Did Somebody Hear a Trumpet?

Did Somebody Hear a Trumpet?
Vol: 20 Issue: 31 Saturday, May 31, 2003

The European Union is currently struggling to develop a new Constitution to accommodate its expansion from fifteen to twenty-five new members. One of the stumbling blocks for the conventioneers is exactly how to express European religious values.

Many of the ten new nations, especially Poland, wanted ‘Christian values’ expressly mentioned. The secularist states (led by the French) argue that ‘pluralist, modern Europe’ is too sophisticated and worldly to make reference to religion.

The ‘secularist’ states in general opposition to references to Christianity or God are the original ten states of the Western European Union, so there is little doubt as to the final outcome of the dispute.

‘Old’ Europe is patterning its Constitution along the lines of the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights, which also excludes references to God or Christianity, instead guaranteeing ‘freedom of religion’ — unless you are a Christian.

In December, 1948, the General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The UDHR was designed to incorporate the lofty principles of the US Bill of Rights, but deliberately avoided enshrining the purposes that inspired the US document.

The US Constitution is carefully worded and constructed. It points out that governments cannot grant rights; rather it says these rights were granted by the Creator. The framers of the Constitution felt that, because these rights were God-given, the recognition of that fact limited the power of government.

The UDHR is designed to do exactly the opposite. Under its terms, the UN grants these rights, because the UN does not acknowledge a Creator.

The whole purpose of the UDHR is to empower the United Nations with the authority to govern.

The UDHR says in Article II:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

So far, it sounds pretty much like the Constitution. But, as you will see, the UDHR gives rights in one hand, as it takes them away in another. Paragraph 2 continues:

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Although the paragraph above sounds like a good idea, look at it more closely. No distinction… on the basis of any other limitation of sovereignty. Although the UDHR grants us rights , those rights are global. They sound good, but they remove from any nation (including ours) the right to govern according to the will of the people of that nation.

In the UN utopia, the rights of the individual supersede the rights of the nation, but not the rights of the UN.

The destruction of the sovereign rights of the nation-state is carefully buried inside idealistic principles against which no sane person can argue. The goal of the UN is not the protection of individual rights, but rather the destruction of the nation state.

Article 12 of the UDHR says:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation.

Once again, a principle that sounds too good to argue against.

But what constitutes attacks upon…honor or reputation? In answering charges against him during the endless scandal investigations, he claimed the press coverage of the investigation was a personal attack against his honor and reputation.

The UDHR would leave the UN to decide: Is the honor and reputation of the President of the United States above scrutiny by the people who elected him?

The Founding Fathers of the US explicitly recognized the necessity of a free press to prevent government abuse of power. Does this Article do away with the Constitutional 1st Amendment right to freedom of the press? Absolutely.

At this point, you may be wondering where I am going with this. Well, for one thing, this document makes a presupposition that I find disquieting, to say the least. It presupposes that we can trust government to act in our best interests.

History teaches the opposite. In fact, the Constitution recognizes implicitly that government cannot be trusted; that it is by nature oppressive and that it is must be limited as much as possible. Constitutional lawyers call it our Constitutional system of checks and balances.

The UDHR grants rights in one hand, and takes them away in another. All the goals and ideals here seem noble and good, even if I seemed to get a little paranoid about the national sovereignty issue and the freedom of the press.

The needs of government — even global government — change as times change. What happens to our UN given rights in the event they interfere with the UN s purposes in the future? Article 29, paragraphs 2 and 3 take care of all that in a single sentence.

2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Take a look at that again! All those rights and freedoms, because they are granted by the United Nations, rather than being inalienable rights given by God, can be taken away by the United Nations, by the simple expedient of claiming they conflict with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Assessment:

In the early days of Christianity, the Roman authorities made a tactical decision to deal with the new Christian religion by killing off its adherents. A popular form of entertainment in those days was watching the Christians being devoured by lions.

But what was the problem?

Surely the Romans couldn t object to Christians adding another god to the list — the Romans already had plenty of gods and goddesses. One more couldn t hurt.

Another god, more or less, didn t make any difference. But Jesus claimed He was the only God, and that No man cometh unto the Father, but by Me.

It follows then, that the Roman polytheist was doomed, according to Christian theology. The population in those days found that sort of doctrine threatening, even hateful.

In fact, that was the charge under which they were persecuted — they called it a hate crime.

The claims of Christianity make it the enemy of every single other religious belief structure on earth, because, according to Jesus, any worship that denies Him is worship of the devil.

Under the terms of the final article of the UDHR, Christianity runs contrary to the goals and purposes of universal brotherhood as espoused by the United Nations.

Therefore, not only is Christianity’s freedom to practice according to its basic doctrine that ‘No man cometh unto the Father, but by Me” NOT protected, it is expressly EXCLUDED.

At first glance, the UDHR extends and espouses all the individual human rights that each person on the planet is deserving of. A perfect model for the ‘new’ Europe to base its new constitution on.

All the same rights the Constitution of the United States says were GRANTED by the Creator.

That is an important point. The only one who can revoke rights is the one who granted them in the first place. In America’s case, that would be God. Not the government.

By contrast, the UNDHR model reserves the right to revoke the rights it grants if they do not conform carefully undefined UN principles.

The same principle would be applicable in the new Europe, should the secularists win the constitutional argument.

The Bible says the government of antichrist is of global reach, but is headquartered out of the revived Roman Empire. Daniel says that revived Rome will be partly strong and partly weak and will be headed by ten kings.

John says that the antichrist will ‘make war against the saints and overcome them’ during the tribulation.

Revelation 13 says that the Tribulation Saints will be hunted down and exterminated for their faith in much the same manner as they were during the first centuries of Christianity under Roman rule.

The mechanism for all that is already in place, and has been for almost sixty years. Now take a look at the situation as it exists today.

Europe is almost ready to step into its appointed role. The Europeans have a vested interest in the Arab-Israeli peace process. They are one of the four members of the Quartet (together with the UN and Russia) who authored the current ‘road map’ effort.

And the Europeans have made no secret of the fact they are eager to step in to pick up the pieces, should the White House fail in its quest to impose peace.

The ten nations of Western Europe (Old Europe) may be part of a wider Europe, but the goal of new constitutional convention is to invest most of the real power in the original ten Western European Union states.

And that’s what the REAL fight is about. The battle over the inclusion of a mention of Christ in the EU’s new constitution is the headline, not the news.

This is about who will be Boss in the new Europe. and the Bible says it will be ‘Old’ Europe. And so do the ‘old’ Europeans who are the ones who decide who gets admitted as members of New Europe in the first place.

The Arab-Israeli crisis precisely conforms to Daniel’s description of the situation at about the time the prince of revived Rome steps onto the scene to confirm the covenant that kicks off the Tribulation Period. (Dan 9:24-27)

I can almost hear the trumpet.

All the Kings Horses. . .

All the Kings Horses. . .
Vol: 20 Issue: 30 Friday, May 30, 2003

President Bush is meeting with a deeply divided Group of Eight in Evian, France, to attempt to set a course for the future that has eight different visions. The challenge facing the president is to whittle them down to a one workable plan.

The Europe of today is not the same Europe that existed when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. Europe and America had a common enemy in the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union fell, a power vacuum was created that has yet to be adequately filled.

No longer threatened by the Soviets and resentful of the Americans, the Europeans banded together in a single, common market, fully expecting to fill the vacuum created by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The problem was that nobody could decide who was going to be Boss. The French think Europe s common language should be French, that Paris should be the capital of Europe and that they have the recipe for European greatness to the exclusion of all others.

The Germans think that they should be Boss because the French are always late and only the Germans have the discipline and the will to shape Europe for the 21st century.

The Belgians think that the EU s capital is in Brussels because of Belgian history makes it a major player in European politics, instead of realizing the capital is located in Brussels precisely because it is insignificant and no threat to the French or Germans.

The British can t quite make up their minds if their destiny lies with the Europeans next door with whom they have almost nothing in common but geography, and the virtually indistinguishable Americans across the Atlantic.

The Europeans have divided themselves along three basic lines. There are those European states who oppose the United States, those who support the United States, and those who wonder why the other two are making decisions for Europe based on how well they like the United States.

Of course, the divided Europeans don t see it that way. Instead, they blame the United States for dividing them. How, one might ask, did the United States divide them?

Every state in Europe bases its relationship with the United States on the current situation in the Middle East. The Europeans are biased in favor of the Arabs, whereas the United State s bias favors Israel.

There are many more Arabs in Europe than there are Jews, and the Arab population tends to get nasty if they think their host governments are getting too cozy with Israel.

On the other hand, the Middle East is a morass of Arab dictatorships, whereas Israel is the only genuine, Western-style representative democracy in the Middle East. The United States could not abandon Israel to the Arab dictatorships and expect democracy to flourish elsewhere.

Assessment:

The Bible characterizes the final form of world government as partly strong and partly weak, like iron mixed with miry clay (Daniel 2:43) saying that they shall not cleave to one another, even as iron is not mixed with clay .

But that partly strong and partly weak government predicted by Daniel will eventually be unified by a powerful prince of the Roman Empire who will win his authority by confirming the covenant between Israel and the many (Daniel 9:27).

That event is what the Bible says kicks off the 7 year Tribulation period. So, let s stop and look at this in detail.

Daniel lived in Babylonian captivity almost six hundred years before Christ. Daniel lived before the Roman Empire replaced the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great, which replaced the Persian Empire, which conquered the Babylonian Empire during Daniel s lifetime.

Daniel predicted the rise and fall of all four, and said that Rome would not be conquered, but would be revived in the last days.

The two legs of iron in Nebuchadnezzar s image were symbols of the Roman Empire which grew so large it split into two empires, one run from Rome, the other from Constantinople.

It was the feet of this image — ten toes mixed with iron and miry clay, of whom Daniel said, in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. (Daniel 2:44)

Take stock of the current situation. President Bush is meeting in France with the G-8 to discuss the divisions in Europe over Iraq. Why was Europe divided over Iraq? Take a look at the countries that opposed toppling Saddam. Now examine their position regarding Israel.

The friendlier they are to Israel, the more likely they were to support toppling Saddam. Draw any conclusion from that you like, but the significance is this.

It s all about Israel. Whether it is the summit in Evian, or the United Nations, or Iraq, or Iran, it all boils down to Israel. Where is President Bush off to when he leaves the G-8 meeting (early)? To Israel to meet with Abu Mazen and Ariel Sharon.

North Korea HAS nuclear weapons and is doing its level best to pick a fight with Washington, but there is no major prophetic connection between North Korea and Israel.

Consequently, US attention is focused primarily on the Israeli road map, secondarily with Iran, Israel s sworn enemy, and is only giving Pyongyang peripheral attention.

Zechariah said that in the last days, the whole world will be focused on Israel and on Jerusalem to the exclusion of all else.

Zechariah said that Jerusalem would be a cup of drunkenness to all the nations. Only a handful of nations recognized the need to topple Saddam Hussein, a dictator whose crimes against humanity put him in the same category as Hitler or Stalin.

The rest continue, even after the extent of Iraq s suffering was known, to criticize the war as unnecessary while crying out for justice for the suffering Palestinians.

How drunk is that?

Zechariah said that in the last days, all that burdened themselves with Jerusalem will be cut in pieces (Zechariah 12:1-3).

Every nation that has entered into friendly relations with Israel will attest to the truth of that prophecy.

It is staggering to know really KNOW that we are that generation that was chosen to be the eyewitnesses to the unfolding of God s Plan for the Ages.

The redemption of the Church, the reconciliation of Israel, the judgment of the nations and the Second Coming of Christ.

And we get to watch.

Note: Mike has added a new section to the Omega Letter Daily Briefing section. You can now share your comments on Omega Letter Briefings similarly to the Omega Letter columns and news stories. It is one of a series of changes and enhancements we have coming up in the near future. I ll keep you posted as things develop.

Also, we are going to be discontinuing our Paypal payment option effective the 15th of June. Members using Paypal will find our 2Checkout merchant solution far less invasive and much easier to use — and you don t have to worry about your email address getting sold to spammer s lists. 2Checkout doesn t require an account with them in order to use it. Please let me know if the change is of particular concern to you.

God bless you all.

Jack

The Sorcerer’s Apprentice

The Sorcerer’s Apprentice
Vol: 20 Issue: 29 Thursday, May 29, 2003

The Liberal government of Jean Chr tien in Canada is considering passage of a schizophrenic law that seeks to decriminalize possession of a half-ounce or less of marijuana, while increasing penalties on dealers.

The bill would make those found in possession of less than 15 grams (about a half-ounce) of marijuana would be subject to a ticket and a small fine. The bill would also call for a reduction in criminal charges for those who grow twenty-five marijuana plants or less.

The Chr tien government dismissed arguments that decriminalization will mean more young people will become marijuana users, but the government envisions a two-tier system of fines that suggests the opposite.

Violators would be ticketed and ordered to pay fines ranging from [CDN] $150 to $400 ($110-$300 US) for adults and [CDN] $100 to $250 ($60-$180 US) for youths — making the drug much more user-friendly if one is under 18. “What kind of deterrence is that?” asks Albert Justice Minister Dave Hancock.

The law hasn t passed Parliament although the Liberals hope to push the bill through by the end of the year.

According to Canadian Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, (equivalent to the US Attorney General) a majority of Canadians favor the planned decriminalization. The fact is that the majority of provincial governments, the majority of provincial legislators and the majority of Canadian law enforcement officials all OPPOSE it.

Alberta Solicitor General Heather Forsyth said the bill tabled in Parliament on Tuesday will give large scale growers an open invitation to crank up marijuana operations as the market expands.

“The concern I have is that when you decriminalize you’re going to get more and more grow operations opening up,” Forsyth said. “B.C. is facing a horrific problem with grow operations and Alberta is in a similar position.”

Assessment:

Since the election of George Bush, Prime Minister Jean Chr tien has adopted an unofficial policy of deliberately taking the most antagonistic position possible in any US-Canada dialogue.

The United States is VERY concerned about the proposed measure and has communicated its position clearly. John Walters, the U.S. drug czar, cautioned the Canadian government that this law would hamper the economic relationship enjoyed between Canada and the United States because of stricter border enforcement.

US opposition to the bill spurred the Chr tien government to new heights of antagonistic rhetoric.

“What assurances can this government give us that its pet project on marijuana isn’t going to jeopardize legitimate trade with the United States?” exclaimed Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper.

Justice Cauchon sneered, “Canada is a different place with different values.”

I would have to take exception to Cauchon s statement. Conceding that Canada is a different place, the average Canadian s values are not too dissimilar to the average Americans.

Canadian politics would be a mystery to Americans (as it is to most Canadians) since Canadians have no direct say in who actually leads the country.

In Canada, national elections are by strict party line. A voter chooses his representative to Parliament. The party with the most representatives becomes the majority and they pick the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister then picks his Cabinet.

As a consequence, the Prime Minister s values reflect the POLITICAL values of the majority party.

That is not the same thing as saying his moral values reflect the values of the average Canadian. The average Canadian doesn t start his day by looking for ways to antagonize Americans. The average Canadian doesn t smoke dope and doesn t want the government telling his kids that it s all right. And finally, the AVERAGE Canadian isn t stupid.

I live within sight of the United States and less than three miles of the second busiest border crossing on the US-Canadian border. Canada exports 85% of its international trade to the United States through border crossings like this one.

Marijuana smuggling from Canada to the United States has already skyrocketed and Washington has made it clear that if the decriminalization goes forward, it will institute a border crack-down, forcing long delays at border crossings already backed up due to increased anti-terror security measures.

Adding anti-drug security means longer delays, increasing shipping costs and possible trade sanctions that will increase the cost of Canadian exports to US consumers and drive down Canada s competitive edge. Stupid.

But again, this is stupidity in keeping with the overall outline of Bible prophecy for the last days. The word sorceries appears five times in the King James Bible, twice in the Old Testament and three times in the New.

The Hebrew word translated as sorceries is ‘kesheph’, which means magic arts. In two other places, ‘kesheph’ is translated as ‘witchcraft’.

In Acts 8:11, the word translated sorceries is from the Greek word magea which also means magic arts or, sorceries.

In the Book of the Revelation the book addressed to the generation that would witness its unfolding we find the two remaining references to sorceries .

Revelation 18:23 tells us, And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.

Revelation 9:21 gives the reasons for the unfolding judgments against an unrepentant and Christ-rejecting world. Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

In both of these cases, the word sorceries is translated from the Greek word pharmakea , which means the use or administration of drugs and is the source of the English word pharmacy .

It’s clear that if John intended to imply that the thefts, fornications and so forth were the result of magic or witchcraft, he would have used a word that MEANS magic or witchcraft. But in all the Scripture, the only place where sorceries is translated from ‘pharmakea’ is in the Book addressed to the last generation.

Note the context of the sorceries that bewitch the last generation before the return of Christ. Deception, murder, fornication and theft.

Compare that to the handmaidens of drug abuse. One cannot illegally use drugs and admit it openly, so a drug abuser lives, by definition, a life of deception and lies. Drugs and drug gangs are responsible for uncounted murders annually. Drugs have turned Columbia into a lawless 19th century frontier.

Illegal drugs are expensive and the vast majority of prostitutes are drug abusers who sell themselves to support their drug habits. Most drug addicts who are not prostitutes are thieves who steal to support their drug habits.

Think about it! Two thousand years ago, the prophet John, in exile on the island of Patmos, wrote that the last generation would be characterized by rampant drug abuse that would result in widespread deception, murder, sexual immorality and theft. And that the nations of the world would eventually embrace it.

Remember that Jesus said that when these things BEGIN to come to pass, our redemption is so close we are to keep looking up.

Guess what, folks. These things are beginning to come to pass.

Nice, Clean Minds

Nice, Clean Minds
Vol: 20 Issue: 28 Wednesday, May 28, 2003

It makes you wonder how Hollywood can keep turning out dirty movies or how there can be a market for them. There just CAN’T be a dirty mind left in America. If you own a TV set and watch network news, your brain has been washed clean and spun dry.

If your favorite network news is ABC, then it has also been neatly folded and put away on a shelf.

The best examples of the application of the Big Lie are usually found in American political stories, since when it comes to politics in America, facts are no barrier to a good story.

‘Spin’ is so pervasive that we even coined a new term to make it more palatable. The media could never admit to brainwashing or disseminating propaganda, but it does give a wink and a nod to the practice of putting a particular ‘spin’ on a story.

But in the end, even the word, ‘spin’, is really an example that demonstrates the role that semantics plays in developing propaganda for use in brainwashing people into believing the unbelievable; specifically because it sounds so unbelievable.

As Hitler explained it in Mein Kampf, the “magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds they more easily fall a victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big.”

“Such a falsehood will never enter their heads and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver, and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick.”

Assessment:

It is not only obvious, but has been stated on more than one occasion, that the liberal media will never forgive George Bush for Election 2000. Here’s how powerful the Big Lie is; there will be some among you who will immediately assume that because I am a conservative Christian, I must be a fan of George Bush and a Republican.

Part of the Big Lie is that if you question the liberal left’s propaganda, you must be a Republican and if you unspin the facts about the president, you must be a blind follower of George Bush.

The tax cut argument makes my case. If you are a Democrat, then you oppose the administration’s tax cuts. You have to. Ask anybody who opposes the tax cuts why they don’t want to have more money in their pockets than they did before, and their eyes will glaze over and they will begin chanting, “It only benefits the rich.”

Think about the absurdity of that thought for a second. If you, Joe Taxpayer, are going to get an extra thousand dollars back from the IRS, what do you care if somebody else who pays more gets more back?

How could millions and millions of hard-working, blue-collar Americans trying to get by in an allegedly bumpy economy OPPOSE being allowed to keep some of their own money? I am not arguing for or against tax relief, just the absurdity of the Big Lie behind it.

Peter Jennings teased his World News Tonight broadcast on May 12 by saying, “When we come back this evening, the states: forced to raise taxes as the federal government cuts taxes.

Very subtle. States are “forced” to raise taxes, as the federal government cuts them. Why are states raising taxes? Take look at the more liberal states, like California.

CBS News spun California’s plight this way. Bob Schieffer set up TIME magazine’s Karen Tumulty, asking, “I was just in California where they re telling me that not only are they facing these huge deficits, but for every five jobs that are lost in America, one of those jobs is in California. The governor out there his approval rating is down to 20 percent. We re seeing other governors with these low approval ratings. Is that because the states are just so starved for money?

Tumulty leapt on the premise crafted by Schieffer; That s right. And while these arguments we re having here in Washington over tax cuts may look sort of abstract to most people in America; it is not abstract when your kid s teacher gets laid off….”

“Libraries are closing, teachers are getting laid off. Gray Davis is in the position of having to decide whether he should deny prosthetic limbs to poor people.

That’s the Big Lie in action. How can the Bush administration cut taxes when big, rich California is so strapped for cash that poor people are going to have go without arms and legs to help see the state through. (Not that California has increased its spending by 98% since 1994).

The liberal propagandists who are leading the charge against tax cuts aren’t opposed to cutting taxes. They are opposed to GEORGE BUSH cutting taxes. Like the opposition to the war with Iraq and the allegations that the administration could have prevented 9/11, the particular issue is a smokescreen for the “selected, not elected” crowd.

Back in 1992, the same liberal media helped get their guy in by looping George Bush the Elder’s campaign promise, “Read my lips. No new taxes!” over and over again after Bush raised federal taxes as a consequence of Gulf War I.

The mainstream opposed tax increases as part of its mantra leading up to Election 1992. Now they are leading the charge against tax cuts leading up to Election 2004. Does this make sense? Only if your brain has been washed clean.

It reminds me of Al Gore’s mind-numbing chant, “every vote should count” while he simultaneously fought tooth and nail in court to exclude Florida’s military absentee ballots that ultimately cost him the election.

To buy the Big Lie, you have to ignore history. Tax relief programs historically result in economic stimulation. Federal tax relief programs stimulated the economic boom in the 1920’s and again in the 1960’s.

While the media is screaming about deficit spending being ‘voodoo economics’, the Recession of the 1970’s was broken by the Recovery of the 1980’s created by Ronald Reagan’s ‘Trickle Down Theory’ that proved tax cuts and deficit spending stimulate, rather than depress, the economy.

Do you see the Big Lie at work here? Everything about the tax cuts plan says one thing, but the Big Lie says it s all an illusion and that things are actually backwards. And it is so successful that a family barely getting by is refusing extra money.

Why? Because the rich will get a bigger check than they will. And who do these people work for? The rich. Yet the administrations argument that tax cuts will promote job growth falls on deaf ears.

In the end, it’s not about tax cuts, or deficit spending or a conspiracy to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor, it s about George Bush.

The Bible says that in the last days, the antichrist will somehow convince the world to subordinate itself to his government. Revelation Chapter 13 explains how he uses the principle of the Big Lie to convince the world that he is a god.

“. . .and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?” (Revelation 13:3b-4)

When asked what will be the sign of His coming, (Matthew 24:3) the FIRST thing Jesus said was, Take heed that no man deceive you.” (Matthew 23:4)

Now you know why.

Heads, Horns and Europe’s Expanding Headache

Heads, Horns and Europe’s Expanding Headache
Vol: 20 Issue: 27 Tuesday, May 27, 2003

The European Union is in the process of expanding its membership from its current fifteen to twenty-five member states. The Convention on the Future of Europe is racing to complete its draft constitution in time for a summit of EU leaders in Greece on June 20. Heading the Convention is former French president Valery Giscard d Estaing so it isn t surprising that almost everybody is crying foul except the French.

Some member states are complaining that the new constitution is being custom-written to serve the interests of the Western European Union.

Elmar Brok, a senior member of the European Parliament, accused d Estaing of riding roughshod over the views of the majority of the 105 Convention members, as well as the majority of the smaller EU member states.

We get the impression we are constantly tilting at windmills, he complained, saying, This is not acceptable to the small member states. Do we want a directorate in Europe where the big six states decide everything? If so, it will be the end of the European Union.

The so-called big six states, Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Spain and Poland, want to see the creation of a long-term president for the European Council. The Council is the supreme body of national leaders within the EU. Currently, the EU presidency rotates every six months among all member states, regardless of size.

The draft would also cap the size of the European Commission, the EU executive which upholds the supranational EU interest, at 15 full members. That would mean that none of the smaller states would even have representatives on the Commission in Brussels.

The EU Commission is also demanding the constitution spell out its expanded powers. The EU Commission wants language included that specifically makes the Brussels executive commission the final authority on all EU matters except common foreign policy and security, which remain the responsibility of the permanent ten members of the Western European Union.

Assessment:

The EU is an effort to create by peace what could not be accomplished in centuries of war the unification of Europe. Ever since the fall of the Roman Empire, Europe has been in a more or less constant state of war with itself.

Dictators like Charlemagne, Napoleon and Hitler all set out to restore Europe to the glory it knew under the Roman Ceasars.

All previous efforts failed. They all tried to restore the empire by force Scripture says differently.

Daniel s description of the ten toes (See Daniel s 70th Week for more) of Nebuchadnezzar s image was that revived Rome would be like iron mixed with miry clay . Daniel also interpreted the meaning of the mixture:

whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. (Daniel 2:43)

Daniel interpreted the legs on Nebuchadnezzar s image as a fourth world empire that would not be destroyed, but would instead collapse and then be reconstituted in the last days.

The two legs were representative of the Roman Empire, which at its zenith had grown so large that it split into two empires. The Western Roman Empire with its capital at Rome, and the Eastern Roman Empire with its capital at Constantinople (modern Ankara, Turkey).

But the king s image only had ten toes, whereas modern Europe has fifteen members now and is squabbling about admitting ten more. But when the elements are separated, it is really a contest between the founding members of the Western European Alliance, whose members are the core members of the European Union.

The WEU is responsible for European common foreign policy and security under the terms of Article 4 of the 1948 Brussels Treaty, which provided for the mutual assistance in maintaining international peace and security”.

The Western European Alliance members are the only full members of the European Commission. The WEU Council closed its membership with the admission of Greece in 1992.

Although the ten-member WEU has largely integrated its functions with the larger European Union, the real power remains in the hands of the Western European Alliance.

That s what the fight is about over the new EU constitution. The complaints being lodged by the smaller EU states is that all the power is concentrated in Western Europe.

European unification will continue to move forward, but not on the French framework, or that of the new members or even according to the framework set out by the original Brussels Treaty.

Daniel is very specific about the details of the revived Roman Empire. Daniel said that the final form of revived Rome will be a configuration of ten nations. Daniel had a dream of the fourth beast, (the Roman Empire) describing it as diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had TEN horns (Daniel 7:8).

Daniel gave details about a split in this final ten-nation power bloc s leadership, saying,

I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. (7:9)

Daniel interpreted the horns and the little horn (Dan 7:24) this way:

And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings

Currently, there are two developing schisms within Europe. There is the one between the emerging EU states and the original ten over who will be in charge.

And there is the second one involving France, Germany and Belgium, whose stance on Iraq put it at odds with NATO over Turkey.

The Iraq war has accelerated the scenario outlined by Daniel (in captivity in Babylon [Iraq] at the time) some 2,500 years ago.

Some might call it coincidence. But it would take considerably more faith to buy the coincidence argument than it does to simply compare today s news to Daniel s prophecies and conclude they are describing the same events from different perspectives.

Watch Europe in the days ahead. Things are beginning to come to pass as Scripture foretold for the last days. And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, Jesus said, we are to look up and lift up our heads as our redemption nears. (Luke 21:28)

I don t know about you, but my neck is really starting to hurt.

The Fear Factor

The Fear Factor
Vol: 20 Issue: 26 Monday, May 26, 2003

The threats keep coming fast and furious — it’s like the US media, in particular. are engaged in a contest to see who can scare the most people with the latest and most stupendous threat.

A truck driver in Ohio was arrested for being part of an al-Qaeda plot to collapse a suspension bridge in the US and possibly blow up an airliner.

In a major intelligence breakthrough, captured al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has been spilling to the feds ever since he was seized in Pakistan March 1, fingered the truck driver, according to Newsweek.

The truck driver, who has not been identified, reportedly told his interrogators that his orders were to procure the tools necessary to loosen the bolts on a suspension bridge. He also told of a plot to blow up an airliner, possibly by driving an explosives-laden cargo truck underneath it before detonating.

The truck driver also revealed the existence of a coming ‘summer offensive’ by al-Qaeda against US targets. Among the targets al-Qaeda is reportedly considering are the nation’s subway systems, according to the latest intelligence.

“It is likely that an attempted terror attack against the U.S. homeland . . . could occur in the next 30 to 90 days,” according to a document obtained by Newsweek.

The CIA and FBI warned that the war on terror was entering a new and more dangerous phase: “an orchestrated spring/summer worldwide offensive.”

According to a top law-enforcement official, the Ohio truck driver is not the only al Qaeda member operating inside the U.S.

“The only thing we can say for certain is that they’re here,” the official told Newsweek. And al-Qaeda’s alleged reorganizational plan includes recruiting Canadians, women, African-Americans and Arabs with “clean passports” as spies and suicide bombers who would have a better chance of slipping through security.

Last week, the United Arab Emirates-based Alsaha.com posted this eerie message:

“Oh brother, further attacks are to come in the next 48 hours. All good Muslims in New York, Boston and other cities on the East Coast should leave.”

Although the 48 hour deadline came and went, the Department of Homeland Security ordered the terror alert level raised from ‘Elevated’ risk to ‘High’. The web posting appeared at the same time as an increase in terrorist ‘chatter’ similar to that which occurred just before the 9/11 strikes.

Assessment:

Since September 11, the United States has been subjected to a barrage of threats, but not a single one of those threats has yet come to fruition.

Last September, the London-based pro-Libyan newspaper al-Alamiyah reported that sources close to al Qaeda had the assets in place in several U.S. states to conduct “devastating attacks” once the signal was given.

However, they had postponed the attacks until after the crisis with Iraq had been resolved, “in order to prevent the United States from using the attacks as a pretext to employ weapons of mass destruction against Iraq.”

This raises the question why al Qaeda would believe that a WMD strike would be the American response of choice to their attack.

There is only one provocation that comes to mind that would evoke the threat of US use of weapons of mass destruction.

The Department of Homeland Security repeatedly warned of a very real danger of a seaborne nuclear attack somewhere along the East Coast.

Is it all hype? The constant barrage of threats without action has led to calls for reevaluating the terror warning system, or scrapping it altogether. Some claim America is becoming too vigilant, warning of a developing police state, while others decry the dangers of growing too complacent.

Only two weeks ago, President Bush hinted that he believed al-Qaeda was ‘finished.’ Then suicide bombers started going off all over the world.

But note the targets and the methodology. None of the targets were militarily significant or of particularly high symbolism. They were largely apartment buildings, cafes, and markets.

Since al-Qaeda’s goal is to foment revolution, blowing up neighborhoods inside targeted countries like Saudi Arabia or Morocco is unlikely to win al-Qaeda much popular support.

And the weapon of choice is unsustainable over the long term.

Probably at no time since the WTC attacks has al-Qaeda needed to demonstrate its capabilities more than it does now. The latest al-Qaeda bombing campaign used up a lot of suicide bombers.

You only get to use a suicide bomber once, and they aren’t that easy to recruit. Suicide bombers like to think they are striking a blow for the cause. Seeing a whole squad of them sacrificed on insignificant targets tends to have a dampening effect on the replacement pool.

That is not to say that this Memorial Day will not come and go without incident. We have no way of knowing how many September 11-style attacks have already been thwarted, like the truck driver and the suspension bridge.

So far, the US has been amazingly effective at preventing new terror strikes. But it has been a combination of hard work and luck. And the fear that America’s luck might run out has the whole country on edge.

Among the signs of the last days are ‘wars and rumors of wars’ on an ever increasing scale of frequency and intensity.

Jesus also said another sign would be that of ‘men’s hearts failing them for fear’ (Luke 21:26) as we witnessed the events ‘coming on the earth’ as the time for His return draws close.

Paul warned of ‘perilous times’ in the last days, warning that cries of ‘peace and safety’ would be punctuated by sudden destruction. (1 Thess 5:3)

It would be impossible to argue that these things aren’t beginning to come to pass before our eyes. The increase in frequency and intensity has shot up noticeably since the world entered the 21st century.

Fear is the operative word in today’s world. Even in places like America. Until September 11, American wars were fought somewhere else.

The world lives in fear of nuclear dictators, chemical and biological weapons, emerging plagues and viral infections, contaminated food and water, and if that isn’t enough, there s always the ever-popular fear of annihilation by a killer asteroid. How much is enough?

“And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. . . Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. (Luke 21:26,32)

Iran Next ‘Regime Change’ Target

Iran Next ‘Regime Change’ Target
Vol: 20 Issue: 25 Sunday, May 25, 2003

Shortly after the September 11 attacks, President Bush made his now-famous Axis of Evil comment, naming Iraq, Iran and North Korea as its points. Iraq has been removed from the list, and the Bush administration evidently intends to remove the remaining members, one by one.

It seems equally clear that the White House has already prioritized the order of removal — and Iran is next on the list. The White House is stalling the North Koreans not negotiating, not responding in any meaningful way and carefully keeping Pyongyang on the back burner for now.

On the other hand, Washington announced it is severing what diplomatic and political ties it has with Tehran and has let it be known that it is considering public and private actions to destabilize the Iranian government with an eye toward effecting regime change there.

Bush administration officials are scheduled to meet Tuesday to discuss strategies concerning how to deal with the Islamic Republic that it accuses of harboring al-Qaeda terrorists.

The Iranians have launched their own PR campaign (with the aid of ABC News) to convince the US that it is another victim of US disinformation. It appears ABC News is ready to cooperate as fully with the ayatollahs as it was with Iraqi Ba athists.

ABC s report of the US decision to cut ties with Tehran bore the headline, Iran Says It Takes Fight Against Al Qaeda Seriously and was full of quotes from Iranian officials denying any cooperation with terrorism, while it prefaced each of the US allegations against with qualifiers like allegedly or reportedly .

The Washington Post says that the State Department is evidently willing to go along with the Pentagon s proposed policy of destabilization, in spite of State s reservations that the level of popular discontent in Iran is not as widespread as the Pentagon believes it is.

Assessment:

Although the North Koreans have nuclear weapons now, and are pursuing a program of obtaining more, the US is more worried about Iran s burgeoning nuclear ambitions than it is Pyongyang s existing arsenal.

While North Korea is as much a terrorist state as Iran, the North Koreans are motivated by profit rather than ideology. Pyongyang facilitates terrorists in exchange for cash.

Iran is one of the principle suppliers of that cash, as well as one of the principle purveyors of terrorist ideology.

The North Koreans don t sponsor terror in the sense Iran does there are no North Korean-backed terrorist groups, whereas the phrase Iranian-backed is almost an official part of Hezbollah s name.

Iran had a hand in the bombing of the US barracks in Beirut in 1983. Last year, a former 20 year CIA operations officer published a book entitled See No Evil .

Bob Baer was badly shaken by the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in 1983, in which several of his buddies were killed. His obsession for the next 15 years was to figure out who had done it, and how.

As he kept looking for the answers, he was astonished that the CIA apparently didn’t know very much about it, and didn’t seem to obsess about it nearly as much as he did. But he kept at it, and finally arrived at a minor epiphany: In my last months (at CIA),” he tells us,

“I unraveled the…bombing, at least to my satisfaction: Iran ordered it, and a Fatah network carried it out.”

The Beirut bombing was a consequence of the unholy alliance between the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the Palestine Liberation Organization.

That alliance between Iran and Palestinian terrorism continued even after the Oslo Agreement rehabilitated the PLO into the Palestinian Authority.

Remember the Karine A, loaded with fifty tons of explosives and weapons from Iran headed for Palestinian territory?

Baer s book also revealed that, by at least 1997, the CIA knew the Pasdaran’s command structure inside and out, just as it knew that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Rafsanjani approved every terrorist operation to come out of Iran.”

“As I looked at the evidence in front of me, the conclusion was unavoidable: The Islamic Republic of Iran had declared a secret war against the United States, and the United States had chosen to ignore it. – ( See No Evil )

If Baer s allegations are true, then the CIA knew all this at least five years ago, but either nobody told Bill Clinton, or he chose to look the other way.

In any case, the cat s out of the bag now.