no threat to the United States. The current danger is the Islamist one.
    Naming the threat also expands the scope of our war effort to all the networks of radical Islam, including mosques, schools and radical sites on the Internet. It is not only terrorist acts that we are confronting, but the propaganda and organizations that make them possible.  [Let the inquisition begin is what THEY are saying, not this webpage!!  How dreadful. When the tribulation saints start preaching the good news of the return of Jesus Christ, trust me, they will be declared propagandists too.  ]
    Some people would argue that we would be declaring a religious war against more than a billion Muslims. But this is not true. We would be declaring war on a particular, violent, political ideology within Islam that threatens the West and the health of Muslim societies themselves.

End 09-15-2005


Remember how we said that in the not too distant future there would be a war between the so-called "Christians" and our secular society and that the true purpose of this war will be to eradicate true Biblical Christianity?   This war is barely in its infancy. The target will be those who believe in the literal truth of the Bible.  However, those who will be suckered into stirring up the war will be chiefly nominal "Christians."

A question - has it ever occured to you that such topics as the debate over saying "Happy Holidays" versus "Merry Christmas" is a lead-in to such a societal conflict?  Did you ever wonder why journalists and media types (e.g., O'Reilly, WorldNetDaily, etc) find this change "frightening" (O'Reilly) or "a secular and atheistic jihad"?

It is the Christmas season and once again Christmas itself is the target of a secular and atheistic jihad. If you didn't know better you might think that the word 'Christmas' was the dirtiest of dirty words and one not worthy of being uttered in public.

Well, folks, is it of major importance to us that the pagan holiday of "Christmas" (3 days after the shortest day of the year and the day of the resurrection of the sun God, Ra. This pagan holiday is known as Saturnalia; look it up) is placed on a pedestal?  It sure is easier to deal with the "baby Jesus" than with the crucified Son of God.  But, I digress.

Leonard Pitts said it well-

What's offensive here is not the imperfect balancing of minority and majority. What's offensive -- also surreal and absurd -- is the notion that Christianity, a faith claimed by 76% of all Americans, is somehow being intimidated into nonexistence. Some of the earliest Christians were stoned for their beliefs. In some parts of the world today, Christianity is a crime punishable by death. And the AFA is feeling persecuted because a salesclerk says "Happy holidays"?

That's not persecution. It's a persecution complex.

And it trivializes what Christians claim to uphold: the baby born of a virgin's womb.

Of what importance is a salesman's greeting if you're one of the 76% who believe that? The greeting that matters was spoken by angels. The book of Luke says they appeared before shepherds in a field: "Fear not, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord."

What is interesting to me is that the surreal and absurd notion designed to generate a "persecution complex" is precisely the objective. The point is - stir up as much bellicosity (persecution complex) as you can and then we can later proceed onto the real task of a "culture war", emphasis on the word "war."  If 76 percent of the nation is nominal Christian, would not the war be a lot more widespread if more than 24 percent participated?

End 12-18-2005


People mean well, but, where will it lead?  Emphasis added to the following.

Uncompromising Jihad
War on Terror/Lt. Col. Michael Burkert, US Army (ret.)
January 6, 2006 - Worldwide Revolution is in the making. Revolution fomented and advanced by Islam! Islamic revolution is most certainly in the works for Europe. Whether or not the Europeans wake up in time remains to be seen. The Worldwide Islamic Revolution has fooled the politicians in our country as well.

I believe deep down that President George W. Bush understands what lies ahead, but most certainly our congress does not.  The “progressive” liberal elements definitely have no concept of the future we face in the War with Islam.  They are more interested in tearing down our sitting president and re-establishing liberal control in Washington than bringing a favorable conclusion to the conflict we face as a nation and society.

The revolution that will soon explode in our faces may well serve as a catalyst that brings about the rapid political destruction of the European Union, as we know it today.  The realized threat of Islam may create a situation where a powerful German dictator appears suddenly on the scene with the promise to save Germany and Europe from the Islamic menace.   You scoff at this statement?  What do you think would happen in Germany, if a nuclear device were detonated in Frankfurt, or Munich?  Do you think that the current socialist government would survive?  It most likely would not! ...

(I stop here; you get the picture.  All you need is a bogeyman and even more people are killed.  I know a lot of well-meaning good men in the military and unfortunately many are unwittingly leading their men into a trap which will eventually destroy that which they are defending.  It is certainly a very difficult time to be a leader in the military. Read the bottom of this page to see what we are to do about these things.)

Here's another article supporting a rally against Islamofascism...

Rallies planned against 'Islamofacism'
Event to 'unify all Americans behind common goal'

A California-based activist group is staging rallies across the United States next month to unify Americans behind the "common goal" of opposing terrorist-sponsoring Islamic extremism.

The United American Committee says its Feb. 1 rallies also will serve as platforms to encourage Americans to report to authorities suspected terrorist activities and to show support for U.S. troops serving abroad in the war against terror.

"The purpose of this rally is to unify all Americans behind a common goal and against an enemy that is seeking to destroy values we all hold dearly," said Jesse Petrilla, head of the organization.

"This is not a rally to promote hate, but a rally to promote peace and tolerance and make clear what America stands for," he said, noting Muslims are being encouraged to attend the rallies which, so far, are scheduled in 13 states.

"Republicans, Democrats, pacifists, all ethnicities are urged to march on the day of the event and show their true support for the United States of America," he said.

(Just know that the cameras will be rolling and the rally will be shown in the Middle East as "Americans Want to Conduct a Crusade in the Middle East."   Remember the "celebrations" in the streets of the Middle East shown on American TV after 9-11?  )

End 01-08-2006


The subject today is possible illegal (unconstitutional) domestic spying by the Federal government.  More accurately it is what people are saying in order to defend it.  The Biblical implications of domestic spying are the emerging World Order and where it ultimately leads.  Of course, by the time it reaches this stage, all spying will be legal.  Regardless of what you feel about domestic spying per se, the real issue is illegal (unconstitutional) domestic spying.  The president takes the oath of office, as prescribed by the constitution, Article II, Section 1:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. 

Many are opposed to domestic spying without warrants (illegal spying) because it is a violation of the Constitution of the United States.  I am not one who actually believes we still go by the Constitution in this country, but, after reading the following defense of illegal (unconsitutional) spying by Cal Thomas, I felt compelled to mention this.  First, Mr Thomas' comments (emphasis added):

Iraq's huge voter turnout last week was a clear step forward for the Bush administration's policy and for a stable Iraqi government, if all sides can learn to live together. But what happened in Washington, D.C., last week will undercut the war on terror and encourage those who want to reprise Sept. 11 on a much grander scale.

It was probably not coincidental that on the same day the U.S. Senate voted against extending the USA Patriot Act, The New York Times printed a story it had held for a year claiming President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on American citizens and others after Sept. 11.

In his Saturday radio address, the president said he personally reauthorized the eavesdropping program more than 30 times since Sept. 11 and did so while consulting members of Congress.

He also defended his decision, because listening in on conversations of actual or possible terrorists is "crucial to our national security."

After the Times story appeared, the Senate failed to extend the Patriot Act, falling short of the 60-vote majority needed to overcome a filibuster led by Democrats. Some senators expressed concern about damage to civil liberties. But civil liberties mean nothing if you're killed by a terrorist who has manipulated the Constitution to achieve his or her objectives.

When another attack comes, will those senators whose concern for civil liberties trumps the saving of lives step forward to acknowledge their role in weakening America?

Those relatively few who were spied on and had their cell phones monitored must have demonstrated their intention to aid in another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Waiting for a judge to give permission to monitor a suspect's cell phone often takes too long. Before a court order can be obtained, the terrorist suspect can disconnect or change numbers, and the trail quickly grows cold.

The law -- especially the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- has lagged behind the technological innovation and cunning of our enemies. The president did what he swore he would do in his oath of office: protect this country and its citizens from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Since the argument of those opposed to such spying is based upon Constitutional grounds, don't you find the "arch-conservative" Mr. Thomas' disposal of their argument more than a little interesting?  No, Mr Thomas, the president did not take an oath to "protect this country and its citizens from all enemies...".   He took an oath to -

preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States

We have been giving lip service to following the Constitution for years.  Since the Constitution can be anything that is necessary at the moment based upon the whims of judges, why do we even pretend to follow the Constitution?  Mr. Thomas himself effectively gets rid of the Constitutional obligation of the president when he errantly quotes the document.    The authority of the Constitution has been eroding for years and those "hearings" to confirm judges are a circus.  This does not come as a surprise to those who read the Bible.  Friend, do you believe the Bible when it says that one day the events of the Book of Revelation will actually come to pass?  We are headed in that direction.

Believe I am exaggerating?

Court Documents & Summary Of United States Versus Google Over Search Data

Earlier we reported in Bush Administration Demands Search Data; Google Says No, Yahoo & MSN Said Yes that the US Government seeks to force Google to hand over search data. That story explains more about the situation, and there have been a number of postscripts from when it was first written. Along with that, we've been able to obtain copies of the three court documents filed in the case. Below you'll find links to each document, along with a summary of what's in each of them.

    The motions requests that Google comply with a subpoena filed by the Attorney General and "produce" for inspection and copying the materials the Government is asking for. 

    After the lead government attorney conferred with Google, Google has chosen not to comply with subpoena.
  • The filing then goes into a background explanation about the Children's Online Protection Act (COPA) and how the government is developing its defense of the constitutionality of COPA. They believe that COPA is, "more effective than filtering software in protecting from harmful exposure to harmful material on the Internet."
  • In preparation of the case, subpoenas were issued to Google and "other entities" that operate search engines to produce two sets materials.
  • First, the subpoena asks Google to produce an electronic file contain, "[a]ll URL's that are available to be located on your companys' search engine as of July 31, 2005.   [The government wants every single URL, webpage locator.]
  • However, after "lengthy negotiation" the government changed and "narrowed" their request and asked for a "multi- stage random sample of one million URLS from Google's database ie, a random selection of the various databases in which those URL's are stored, and a random sample of the URL's held in those selected databases.
  • Second, Google was asked to "produce an electronic file containing [a]ll queries entered into the Google engine between July 1 and July 31 inclusive.  [the government needs to know all your search criteria]
  • Again, after lengthy negotiations the government the government changed their request and asked for an electronic file "containing the text of any search string entered into Google's search engine for a one week period (absent any personal information identifying the person who entered the query).
  • Google has still refused to comply with these requests in any way.
  • The Government says that access to this information would be of "significant significance" in the preoperation of the their case.
  • Specifically why?
  • "The production set of queries entered into Google's search engine would assist the Government in its efforts to understand the behavior of current web users, to estimate how often web users encounter harmful-to-minors material in the course of their searches, and to measure the effectiveness of filtering in screening that material."  [is Jesus-is-the-Way harmful to minors?  It will be considered so in the future]
  • This information would also help the Government understand what, "web sites people find through the use of search engines, to determine the character of those sites, to estimate the prevalence of harmful-to-minors material on those sites, and to measure the effectiveness of filtering software on that harmful to minors material.
  • The document continues into a discussion with plenty of legalese and citations and again points out the Google has failed to comply and lists some of the reason Google objects to this.
  • Google first objects to this on the grounds of relevancy.
  • Google also objects on the grounds that if they would provide what the government asks for, they would be required to produce information identifying the users of its search engines.
  • The Government claims that this is "illusory" since they have specifically asked for a random sample containing no personally identifying information to any search string.
  • The Government said that it has received compliance from search entities with files containing no personally identifying information.
  • Google also contends that the information they're being asked to produce is "redundant" since the Government has asked other engines to produce similar files. The Government argues that this "misunderstands" what's being requested. "The production set of queries from Google's database, in combination with similar productions from other search engine operators will assist the Government in developing a sample of the overall universe of search engines queries, while accounting for the potential of any variations in the type of queries that are entered into different search engines."
  • The Government says that since Google is the market leader, its response, "would be of value" in developing the Governments overall sample of queries.
  • Google says that complying would also force Google to share trade secrets because the total number of queries receives in a day is a trade secret. The Government adds that if this was the case, a district court has said that these numbers would not be disclosed.
  • Finally, according to the filing, Google says that it will be subject to an "undue burden" in complying. The Government claims that this is not the case whatsoever. The Government adds that they would be "willing to work" with Google to specify a multistage sample. They are also willing to compensate Google for its work and complying with the subpoena.
  • The filing ends with the Government saying that, "This court should require Google to comply with the subpoena on the same terms it's competitors have."
Once "fundamentalism" becomes "harmful" in the eyes of those protect[ing] this country and its citizens from all enemies, foreign and domestic, Jesus-is-the-Way will be history and all other sites proclaiming the literal truth of the Bible.

End 01-22-2006


It occurred to me today (while reading a section of Jane's Intelligence Review) how websites such as Jesus-is-the-Way will "disappear" as part of the "solution" to the Clash of Civilizations scenario.

Beijing's censorship of the internet

China dedicates a substantial effort toward filtering internet content and monitoring internet users.

Although some of this effort is directed toward filtering out pornography and commercial spam, much is aimed at controlling dissident political views.

The issue of internet censorship and monitoring in China came to the fore once again in mid-January 2006 when, at the behest of the Chinese government, Google launched a self-censored version of its search engine. Google's move followed Microsoft's decision to shut down a web log discussing politically sensitive issues on its Chinese web log hosting service in December 2005. A Microsoft spokesman told press: "When we operate in markets around the world we have to ensure that our service complies with global laws as well as local laws and norms." 

There you have it.  Change a few laws in the interest of suppressing "extremism" to avoid a Clash of Civilizations.  After Google, et al comply with the "laws" and "norms" and someone conducts a search, Jesus-is-the-Way will never be returned.

End 02-08-2006


Propaganda to promote the Clash of Civizations continues.

from an article entitled - How to Enrage Muslims Worldwide
We read how three recent events are designed to deliberately inflame the Muslims.  Such acts of deliberate provocation are deplorable and disgusting.    From the article, we read-

The visual element is key here: all three incidents [cartoon in Denmark with Mohammed, new Abu Ghraib pictures, and a video of Iraqi children being beaten by British soldiers] bear the earmarks of classic propaganda techniques, which are meant to inflame and provoke a target population as a prelude to an armed struggle. Whether or not it was planned that way, this triad of outrages – with more, doubtless, to come – effectively serves as the means by which both sides in a looming world war prepare their people for the coming battle – and basically ensures that such a conflict is inevitable.

Consider how the origins of all three provocations are cloaked in murk and mystery. First of all, the cartoons: deliberately insulting and gratuitously obscene caricatures of the Prophet are published in a Danish newspaper of right-wing provenance and suddenly begin appearing all over Europe. The "explanation" offered up by the pro-war media is that this is all the result of a conspiracy hatched by "hidden masterminds," as the UK Telegraph put it. The assumption is that these "masterminds" were Danish imams and activists who conducted a protest campaign against the Jyllands-Posten newspaper for publishing the cartoons in the first place, but, as I pointed out here, this seems a dubious proposition at best. What Reason magazine, with predictable juvenility, calls the "Intoon-ifada," may indeed have been promoted by certain persons for reasons of their own: however, it is unlikely that the provocateurs are the same folks who are responding to the provocation.

The response was all too predictable: if Jyllands-Posten had been intent on bringing out all the feelings of resentment, persecution, and humiliation experienced by Muslims worldwide in recent years, the issue couldn't have been illustrated in starker terms. What's more, the controversy seems perfectly formed to dramatize for a global audience the more authoritarian, intolerant, and illiberal aspects of a faith that George W. Bush has called a "religion of peace." The authors of this outrage protest that this was not their intent, but whether by accident or design, the effect is the same.

The new Abu Ghraib images present another mystery in terms of their sudden appearance. Ever since the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, the American Civil Liberties Union has been trying to wrest the unpublished material from the U.S. government. Although members of Congress were allowed to view them at their leisure, the hoi polloi were shielded from such an upsetting sight. So why, now, are we being treated to what seems like a controlled release of images that are sure to roil the Arab world and spark fresh protests against America? They appeared first on Australian television, but clearly other news outlets had them: where did they get them? Who is feeding us these horrific illustrations of the true meaning of Iraq's "liberation" – and why at this particular moment?

Raising further questions is the nature of the photos themselves: they are far more graphic than the ones released initially. They show what appear to be a number of corpses – almost as if they embody some sort of premonitory threat. As if to say to the Arab-Muslim world: this is what awaits you if you continue to resist. It is a classic fear technique, made all the more potent because we are dealing here with images that resemble a vision out of Hell – and, unlike the Muhammad caricatures, depict real events.

We also read (from about retaliatory attacks by "Christians" on Muslims in Nigeria.

ENUGU, Nigeria, Feb 21 (Reuters) - Christian rioters killed Muslims and torched mosques in the southern Nigerian city of Onitsha on Tuesday in retaliation for anti-Christian violence that killed dozens in the north, witnesses said. A security source said the dead had yet to be counted but at least a dozen people were killed and authorities feared the toll could be much higher. A Christian trader said young men armed with guns, stones and machetes tore through the market, attacking any Muslim in sight, and as he fled the violence he saw many dead bodies.

Friends, who call yourselves Christians and conservatives, I implore you to live peacably with all peoples and to wait patiently for the coming of the Lord Jesus.  When the propaganda [and there is plenty already] is turned to target you, do not believe it and do not act on it.  The Bible says 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.    (2 Thess 2:10-11)  Your salvation and the salvation of God's people are what is important.  No one is going to win the "Clash Of Civilizations" and, no wonder, considering its purpose.

End 02-21-2006


we read how Rick Warren, about whom it is said-

Warren "took the principles that we preach about every Sunday and packaged them in a way that are palatable for Christians and non-Christians."  "The guy is a preacher's preacher... . He's the leading evangelical in the world, unquestionably,"

What does Rick believe?-
Warren predicts that fundamentalism, of all varieties, will be "one of the big enemies of the 21st century."  "Muslim fundamentalism, Christian fundamentalism, Jewish fundamentalism, secular fundamentalism - they're all motivated by fear. Fear of each other."

First of all, let me say that I do not fear Muslims or Jews.  I, however, DO fear for those that water down the words of the Bible and try to create a man-made all-inclusive smiley faced church based solely upon human emotions (bereft of the Words of God).

The Purpose Driven Life is (without question) not a book or philosophy based upon the essential teachings of the Bible.  It is cleverly written for sure and purports to be Biblical and appears to be Biblical since many references are made to "Bibles" (and Mr Warren picks and chooses which one in each situation to make the point HE wants to make.  God never intended for men to change what He said.)  My question is - is it the point God wants to make?  Purpose Driven Life appears to many men to be a  way to get what you want (even endorsed by the Bible). 

Many of my Southern Baptist friends have been taken in by this.  I have tried to warn them about this, but, the warning has fallen on deaf ears.  They swear by Rick Warren and The Purpose Driven Life.  Some questions should be asked.

Are we to repent and receive the gospel in need?  Or, are we to have a "purpose driven life?"  Are you purpose driven or are you led by the Spirit of God? I submit that these are not the same things.  My ENTIRE POINT is whose purpose is driving us?  Our own or His?

The Bible is full of warnings about our own devices.  If you want to call them Purpose Driven Devices, go ahead.
The Bible says that the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked: who can know it?  (Jer 17:9)  Given this truth, are you willing to run off in pursuit of some Purpose Driven Life defined by a man (in possession of the same naturally deceitful and desperately wicked heart as ours)?  The Bible is full of judgments against men who did Godly things (and the Lord was angry over it).  See, for example, Saul who made God angry by giving a religious sacrifice to the Lord Himself.  So, religious work can actually make God angry.  Saul was taken off the throne when he did sacrifice to the Lord.  What matters is WHO INITIATES such work.  Is it us or the Lord?  Is it the Lord or some Purpose Driven Device?

If you omit the utter sinful nature of man and the complete Holiness of God and the judgment which must fall upon sin (all of which the book Purpose Driven Life omits), what is the difference between this approach and any Positive Pep Talk?  All the rich and the successful have "purpose driven lives."    And the rich and successful are "in on everything?" (see below).

On page 58 of the Purpose Driven Life, he quotes from the "Message" (some actually consider this the Bible).  Just remember, we can not accept Jesus Christ on our own terms, only on His terms.
 "Whoever accepts and trust the Son gets in on everything, life complete and forever!" [John 3:36].

I am sorry, but, these words disgust me (because they are man-centric, gets in on everything) and are an insult (the text omits the wrath of God) to the Lord Jesus Christ and the suffering He did  in order to satisfy the just requirements of a righteous and Holy God whose perfect righteousness makes Him angry at sin.  Where is the judgment of God upon sin in this so-called "Bible" verse?   Read the real John 3:36.  He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. 

By changing the Word of God in this manner even an UNREPENTANT sinner can be lead to believe he has become a "Christian."  Taking lightly the consequences of our sinful nature in the light of a righteous God is a serious thing in my Bible.

Why is the wrath of God left out of the "Message" and the book Purpose Driven Life?  What is God's purpose for His people?
Thou hast proved mine heart; thou hast visited me in the night; thou hast tried me; and shall find NOTHING... Psa 17:3
Why does the Lord find nothing AFTER He has tried us?  Because He empties us of all JUNK, including self-delusional Purpose Driven Lives.  My strength is made perfect in WEAKNESS (2 Cor 12:9).  Note- we are not to get in on everything via our own blessed attributes (gifts) and purpose driven lives.  Christ Jesus Himself IS our giftAll praise to His Blessed name forever!  He IS the Way, the Truth, and the Life!  Turning His life, death, resurrection and all His gifts into a "Purpose Driven Life" cheapens the gospel and misleads many.  By admission, the author above says that Mr Warren has taken the Principals and packaged them in a way that are palatable for Christians and non-Christians.  Precisely.   Which of these Purpose Driven people wants to hear this message?  He must increase but I must DECREASE. (John 3:30)

So, what does the emergence of  this kind of all-inclusive "church" (Purpose Driven) mean?  It means that Warren's prediction is coming true-
Warren predicts that fundamentalism, of all varieties, will be "one of the big enemies of the 21st century."

Fundamentalism means the belief in ALL the inspired words of the Bible.  Such belief apparently makes you one of the big enemies of the 21st century and this per the leading evangelical in the world.  So, dear friend, choose between believing ALL the inspired words of the Bible or a Purpose Driven Life.  They appear to be the same, but, when you look closely the two are mutually exclusive.

End 03-12-2006


from the website-
you can watch the Arab lady speak against radical Islamism.

The only reason I am mentioning this is that her words fit right into the Clash Of Civilizations think-tank mentality.  So, before you start "celebrating" what she said, just remember what this means (on balance).  What does she say?

She says it is
not a clash of religions or a clash of civilizations, but between a mentality of the Middle Ages and a mentality of the 21st century, between civilization and backwardness, between barbarity and rationality, between civilized and primitive, between freedom and oppression, between the culture of the West and backwardness and ignorance of Muslims (she is asked and agrees)..

She is asked - was it not Huntington (Samuel) who invented this phrase Clash of Civilizations? she says
No, it was the Muslims

That is certainly an oft-debated topic. Resolving this requires us to return to the issue of coopting the radical Muslims, beyond the scope of this page.  She does say that

 people must be allowed to have their beliefs (she being a secular woman, for example). 

I agree with the fact that each person must chose what he believes (without coercion from anyone). 

She is right -
not a single Jew has blown up restaurants in Germany.

However, from page 176 of Dollars for Terror, we read of the Clash of Civilizations paradigm as believed and practiced by the think-tanks that take this view of how to solve the problem.  Ultimately, Huntington reactivates the idea of "each man for himself," founded on the old opposition between civilization and barbarity

Regardless of what the lady might have said that was true, she does return to the theme of Huntington as expressed on page 176 of Dollars for Terror. = the old opposition between civilization and barbarity.  This call for civilization will lead to the ultimate outlawing of all fundamentalists, an ever increasingly dirty word.  The internet is replete with descriptions of Christianity as an idea foreign to the 21st century, applicable to only the Middle Ages.  So, if you follow the lady, eventually you favor the Clash of Civilizations (and the eventual elimination of Christianity also), like it or not.

On another similiar topic, remember the lady's comments? - (they) treat women as beasts.  While you are contemplating this, ask yourself why an American male can be convicted by a jury (because he failed in his duties to protect his wife and child),  while on trial for murdering her?  He is either guilty of murder or he is innocent.  What does he failed in his duties to protect his wife and child have to do with his murder trial?  Are we creating new laws on the fly without even thinking?  

The lady says the clash is between those in favor of human rights versus those opposed to human rights.   In the process of protecting these "rights", we are headed toward forbidding anyone from the public practice of an absolute religion, all of which are believed foreign to the secular 21st century.  When this process bears fruit, the Christians, the Muslims, and the Jews (who don't blow up German restaurants) will all be the victims.  No one is going to "win."   You'll get no hoo-aagh from me after listening to the lady.  The whole scenario is foreboding and frightening for a world without Jesus Christ..

End 03-19-2006


On 06-20-2004 we had a commentary about Huntington's book Who Are We?—The Challenges to America's National Identity.
We said on that date -
The essence of this book is that the United States is essentially a Protestant nation which is likely to lose its identity under the threat of Hispanic (and therefore Catholic) immigration.  Huntington's claim is that Hispanics will not assimilate into the American culture (unlike 19th and 20th century immigrants).  The purpose of this book is to lay the intellectual groundwork for a future ethnic conflict within the United States.  

Unfortunately, that day is fast approaching.  Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to allow 1.5 million illegal immigrants to be given a five year permit to work in the United States (the article below says 12 million).  I am not questionning the motives of anyone involved in this, including Mr "Magic Bullet."  I will say this - Mr "Magic Bullet" himself, Arlen Specter, played a major leadership role in getting this legislation out of committee.  The "Magic Bullet" is the one that killed JFK.  The inventor of the theory is the same Mr. Specter, while acting as counsel to the Warren Commission.  Expedience was required in 1964 (because the evidence, via the Zapruder film) said it was impossible for Oswald, acting alone, to have killed the president) and "expedience" is required now for other reasons. For background and relevance of the JFK assassination.   My advice to any reader about this scenario?  Pray for the lost.  Any other advice?  Pray to the Lord about your own salvation.  Any other advice?  If this happens before the rapture of the church, stay out of the streets and obey the law.  The ultimate intent of this situation is to allow the opportunity for domestic "terrorism" to develop.  This "terrorism" will be blamed on two groups, the Hispanics and the Protestant citizenry of the United States. The "terrorists" will be neither.  Another intelligence operation will have developed.  This time it will not be in Iraq.  If you fight against the "Sunni terrorism", you will become a "Shiite."  Take your pick as to whether the Protestants are the "Sunnis" or the "Shiites."  Would you want to be either in Iraq?
Washington -- The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Monday a sweeping overhaul of U.S. immigration law that provides a way for the 12 million undocumented immigrants now in the country illegally to become citizens and creates a guest worker program for future immigrants....In the Senate committee, Chairman Arlen Specter maneuvered an alternative bill through a grueling debate and overcame a threat by Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist to move an enforcement-only bill to the full Senate if Specter did not come up with a plan by Monday.

When we first discussed this on 06-20-2004, we talked about the prospect of Protestant/Hispanic ethnic conflict.  This is exactly what is creeping into some Protestant websites.  Take NO ACTION on this stuff, friends.  The incitements have just begun.  I am not telling you to not write your Congressman; I am telling you to stay out of the streets because there is NOTHING we can do about it.  The powers that be have already decided (years ago) that they were going to do this. They just did not tell any Senator or President what their long-range plan was (just like terrorism has a long-range element), well, maybe some Senators.  The best thing to do is to personally embrace every Hispanic person you meet.  If you are invited (later) to take up arms to defend the country, it will be too late.  If you do take up arms, you lose.  If you don't take up arms, you lose.  If the "militia" starts defending the country, all hell will break loose.  To tempt the "militia" there will be "incidents" of all kinds (including "Hispanic gangs" etc).

[A] Warning Regarding Illegal Immigration

I wrote the following words on March 21, 2006, just days before hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens took to America's streets in massive protests. (To read the entire column, go to: ) "America's illegal immigration problem is a time bomb with a lit fuse! And the fuse is getting short! "Did you know that of the more than 12 million (This is a very conservative estimate. The actual number is well over 20 million.) illegal aliens that currently reside in this country, almost half of them arrived here since G.W. Bush became president in 2000? The reported figure is 40%. (Source: The Washington Times) "Does anyone think that the dramatic increase of illegal aliens to America during the Bush administration is a coincidence? Only an imbecile could believe that! The reason that there are nearly 50% more illegal aliens in America (most of them crossing our southern border since Bush became president) is directly because of the policies and speeches President Bush has made that have created a climate extremely favorable to illegal aliens. Most of the millions of illegal aliens that have poured across our southern border during the last 5 years have done so with the expectation (clearly created by Bush) of receiving legal amnesty in this country. "How can any rational person take Bush seriously about his "war on terrorism," when he treats the problem of illegal immigration with such a cavalier attitude? Beyond that, how can they accept his continued encroachments upon the liberties of the American citizenry with such indifference? Do they not realize that President Bush is punishing law- abiding Americans while opening the door of potential terrorism even wider? Have the American people (and especially the Religious Right) lost their minds?" Our elected leaders have created a gigantic illegal alien nightmare that will plague this nation for decades to come. Rep. Tom Tancredo and a few others have tried to warn America for years of this impending disaster. Now, we are beginning to pay the price. We should give Rep. Tancredo all the help we can. Please contact your house members and senators immediately! The future of our country is at stake!

What is the title of the article referenced within the text? Where Is The Religious Right Hiding These Days?

In this article Mr Baldwin goes after the Religious Right.  He is "calling out" the religious right. Mr Baldwin is right about many things he said.  However, I can answer Mr Baldwin's question - "How can any rational person take Bush seriously about his "war on terrorism," when he treats the problem of illegal immigration with such a cavalier attitude?

The answer is that the War on Terror and ignoring the illegal immigration problem both serve the same purpose in the long run.
They both destabilize society and facilitate the New Global Order.  It is perfectly logical to do both (if you are in the "destablization" business).  I have no idea what Mr Baldwin's intent is (and it may well be good) or the President's for that matter, but, stirring up the Protestants against the Hispanics is exactly what Mr Huntington predicted.  [Once any of the Christian Right is called out, the blame game can begin. After all, the "Christian Right" is the true target.] God bless us all and kiss every Mexican you meet.  What do you think will happen after the rapture, when, at that instant, not a single person indwelt by the Holy Spirit is left?

Concerning immigration, here is a little known fact.  During the early 60s a deliberate strategy was undertaken in North Vietnam to create a massive immigration to South Vietnam to destroy the South.  A great deal of scare tactics were used to cause the immigration of these poor victims.  If my memory serves me, the number was approximately 1.1 million, a relatively large percentage.  Whatever became of these 1.1 million victims with no place to live and no job?  Well, they were later dubbed the VietCong.

End 03-28-2006


(1) Under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, officers and agents of the Secret Service are authorized to—
  (A) execute warrants issued under the laws of the United States;
  (B) carry firearms;
  (C) make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony;
  (D) offer and pay rewards for services and information leading to the apprehension of persons involved in the violation or potential violation of those provisions of law which the Secret Service is authorized to enforce

Some of the above was true prior to Homeland Security.  Is there anything in the government that is not now under the purview of Homeland Security?  See  for this list of agencies.  I suggest you go to the link and read all about the DHS.  When the need to clamp down on fundamentalists, serial killers, terrorists, kidnappers, bad husbands, bad fathers, dead-beat dads, etc, etc, we will have the agency in place to handle this (and the people).

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
prepares the nation for hazards, manages Federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident, and administers the National Flood Insurance Program.

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) protects the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.  

Customs and Border Protection  is responsible for protecting our nation’s borders in order to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the United States, while facilitating the flow of legitimate trade and travel.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE),  the largest investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for identifying and shutting down vulnerabilities in the nation’s border, economic, transportation and infrastructure security.

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center provides career-long training to law enforcement professionals to help them fulfill their responsibilities safely and proficiently.

Citizenship and Immigration Services is responsible for the administration of immigration and naturalization adjudication functions and establishing immigration services policies and priorities.

The U.S. Coast Guard protects the public, the environment, and U.S. economic interests—in the nation’s ports and waterways, along the coast, on international waters, or in any maritime region as required to support national security.

The U.S. Secret Service protects the President and other high-level officials and investigates counterfeiting and other financial crimes, including financial institution fraud, identity theft, computer fraud; and computer-based attacks on our nation’s financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure.

(and we will have the masses of people to perform other purposes.)

H.R. 4752: Universal National Service Act of 2006 - Again
HR H.R. 4752 Universal National Service Act of 2006 - To provide for the common defense by requiring all persons in the United States, including women, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.

The following summary is provided by the Congressional Research Service, which is a government entity that serves Congress and is run by the Library of Congress.

Universal National Service Act of 2006 - Declares that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a two-year period of national service, unless exempted, either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. Requires induction into national service by the President. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) induction deferments, postponements, and exemptions, including exemption of a conscientious objector from military service that includes combatant training; and (2) discharge following national service.
Amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.

End 06-07-2006


In case in any of you were planning on skipping the Clash of Civilizations, they are not going to let that happen.

A new film is out-

Islam, What the West Needs to Know
Main Idea
Virtually every major Western leader has over the past several years expressed the view that Islam is a peaceful religion and that those who commit violence in its name are fanatics who misinterpret its tenets. This claim, while widely circulated, rarely attracts serious public examination. Relying primarily on Islam’s own sources, this documentary demonstrates that Islam is a violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government.

So, anyone of us who believes we should live peacably with others (including what must be mislead Muslims who love peace too, if you believe the above) are not going to be allowed to do so.  They are going to keep hammering you with this idea and with Zarqawis (even if he died 5 years before he was killed by 500 pound bombs, which did not actually kill him either) and Bin Ladens until they get what they want.  On the other side of the coin they are hammering the Muslims with the Crusader Invasion of Iraq by the "Christians."

If the Christian Bible has been corrupted (and it has- ASV, NASV, NIV etc ad nauseum), don't you think the Koran has been corrupted too?  Anyone who knows will tell you (for example) that a Saudi Arabian Koran (a Wahhabi Koran) is different (for political reasons) from other "Korans" (because it has as its objective the continued peninsular hegemony of the Saudi Royals.)  We have not seen anything yet.  It would not surprise me if they "found" (ala Tischendorf) the Sinaiticus Koranic scrolls "proving" that al-Qaeda is the 5th horse of the apocalypse (with a photograph of a Boeing 757 on page 757), similar to the Koranic reference of Quran 9:11 that is circulating on the internet.

End 07-06-2006

How far are we going to go to win the so-called Clash of Civilizations?  Apparently the answer is all the way to the Book of Revelation.

No one can know for sure whether an al-Qaida loyalist had what it took to follow through on a suspected plot to bomb Hudson River train tunnels. He had no explosives and no detailed plan, and isn't believed to have visited New York, authorities said.

But U.S. officials said they weren't willing to find out.

"We don't wait until someone has lit the fuse (to) step in and prevent something from happening. That would be playing games with peoples' lives," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Friday as Assem Hammoud's arrest in Lebanon was being announced.

Policy makers and security experts said the bust illustrates a shift in U.S. counterterrorism policy that has played out in other recent high-profile cases, including the arrest of seven men suspected of wanting to bomb Chicago's Sears Tower.

Law enforcers, they said, are now willing to act swiftly against al-Qaida sympathizers, even if it means grabbing wannabe terrorists whose plots may be only pipe dreams.

"Before 9/11, the FBI was thinking in terms of criminal convictions," said Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.

That meant waiting to act until investigators had hard evidence of a major crime, the New York Republican said. These days, he said, the priority is disruption.

"You may end up not winning it in court, but you get a bad guy off the street," he said.

We are now arresting "bad guys" who have "no explosives", "no detailed plan", who have never visited New York, the city in question, and have "only pipe dreams."    In the recent arrests made in Miami (regarding the Sears Tower), the only "al-Qaida" was the FBI undercover agent. The FBI agent reportedly agitated the group, which were not even Muslims. (Lesson- if you are in a group that expresses disgust at current government policies, you had best get out; they may need to take another bad guy off the street.)

In this case there are no al-Qaida either, but wannabe terrorists.  How far are we from arrests of individuals who oppose the policies of the government?  If someone is opposed to these types of arrests, can they not easily become "al-Qaida sympathizers?"  Since these individuals are now "off the street", how long will they be "off the street?"  Since we may end up not winning it in court, do we then send them to Gitmo to be held in perpetuity?   We are going to have to arrest a great number of people if we arrest everyone in the Muslim community who gets angry over US policy in Iraq (especially those who have pipe dreams of living in peace).

The next time you look at a woman in lust, given this type of "law", you might be arrested for attempted rape as a rapist wannabe.  The next time you can not pay your bills and you ride by a banking institution, you could be arrested for thinking of all that money that is in there as a bank robber wannabe. [Just do not share your thoughts with anyone in the FBI.  No, wait, with the government solicitation of informants for observations of "suspicious" behavior, do not share your thoughts with anyone.] If you do tell anyone,at least we would have you, the bad guy, off the street.  Look, we have to protect women and the banking community from the al-Qaida.  By the time we arrest all the sinners, who are the real bad guys, what will happen to the GDP, the Gross Domestic Product, and the unemployment rate?  How does one run for president on a platform of full employment and winning the war on "terror?"  I guess we will have to forget full employment.  I know all this is tongue-in-cheek, but, dear reader, can you not see that your earthly options are growing smaller each day?  Do you honestly believe that your life here is going to be full of happiness, joy, and prosperity during the coming "long war", as the intelligence community is want to describe the situation?  Whether you are a conservative or a liberal, rich or poor, is that going to matter?
Will it matter if you are a Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, New Ager, hippie or Wall Street investment banker?  None of this is going to matter.  All that matters is whether you accept Jesus Christ, the Only True God and Savior. (Read that link and let the Word of God speak to you.  Forget about all that you are pursuing and LISTEN to the Almighty.) He is the Creator and all will stand before Him and call Him Lord.  I am telling you these things for one reason only - I love you and want to see you in the kingdom to come, which God, who can not fail, has promised us.  If you are one of God's people, call on Him today. Today is the day of salvation, dear friend.  It is not too late

End 07-09-2006

There is a new novel (June 2005, making Weinberger 87 when writing the book) out called Chain of Command and it was not written by the arch-liberal Bush-basher Michael Moore, but the arch conservative from the Reagan administration, Caspar Weinberger.  What is the subject matter of the book?  The answer is - the threat to Constitutional America posed by the activities of the executive branch of government in conducting the war on terror (domestic style).

From one review-

"Two term Reagan Secretary of Defense Weinberger collaborating with Schweizer (The Next War) turns in a debut political thriller crackling with a chilling authenticity and riveting dirty dealing. When Secret Service Special Agent Michael Delaney, a longtime member of the presidential security detail, awakes blearily one morning at Camp David, he discovers that someone's swapped guns with him — and within minutes, the president and vice president are shot with Delaney's own Beretta. Before the wounded VP is taken to surgery, he's sworn in as president; moments later, multiple cities get hit in small but lethal coordinated attacks. The new POTUS, who sees opportunity in disaster, declares a state of national emergency, putting the entire nation under martial law, then prepares to take out a right-wing militia on whom he has pinned the attacks. Before a highly skeptical Delaney can catch his breath, he finds himself accused of being complicit in hitting the president and VP. The novel tracks, over nine days, the particulars of the White House power grab and Delaney's desperate attempts to derail it, both in the District and in some tense encounters with the Appalachia-based right-wingers. ["Talladega National Forest, Northern Alabama 11:40 AM" to be exact.  That is the Bible Belt, if you are still reading- my comments.] Despite some stilted dialogue, Weinberger and Schweizer have delivered a superbly paced, tightly plotted winner. (June)" Publishers Weekly (Starred Review) (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)

From another review-

Here's the story line: Senior government officials stage a presidential assassination to make it look as if domestic terrorists are about to take over. Then they urge passage of a super "Patriot Act" to get around the niceties of civil liberties and deploy armed troops in the streets of Washington.  Voilà. The conspirators take over, and order - their view of order - prevails.

But is Mr. Weinberger saying that the US remains vulnerable to terrorists who could find it frighteningly easy to slip a radioactive or germ-laden bomb into New York Harbor, for example? Or is he warning that the current panicky and confrontational political atmosphere here and abroad - with "evil-doers" feared across the aisle in Congress as well as in places like Iraq, Iran, and North Korea - could start the US down a slippery slope to political repression in the name of homeland security?

One reviewer asks-

Is this a coded -- and disloyal -- reference to the Bush administration's response to Sept. 11, to what some on both the left and right have seen as the civil-liberties invasions of the Patriot Act?  Absolutely, positively not. Sort of.


Someone wielding the gun of Secret Service agent Michael Delaney kills the President and wounds the Veep. Immediately afterwards, terrorists strike at several major cities, and the perpetrators appear to be homegrown. [Homegrown fundamentalist from Alabama, that is- my comments] Declaring martial law, the new President begins eroding civil liberties in the name of national security.

We have previously discussed how it is the hope of certain elites that the "heart-belongs-to-Jesus boys" will conduct a counter-coup against the US government.  If the "heart-belongs-to-Jesus" don't conduct a counter-coup, one will be conducted for them and in their name, ala "insurgents" presently all over the planet.  Why?  The "heart-belongs-to-Jesus" boys are the real target of the scenario outlined in the Chain of Command.  Do not know if "Cap" was aware of this. "Cap" has passed on. However, Cap's book says that the "terrorism" was staged.   The thesis of Caps' book is in agreement with this page.  From pp 328-329 in a conversation about grabbing the tapes "..the last thing they needed was 15 Zapruders, everybody spending the next 40 years dissecting these tapes for suspicious flashes and puffs of smoke from the grassy knoll."  (Read the link to see a glimpse of the depths of the situation. Read until you see a plausible explanation of what happened on the grassy knoll, and more importantly, why.)

What are you to do about all of this?  Pray for the lost and accept Jesus Christ before it is too late.  Anything else?  Nothing.  The god of this world is Satan.  Only Jesus Christ at His Coming will take back the Kingdom.  We are to stay out of it.

End 07-29-2006


PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia - The Islamic world's largest organization of countries demanded on Thursday that the U.N. implement an immediate cease-fire in Lebanon and investigate what it called flagrant human rights violations by Israel.Leaders of key countries in the 56-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference, including Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey, voiced strong support for the Lebanese people "in their legitimate and courageous resistance against the Israeli aggression."... 
"This war must stop, or it will radicalize the Muslim world, even those of us who are moderate today," said Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who leads the world's most populous Muslim country. "From there, it will be just one step away to that ultimate nightmare: a clash of civilizations."

End 08-07-2006


It is difficult to decide where to put this article, but, I decided this page was as good as any other.  It is in regard to the recently passed legislation in Congress.  First of all, God help the President and our leaders. Second of all, obey our laws.  Live peacably with all men.  Love one another.  Be guided into the patient waiting for our Lord.

Bush in recent weeks has gone so far as to make the rhetorical suggestion that those who insist on questioning the government about its official version of current events – he says this in spite of endless documented examples of blatant dishonesty – give "aid and comfort" to the enemy.

I’m not sure at which point "aid and comfort to the enemy" crosses the boundary into the realm of "material support," either, but I can conclude that according to Bush logic, "material support" and "aid and comfort" are bordering territories.

This is where the legal battle for the hearts and minds is headed. The first steps towards legalizing Bush’s attack on dissenters began this week when the Senate approved Bush’s anti-terrorism legislation: "Republicans succeeded this week in pushing through a key piece of President Bush's anti-terror agenda, passing along party lines legislation that would endorse the military program to detain and interrogate terrorists."

Part of the bill includes, of course, provisions that deal specifically with how Bush can legally treat "unlawful combatants." But according to the AP, our only assurance that the unitary executive won’t be allowed to arbitrarily declare a U.S. citizen an "enemy combatant" and strip him of his Constitutional right to habeas corpus requirements is an anonymous suggestion by an unnamed proponent of the bill that it "would not apply to U.S. citizens."

The anonymous source is saying, "Hey, you can trust us." And we’re all saying, "Why yes, trusting government has always worked to our benefit before."

But one look at the bill itself demonstrates no such practical exclusion for U.S. citizens:

The term `lawful enemy combatant' means an individual who is--

  1. a member of the regular forces of a State party engaged in hostilities against the United States;
  2. a member of a militia, volunteer corps, or organized resistance movement belonging to a State party engaged in such hostilities, which are under responsible command, wear a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry their arms openly, and abide by the law of war; or
  3. a member of a regular armed force who professes allegiance to a government engaged in such hostilities, but not recognized by the United States.

The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States who is not a lawful enemy combatant.

If Congress intended to protect U.S. citizens from vulnerability to the designation of "unlawful enemy combatant," they only needed to append the phrase "or a U.S. citizen" to the end of the second definition.

But this is by design. Congress has now completed the groundwork for Bush’s ultimate goal: to be able to prove that dissent is the equivalent of "hostility" against the United States – that dissent is disloyalty, or treason.

I have no idea what Bush's ultimate goal is.  However, someone in the future now has the door opened to fulfill certain Bible prophecies.

End 10-01-2006


In the legislation passed (see 10-01-2006), it says-

"The term 'unlawful enemy combatant' means –
(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or
(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."

Presumably, "person" means anyone, including a citizen of the United States.  The following is an opinion of a Yale Law School professor.  As the author of the article points out, this is not just hypotheticals here.  In the case of Jose Padilla (which you can look up on the internet), the president has already arrested and imprisoned a US citizen (as an enemy combatant) for sometime without a trial.,0,619852.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail

BURIED IN THE complex Senate compromise on detainee treatment is a real shocker, reaching far beyond the legal struggles about foreign terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay fortress. The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.

This dangerous compromise not only authorizes the president to seize and hold terrorists who have fought against our troops "during an armed conflict," it also allows him to seize anybody who has "purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States." This grants the president enormous power over citizens and legal residents. They can be designated as enemy combatants if they have contributed money to a Middle Eastern charity, and they can be held indefinitely in a military prison.

Not to worry, say the bill's defenders. The president can't detain somebody who has given money innocently, just those who contributed to terrorists on purpose.

But other provisions of the bill call even this limitation into question. What is worse, if the federal courts support the president's initial detention decision, ordinary Americans would be required to defend themselves before a military tribunal without the constitutional guarantees provided in criminal trials.

Legal residents who aren't citizens are treated even more harshly. The bill entirely cuts off their access to federal habeas corpus, leaving them at the mercy of the president's suspicions.

End 10-02-2006


Watch the following video which was filmed on July 16.  I really can not believe what I saw.   This is exactly what we should NOT be doing while waiting upon the Lord.  John has no idea that he is promoting the Clash Of Civilizations.  Go to the 5:10 mark and hear John Hagee promote a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran (to prevent a nuclear holocaust?).  As you can readily see from the filming and questions, the blame is being squarely laid on the evangelical right.  You can avoid this by not advocating preemptive nuclear strikes.

End 07-29-2007


If you read the following, what would you be lead to believe?

The Untold Story of How a Band of True Believers Seized the Executive Branch, Started the Iraq War, and Still Imperils America's Future.

The quote is on the Jacket of Craig Unger's new book The Fall of the House of Bush.  "True believers" threaten America's future is the message.

We have previously explained the idea that the true Clash of Civilizations ultimately has at its core the fight between all fundamentalists and the rest of society.  The phrase "True Believers" alludes to Unger's thesis that the Christian fundamentalists and the Zionist fundamentalists  (along with the neo-cons) lied the country into the Iraq War.  Unger makes the True Believers the source of the problem.   He has a chapter entitled Into the Fray that links the Bush Iraq policy with the likes of :
Jerry Falwell- p64
Tim Lahaye - p63
James Dobson - p68

Unger describes the roots of the true believers in association with John Nelson Darby, the so-called father of the rapture.

The chapter The Prodigal Son chronicles Dubya's conversion to "fundamentalism."

In the chapter The Age of Unreason, Unger identifies David Lloyd George as one of the trouble makers because he was a "premillennial dispensationalist" (p 105).

Here are a few comments from various reviews of the book.  The first one shows that there are others who see the import of Unger's book.  See the highlighted section.

In Saturday's London Daily Telegraph, there was a review of Craig Ungar's book The Fall of the House of Bush, reviewed by Damian Thompson, here is an excerpt from Mr Thompson's last paragraph, referring to Ungar, who says "the most powerful enemies of our modern post-enlightenment world may not be the militant Islamists more than an ocean away, but Christian fundamentalists and their neo-conservative allies"

Damian Thompson continues " Well he's right up to a point. Some well connected Americans are indeed more dangerous than crazed mullahs. But they are not neocons or Bible-bashers, they are liberal commentators who suggest a moral equivalence between their churchgoing neighbours and terrorists. That means you Unger.
the linked page yields the same theme proffered here-
From the Publisher:

Conventional wisdom has it that the Middle East crisis is the product of a clash of civilizations between Islam and the West. The Fall of the House of Bush will frame that conflict as part of an entirely different paradigm namely, the ongoing war between faith and reason, between fundamentalisms (Islamic, Jewish and Christian) and the modern, scientific, post-Enlightenment world. [we described the real purpose of the Clash of Civilizations  as precisely this] It will tell the story of how radical, neoconservative ideologues secretly forged an alliance with the Christian Right in the presidency of George W. Bush, and, driven by delusional idealism, ideological and religious zeal, waged unilateral, preemptive war in the Middle East, not to mention a domestic war against reason, science, and civil liberties. In other words, it will make the case that irrational religious and ideological forces have taken control of U.S. policy and are part of the problem, not the solution.

To fully appreciate the catastrophic consequences of these policies, one cannot overlook the fact these are the last days during which the United States has secure access to diminishing supplies of Middle East oil. As a result, far from insuring our security, the Iraq War will be seen as a great strategic pivot point in history that is igniting a global oil war. It also means a foreign policy based in part on apocalyptic end-time scenarios embraced by tens of millions of right wing Christian evangelicals who have effectively taken over the Republican Party, and are explicitly calling for the end of the separation of Church and State.
Forget about the clash of civilizations between Islam and the West. Unger’s subject is the war that really matters: the one between Islamic, Jewish, and Christian fundamentalists on one side, and the scientific (reality-based!) post-Enlightenment world that some of us still prefer to inhabit.

By the way, the book is a thorough indictment of the Bush invasion of Iraq.  The Fall of the House of Bush chronicles how the neo-cons aimed to invade Iraq BEFORE Bush took office, how the neo-cons prepared Bush BEFORE he took office, how the administration produced one lie* after another to justify the policy it wanted to pursue before January 20, 2001. 

The problem is that the real true believers had NOTHING to do with the Bush policy.  Yes, misguided religionists (aka kingdom makers) DID support the administration.  These kingdom makers are deluded. However, us nobodies had nothing to do with it. 

The tribulation martyrs will be blamed. 

Strangely enough, the photo section of the book in the center has the following quote-
Ledeen allegedly launched unauthorized foreign policy initiatives in secret meetings in Rome.

End 02-14-2008


The purpose of the 02-14-2008 update was to show how the Bush policy will be used against the tribulation saints.  Of course, Unger's thesis that the true believers are responsible is fallacious.  His citations of John Nelson Darby and "pre-millennial dispensationalists", for example, are ludicrous.  Do not expect the public at large, however, to find Unger's thesis ludicrous.  Many will find Unger's thesis to be accurate. Unger's citation of the Bush policy failures is well documented in many places.

A few of Unger's points are-
p 201 Bush: "go find me a way to do this"  (invade Iraq)
p 311 Bush knew the Niger yellowcake pursuit by Saddam was false before he cited it in the State of the Union
p 299 Cheney supervised the disablement of the existing intelligence apparatus and replaced it with a parallel apparatus
p 319 "Many of the essential facts of Nigergate had been revealed- that the documents had been forged, that the White House leaked Valerie Plame Wilson's identity to the press in an effort to discredit Joe Wilson" [who publicly stated that the Niger documents were a forgery]
p 288 L Wilkerson: "My participation in that presentation [Colin Powell at the UN] at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life.  I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community, and the United Nations Security Council."

End 02-17-2008


A Detention Bill You Ought to Read More Carefully

Mar 5 2010, 3:40 PM ET

Why is the national security community treating the "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," introduced by Sens. John McCain and Joseph Lieberman on Thursday as a standard proposal, as a simple response to the administration's choices in the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing attempt? A close reading of the bill suggests it would allow the U.S. military to detain U.S. citizens without trial indefinitely in the U.S. based on suspected activity.

You can read the full text of the bill here.

Senator McCain introduces the legislation:

Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that sets forth a clear, comprehensive policy for the detention, interrogation and trial of enemy belligerents who are suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States. This legislation seeks to ensure that the mistakes made during the apprehension of the Christmas Day bomber, such as reading him a Miranda warning, will never happen again…”

Senator John McCain (AZ)
U.S. Senate
Floor Statement
March 4th, 2010

And, thusly, what was begun under Bush continues under Obama (so much for change).   Only this bill (S. 3081) is worse than the Patriot Act in terms of its potential to take away the rights of Americans under the Constitution (so much for hope).  On some websites this legislation is described under headings containing the words "Police State."   The legislation reminds me of the Quigley book Tragedy and Hope.

Apparently, there was a reason to try 9-11 "Terrorists" in civilian court.  The reason is that it justifies such a bill as S. 3081. 

Here are some specifics:

p 2.
8 is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United
9 States or its coalition partners through an act of ter
10 rorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war,
11 or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities,
12 and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the

13 individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes

14 of initial interrogation and determination of status in ac
15 cordance with the provisions of this Act.

Comment - you can be arrested and detained by the military because you are suspected.
It is against the Posse Comitatus Act for the military to act as police within the United States.

p 3.

Each interagency team

17 under this subsection shall be composed of such per18

sonnel of the Executive Branch having expertise in

19 matters relating to national security, terrorism, in20

telligence, interrogation, or law enforcement as the

21 President considers appropriate.

Comment - you could be arrested by a future as yet unknown "gestapo" or persons the President considers appropriate.

p 4.


20 high-value detainee interrogation group may utilize

21 military and intelligence personnel, and Federal,

22 State, and local law enforcement personnel, in con23

ducting interrogations of a high-value detainee.

Comment-  The Feds will be in charge of all levels of law enforcement for purposes of the legislation.
Law enforcement will include "other personnel."

p 5.


6 AND RIGHTS.—A individual who is suspected of

7 being an unprivileged enemy belligerent shall not,

8 during interrogation under this subsection, be pro9

vided the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona

10 (384 U.S. 436 (1966)) or otherwise be informed of

11 any rights that the individual may or may not have

12 to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Mi13

randa v. Arizona.

Comment - You will not be informed of any rights.  In fact, you will have none. 
And they have to prove nothing to detain you. 

p 7.

Comment- High Value Detainees, which can be held indefinitely without a trial, are designated by-

15 (A) The potential threat the individual

16 poses for an attack on civilians or civilian facili17

ties within the United States or upon United

18 States citizens or United States civilian facili19

ties abroad at the time of capture or when com20

ing under the custody or control of the United

21 States.

22 (B) The potential threat the individual

23 poses to United States military personnel or

24 United States military facilities at the time of

March 4, 2010 (12:06 p.m.)

1 capture or when coming under the custody or

2 control of the United States.

3 (C) The potential intelligence value of the

4 individual.

5 (D) Membership in al Qaeda or in a ter6

rorist group affiliated with al Qaeda.

7 (E) Such other matters as the President

8 considers appropriate.

Comment- (under the category of intelligence value)

Interrogation Group to suspect- Do you know any other Christians that we should interrogate? 
You think this is far fetched?  I do not.   
You can become a high value detainee on account of an abritrary matter deemed appropriate by a President.

p 8.


TIONS.—The regulations required by this subsection

11 shall provide that the paramount purpose of the in12

terrogation of high-value detainees under this Act

13 shall be the protection of United States civilians and

14 United States civilian facilities through thorough

15 and professional interrogation for intelligence pur16


Comment - civilians who are being protected are not to be confused with the accused.

I repeat - What are we to DO about all this?   Answer- Nothing.  Any participation will further inflame the situation.

Remember when I warned that the Clash of Civilizations would include some "new" belligerents?

The sole reason i bring this to your attention is to encourage you to call upon the Lord before it is too late.

End 03-20-2010


If you did not believe that the Clash of Civilizations was still alive and well, recall what is happening in the news during the last week:

These type of things will escalate and the real enemy of the increasingly secular society will continue to be "fundamentalists."  Just think what the hatred of fundamentalist Christians is going to be in the future tribulation. 

End 09-12-2010

The Lord is going to bless all remaining Israel and all the remaining Semitic nations.  This includes Ishmael's descendants.
All you Arab bashers are going to have to get over it.  You are falling into the trap of Satan.

And the LORD shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know the LORD in that day, and shall do sacrifice and oblation; yea, they shall vow a vow unto  the LORD, and perform it.-- Isaiah 19:21

And the LORD shall smite Egypt: he shall smite and heal it: and they shall return even to the LORD, and he shall be entreated of them, and shall heal them. -- Isaiah 19:22

In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians.-- Isaiah 19:23

In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land:-- Isaiah 19:24

Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.-- Isaiah 19:25

I could be wrong, but, the Bible is never wrong. Regardless of the specific merits of this web page, one  needs to understand that the coming of the Lord is  sooner than we think.

What are we to DO about all this?   Answer- Nothing.  Any participation will further inflame the situation.  Reading this should convince a reasonable person that with what is coming soon, the world will offer NOTHING for hope . We do not need the Bible to figure this out.  The hatred that is being engendered from these events is incalculable.

However, what DOES THE BIBLE say? -  

Mat 24:7 for NATION shall rise against NATION , and kingdom against kingdom.  According to Mat 24:8 these are part of the BEGINNING of SORROWS .  Then, what happens?

Mat 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you : and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

The word NATION above is Strong's Concordance word number 1484 in the Greek Dictionary. It means " tribe ", specifically non-Jewish. It is, therefore, "tribal" conflict and fits into the mold of Huntington's Clash of Civilizations.

Mat 24:10   And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
(the accusations will lead to betrayal (to authorities) and hatred will abound (specifically toward any fundamentalist).

Mat 24:11   And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
(deceivers will make matters worse)

Mat 24:12   And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
(lawlessness, disregard for true authority, will abound)

The above verses refer to the tribulation period and the tribulation saints, when the Clash of Civilizations will be underway .  

The only thing we should do - get right with the Lord now and wait patiently for His coming.

How Is a Man Saved?

Home Page

Please e-mail us with questions or comments today.   I  might be wrong, but, the Bible is never wrong.

"I am the way, the truth, and the life" - Jesus Christ
John 14:6