To Honor Jesus Christ, Glorify
God, Encourage Believers, & Warn All
Est 12-07-2002
Updated 02-17-2008
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
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/research/rapl/events/sells_abstract.html
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].
Commentary
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 yahoo.com 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 - http://www.youth.co.za/theedge/reviews/reviewsBO05.asp
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.
Commentary
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
http://www.ourfaiths.org/story.cfm?story=1220
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?
01-05-2003
The choice between two alternatives (1) East-West Religious unity OR (2) the Clash of Civilizations is stated succinctly on this website:
http://www.eppc.org/publications/xq/ASP/pubsID.300/qx/pubs_viewdetail.htm
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 http://www.crosscurrents.org/Mileswinter2002.htm - we read
THEOLOGY AND THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS
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?
http://atrueword.com/index.php/article/articleview/23/1/3/
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."
12-01-2003
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:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/997080.asp?0cv=CB30#BODY
“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
10-17-2003
from the news of today on the following web page we read-
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&ncid=1802&e=5&u=/washpost/20031017/ts_washpost/a35155_2003oct16
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?
http://atrueword.com/index.php/article/articleview/21/1/1
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.
08-23-2003
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
08-23-2003
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)
04-09-2003
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
04-11-2003
From the the following website, http://theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/540opeji.asp
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 .
04-21-2004
From the following webpage
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1195727,00.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 www.raptureready.com, 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
05-16-2004
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 Newyorker.com 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:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4855930/
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 antiwar.com
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.
From http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/14/iraq/main617608.shtml
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. [What?]
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 .
http://www.cs.umass.edu/~immerman/play/DowdMay13_04.html
May 13, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Clash of Civilizations
By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON
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
05-18-2004
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
06-20-2004
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
07-24-2004
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-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20040718-115716-7774r
We read-
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
When does religion become a hate crime?
By Al Webb
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
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."
07-24-2004
11-28-2004
from the website-
http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20041114-103944-4700r.htm
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-
http://www.semissourian.com/story.html$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-
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=286638
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-
http://www.dawn.com/2004/11/28/top10.htm
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
12-19-2004
from the website-
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/513999.html
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-
http://www.newshounds.us/2004/12/18/patriot_act_ii.php
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
05-07-2005
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.
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.)
Quoting-
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-
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050328-125306-7868r.htm
Gang will target Minuteman vigil on Mexico border
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
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
06-11-2005
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 http://www.geocities.com/visplace/vatican.htm 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 -
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/09/ldt.01.html
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.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
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-
http://www.cfr.org/pub7914/press_release/trinational_call_for_a_north_american_economic_and_security_community_by_2010.php
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
http://www.newswithviews.com/Spivey/phyllis3.htm
for more information on international interests inside the United States-
INTERNATIONALIZING U.S. ROADS
...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