Another Gospel . . . Another Jesus

Another Gospel . . . Another Jesus
Vol: 54 Issue: 18 Saturday, March 18, 2006

For an alleged fraud, there sure are a lot of religions desperate to attach the Name of Jesus Christ to their doctrine in some way.

Islam ‘adopted’ Jesus (Isa), not as the Son of God and Savior of mankind, but as a ‘Prophet’ of almost-equal rank with Mohammed. By this device, Islam can therefore claim that Jesus Christ of the New Testament was really a Muslim.

But the Koran claims that Isa was born in the normal way, had a normal marriage, normal kids, lived a normal life and died a normal death. ‘Isa’ is another Jesus. Isa holds neither the keys to Heaven nor Hell and can save no one.

Buddhists, who deny the existence of a personal creator god, make room in their theology for Jesus Christ. Buddhism offers no form of redemption, forgiveness, no heavenly hope, or a final judgment to those practicing its system.

But Buddhists claim that Jesus was Himself a Buddhist. “Jesus Lived in India and The Original Jesus: The Buddhist Sources of Christianity by Holger Kersten are both popular books among Western Buddhists.

And Nicholas Notovitch allegedly discovered scrolls in a monastery in Hemis claiming Jesus traveled to the east while a young man and studied the scriptures of several faiths, including Buddhism.

But the Buddhist Jesus is not the Jesus of the Gospel, Who taught in the Temple in Jerusalem at age 12. This is another Jesus, and another gospel.

Jehovah’s Witnesses lay claim to Jesus Christ, but also deny His Deity, teaching that Jesus was a created being who was ‘a god’ but not God Himself.

The zeal of the Jehovah’s Witnesses to win new converts puts most Christian efforts to shame. But the JW’s ‘Jesus’ is not God, and salvation comes by a selective works-based process in which only 144,000 Witnesses will share.

(There are modern revisions of this JW doctrine in order to maintain membership, but founder Charles Taze Russell was dogmatic about salvation being limited to 144,000 believers.)

In any case, the ‘Jesus’ of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is another Jesus.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints sounds way more Christian than its shorter appellation, ‘Mormon’. Mormon missionaries are as dedicated to preaching their gospel and winning new converts as are the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

But their Jesus is another Jesus. The Mormon Jesus isn’t the Son of God, but a Son of a god, a god who was once a man living on the planet Kronos.

Following the recipe for godhood (he later transmitted to Joseph Smith in Palmyra, New York on mysterious golden tablets sometime around 1830,) the man from Kronos became the same god as God the Father of Jesus. Observant Mormons will eventually get their own universes to be gods in.

The Mormon Jesus reestablished his Kingdom in Independence, Missouri, before changing his mind and relocating his headquarters to Salt Lake City, Utah. His spirit-brother’s name is Lucifer.

Like the others, neither their gospel nor their Jesus offers hope of salvation.


But making room for Jesus is good marketing if one want’s to convince others to join up. Jesus is the most popular Name brand in human history.

Hordes of bloodthirsty Papists engaged hordes of equally bloodthirsty Muslim Saracens during the Crusades, slaughtering each other over whether followers of Jesus or Isa would control Jerusalem.

Each slaughtered protesting Jews with equal abandon. Both in the name of a different gospel and another Jesus.

The Crusaders butchering Jews wholesale as punishment for the Crucifixion were not following the Gospel or the Jesus Who said from the Cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

But attaching the Name of Jesus to your religion is great advertising. Like having Mandy Pantinkin advertising medicine to lower your cholesterol. First off, you didn’t know you needed something that lowers your cholesterol until Mandy told you so in his kindly, but authoritative way.

Before you know it, you are off to ask your doctor if a product that cures something you don’t know you have and causes flatulence, insomnia, flaking skin, male pattern baldness, uneven tire wear and leaky plumbing is right for YOU!

All the while fully aware that Mandy Pantinkin is really an actor who plays an FBI profiler on ‘Criminal Minds,’ knows no more about pharmacology than you do, and probably doesn’t have a cholesterol problem either.

But he seems like such a nice guy! So does Jesus, except that the REAL Jesus’ endorsement is too expensive. Embracing the REAL Jesus means becoming a REAL Christian.

Islam would have to give up the sword. Buddha would have to give up pantheism and all that meditation stuff. The Watchtower Bible Society would have to give up its publishing company. The Mormons would have to give up both polygamy here and godhood in the hereafter.

It’s cheaper to just invent a fake Jesus and hope nobody looks at the ad too closely.

The Bible make reference to another gospel and another Jesus, not obliquely, but head-on. The Apostle Paul, under the inspiration of God, warned bluntly;

“For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him,” Paul warned the Corinthians. But, he continued;

“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” (2nd Corinthians 11:4,13-15)

To the Galatians, he wrote, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

To underscore his point, Paul repeated himself: “As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:6-9)

The various claimants to the Name of Christ deny His Deity, His Virgin Birth, His Resurrection, His purchase of Redemption and His offer of salvation by grace through faith.

But they covet His Name like no other.

Mohammed is claimed by Islam alone. No other religion claims Buddha as their own except Buddhists. Charles Taze Russell and Joseph Smith are revered only within the sects they founded.

Their Jesus cannot save. He has no power. They follow another Jesus, and different gospel.

Of the REAL Jesus, the Bible says, “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a Name which is above every Name.” (Phillipians 2:9)

Two thousand years ago, six hundred years before Mohammed, 1800 years before Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell, and before the modern Western Buddhists discovered Jesus, the Apostle Peter said of the Name of Jesus;

“Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above; Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other Name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)

This is something one wouldn’t ordinarily consider fulfilled Bible prophecy. It is as normal as air to a Christian. Of course, the Name of Jesus is above every other Name, if one is a Christian living in 21st Western culture.

But when Peter and Paul trod the earth, Christianity was a tiny breakaway Jewish cult. Today, the Name of Jesus is known throughout all the world, above all other names, above all other religious figures, above all other religions.

His is a Name claimed by all, as a necessary, if not critical element, in any claim to religious authenticity.

Significantly, the only major religion that refuses any claim to Christ is Judaism — another fulfillment of Bible prophecy often overlooked.

Paul was himself a Jew, and a Pharisee, and had a great love for his people. Indeed, he offered to exchange his own salvation for that of the Jews. (Romans 9:3)

But 2000 years ago, this Pharisaic Jew turned Apostle prophesied that Israel would reject Jesus until His Return. As they have, to this point in history, Name recognition notwithstanding.

“For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” (Romans 11:25)

The Gospel of Jesus is under assault from all directions by smooth-talking apologists preaching another gospel and another Jesus because they need the Power of Jesus’ Name to endorse their product.

The reason is because Jesus is real. He is alive, He is God, and the world instinctively knows it. It doesn’t matter what they teach, or what they believe, or how incredible it is.

What does this all mean? It is powerful evidence, when you take the time to consider it as evidence, and impossible for a skeptic to refute.

Need proof?

Attach the Name Jesus to a religion that practices polygamy in Utah as a means to attaining godhood in another galaxy and bingo!

Next thing you know, there are two nice young fellas from Salt Lake City wearing white shirts and black ties knocking at your door to ask if you know the ‘rest’ of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The first thing you’ll find is that you hear lots and lots about Jesus, but not so much about Kronos. Why?

The Name Jesus means instant religious credibility, just as His eyewitnesses predicted.

Because they saw the REAL Jesus. As will we.

“For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.” (2nd Timothy 1:12)

“Speaking Lies In Hypocrisy”

“Speaking Lies In Hypocrisy”
Vol: 54 Issue: 17 Friday, March 17, 2006

In America, violating the Ninth Commandment is not only wrongful behavior, under certain circumstances, it is also a crime.

Of course, whether or not bearing false witness is criminal behavior depends a lot on one’s political affiliation. One of America’s two largest political parties is EXPECTED to lie.

Point out an obvious lie, like, “I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky,” and they’ll provide new definitions for ‘sex’, new definitions for ‘lie’ and even new definitions for ‘is’ — and when all other avenues are exhausted, a new definition for ‘honesty;’ “Everybody lies about sex.”

America’s other political party is held to a much different standard. ‘Honesty’ is redefined to match the definition of ‘omniscience’.

Take the Iraq War. Prior to the invasion, both parties were unanimous in their assessment of the threat of Iraqi WMD. That assessment didn’t change until AFTER the invasion failed to uncover massive stockpiles of prohibited weapons.

Here is the case for removing Saddam Hussein as first presented to the American people, as it was laid out BEFORE Saddam’s fall.

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists,” said the president.

“If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.”

The Secretary of State argued that the sanctions weren’t working. “There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It’s just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”

The Secretary of Defense told a press conference; “The United Nations has determined that Saddam should not possess chemical or biological or nuclear weapons, and what we have is the obligation to carry out the U.N. declaration.”

Leading up to the 2003 invasion, the administration’s critics argued for continued reliance on the UN inspectors that had spent most of the past decade playing hide-and-seek with Saddam’s military assets.

That won’t work, argued the National Security Advisor. “It is ineffectual; it is not able to do its job by its own judgment. . . It doesn’t provide much deterrence against WMD activity.”

Said one senior senator in support of the administration’s case for war with Saddam:

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.”

“For the United States and Britain, an Iraq equipped with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons under the leadership of Saddam Hussein is a threat that almost goes without description,” said another hawk, taking aim at the split in the international community.

“France, on the other hand, has long established economic and political relationships within the Arab world, and has had a different approach.”

Were all those officials lying about the case for war? The Left says yes.

The Right points out that both sides believed that Saddam had WMD until after the invasion, so the president couldn’t have been lying. Not so, claims the Left.

Bill Clinton accused the Bush administration of ‘cooking intelligence’ to make a case for war.

Madeline Albright called Bush an outright liar, as did former Defense Secretary William Cohen, disgraced National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, former Senate Majority Leader (and now private citizen) Tom Daschle, and failed presidential candidate John Kerry, (who staked his entire candidacy on Bush’s dishonesty.)

The ‘lies’ quoted above in support of regime change in Iraq were made in 1998 by Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, William Cohen, Sandy Berger, Tom Daschle and John Kerry.


None of the above quotes are a secret. All of them can be found in the archives of the same mainstream media outlets engaged in the unspoken conspiracy to turn the Clinton administration’s truth into the Bush administration’s lies.

It HAD to be a conspiracy — the mainstream media has access to their own archives. They HAD to know that there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the intelligence cited in 1998 by the Clinton administration and the intelligence citing in 2003 by the Bush administration.

In 1998, the intel was being used to justify a massive bombing campaign against Saddam Hussein (at the same time the Monica Lewinsky scandal was breaking).

Operation Desert Fox didn’t sufficiently distract public attention, but fortunately, Slobodon Milosevic was conducting an ethnic-cleansing campaign in the former Yugoslavia.

The UN refused to intervene, saying UN involvement would violate its charter. But Yugoslavia was in Europe’s back yard, so Clinton was able to get NATO to participate in what the UN called an ‘illegal’ war.

Yugoslavia’s woes were in no way affecting US interests in the region and were no threat to continued US security. It was a war so obviously contrived as a distraction from Clinton’s legal problems that it was dubbed the “Wag the Dog War” after a movie with an eerily similar plot line.

To the end, lying about sex, contriving a case for two separate bombing campaigns, lying in a sworn deposition, lying to the grand jury and repeatedly lying to the American people were vigorously defended by the political left.

Democratic activists swore in the aftermath of Election 2000 to prove that the Republicans were bigger liars than the Democrats.

In a worldview in which it is assumed that everybody lies about something, lying, in and of itself, is less important than the subject about which the lie is told.

So being wrong about Saddam’s WMD is an ‘error in judgment’ if you are John Kerry or Bill Clinton, but it is an bald-faced lie if you are George Bush.

The liberals on the Left KNOW that they are lying when they accuse Bush of lying. The only other explanation is massive short-term memory loss.

And even if Clinton/Gore/Kerry/Daschle/NYTIMES/LATimes/Washington Post and all their advisors, editors and reporters all had their memories wiped clean by a Democratic memory virus, the archives are still there.

The Left has called George Bush a liar, a war criminal, accused him of violating the Constitution, and some are even kicking around the word ‘impeachment’.

Recently-released Iraqi government memos detailing a connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda are either ignored or published on the back pages of the mainstream media.

The same for both recordings and official memos that prove that even Saddam’s generals on the eve of invasion thought Saddam possessed stockpiles of WMD.

Eyewitness testimony before the Senate by a former Iraqi general that he witnessed the transfer of huge WMD stockpiles to Syria prior to the invasion has been all but suppressed by the mainstream media and the political left.

Millions upon millions of Iraqi intelligence documents, as well as almost 20,000 hours of recordings made of Saddam’s official meetings languish, unexamined and untranslated, in a warehouse in Doha.

Very few mainstream media types have even acknowledged their existence, let alone sought permission to examine the evidence.

Is there no obligation to know the truth before dubbing someone else a liar? Not if one is happy with his version of the truth, in this case, that Republicans are bigger liars than Democrats.

Divorce yourself from politics for a second, and revert back to being an American, and a Christian, and look at this one more time. For five years, America has been building its reputation as a selfish, oil-hungry behemoth willing to lie, cheat, steal and torture as part of its oil-mad foreign policy.

Those perpetuating the myth either don’t know or don’t care that the rest of the world doesn’t see it as a Republican-Democratic issue.

The enemy isn’t partisan. Our enemies remember that Bill Clinton said the same things before he sent cruise missiles into Baghdad that George Bush said before he sent troops five years later.

Our enemies believe everything they read in the mainstream about the Bush administration, but to them, they are reading about America, not Republicans. The world is experiencing an unprecented wave of anti-American sentiment, not anti-Republican sentiment.

The political accusation that the administration lied is not only itself a lie, but a lie of incredible hypocrisy. Those perpetuating it cannot help but know the collateral damage they are causing to America in their political war with George Bush.

The only other conclusion is that they believe George Bush is a greater threat than that posed by al-Qaeda. In fact, Useful Idiots like Teddy Kennedy have said so in so many words. Even if Kennedy believes that to be true, consider this.

Benedict Arnold felt the same way about George Washington and King George. Because it just so happened that America was at war with King George, the name Benedict Arnold is synonymous with ‘traitor’.

“This know also, that IN THE LAST DAYS, perilous times shall come. For men shall be . . . Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God. . .” (2nd Timothy 3:1-2,4)

In his 2nd Letter to the Thessalonians, Paul was addressing a heresy that had entered the Church at Thessolonika, specifically that the Rapture had happened and the Thessalonians had been left behind.

Paul explained about the coming antichrist, the bodyguard of lies that will accompany him, and the willingness of the public to believe “the Lie.” Paul assured the Thessalonians that time had not yet come, because first the world had to be conditioned to receive him.

“And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2nd Thessalonians 2:11-12)

‘Bush lied’ is NOT the ‘strong delusion’ Paul said would blind the world to the true identity of the antichrist after the Rapture.

The story here isn’t the capacity of a politician to lie, but the capacity of the public to willingly accept a lie they know is a lie because they prefer it to the truth.

Paul said the last days of the Church Age would be noteworthy for the complete breakdown of social morals accompanying them.

Paul pointed out that such things as treason, false claims of religious faith, false accusations, despisers of those that are good (“goody-two shoes Bush” is a worse liar than Bill Clinton”) and the universal willingness to accept a lie because they prefer it would be some of the outstanding characteristics of the professing church in the final days of the Church Age.

The inescapable fact is that it is a defining characteristic of this generation in what the world has dubbed the “world’s most Christian country.”

If Americans didn’t prefer to choose who lied to them, there would be no such thing as either a ‘liberal’ or a ‘conservative’ media.

But there is. Not because Americans don’t expect to be lied to. They just like to choose their favorite liar.

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in THE LATTER TIMES, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.” (1st Timothy 4:1-2)

Uncommon Valor, Unsung Heroes

Uncommon Valor, Unsung Heroes
Vol: 54 Issue: 16 Thursday, March 16, 2006

The New York Daily news reported a war protest concert called “Bring ‘Em Home Now” headlined by a bunch of musicians I never heard of, noting that Cindy Sheehan was an invited guest and that Jeanne Garafalo plans to broadcast her TV program from the concert.

Interestingly, I ran a Google news search of the concert and got four hits. One was a music site in the UK, two were local New York-area papers, and the fourth was a website called ‘alArab Online’.

The Dixie Chicks are making their way back up the country music charts with a new anti-war album recanting their tearful apology for making anti-war statements while on tour in London.

The new album, “Not Ready To Make Nice” slams the administration and the war anew, noted al Jazeera.

George Clooney got an Oscar for ‘Syriana’ — an antiwar film in which America was the heavy and the terrorists were the heroes.

A Kansas-based protest group regularly pickets military funerals, carrying signs like “Thank God for IEDs” and Thank God for Dead Soldiers”.

Public support for the war in Iraq in waning, as is public support for the war on terror. The Bush administration’s job-approval rating dropped to 36% — an all-time low.

A recent poll conducted by the polling firm of Tarrance and Reihle found that just 54% of Republicans trust Bush.

A solid majority of Americans now say the war in Iraq was not worth fighting – 57 percent in the latest ABC News poll.

And, despite months of assurances by the president that he has a strategy for victory, 65 percent of those surveyed by ABC on March 2-5 said the Bush administration does not have “a clear plan for handling the situation in Iraq.”

The Islamic press is filled with optimistic forecasts of how much longer the administration will be able to hold out against domestic opposition, noting gleefully that the administration has been ‘unable’ to prevent the damage caused by ‘sectarian violence’ forecasting that Iraq’s impending civil war will sink the US effort to rebuild Iraq.

The steady drumbeat of incomprehensible horrors; foreign kidnappings, beheaded hostages, military casualties and domestic political posturing has all but sapped America’s will to stay the course.

The Useful Idiots don’t understand Marines. The Marine Creed gives them nightmares:

“This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is MINE. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. My rifle without me is useless.”

“Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will…”

“My rifle and myself know that what counts in war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our bursts, nor the smoke we make. We know it is the hits that count. We will hit…”

“My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strengths, its parts, its accessories, its sights, and its barrel. I will ever guard it against the ravages of weather and damage. I will keep my rifle clean and ready, even as I am clean and ready. We will become part of each other. We will…”

“Before God I swear this creed. My rifle and myself are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life.”

“So be it, until there is no enemy, but PEACE.”


I spend a lot of time around active-duty Marines, many of whom have served several combat tours in Iraq. I find it fascinating that returning Marines are universally astonished at how the conduct of the war is portrayed in the US media.

Marines come home with memories like those of 1st Lt. Brian M. Stann, who was awarded the Silver Star yesterday at Camp Lejeune for his actions and bravery during Operation Matador last year in Iraq.

Stann accepted the award on behalf of his Marines, saying, This award represents my guys. . . It s an insight to what my men did over there. There were a lot of our guys who received awards from our group when we were out there, not just me.

Stann was platoon leader with the 2nd Mobile Assault Brigade when his unit was assigned to take a bridge near Karabilah. The battle took six days from May 8 to May 14 and involved three different assaults. On the third attempt, his unit was ambushed.

Stann was in a 360-degree fight and was setting up casualty evacuation points after they were hit by suicide IEDs. He led his platoon through over 30 rocket-propelled grenade attacks, multiple machine guns firing, and improvised explosive devices detonating all around him.

“You can forget all the other medals; I just wanted the award that said 42 out of 42 men came home safely, Stann said at the award ceremony. And we all came home, so mission accomplished.

Stann’s award came the day after Captain Frank Diorio was awarded the Bronze Star for his actions with Company I, 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment in Husaybah, Iraq from February to September 2005. During that period, Diorio led his company in over 275 engagements at Camp Gannon firm base.

Like Stann, Diorio did not take all the credit for his company s success in Iraq. The images of my Marines fighting together as a company will stay with me for ever, he said.

This is India Company s award.

Marine Cpl. Dale A. Burger Jr. was honored with the Silver Star this week, as well.

While in Iraq during the second battle of Fallujah, Burger s battalion was involved in intense house-to-house fighting. Burger s squad leader was injured during the fighting, and Burger stepped up to assume the squad leader s duties.

While leading an assault against a fairly large group of insurgents held up in a building, he was wounded and evacuated for medical treatment. Three days later, Burger volunteered to return to his Marines and continue to fight by their side despite his injuries.

Burger was so eager to return to his Marines, he showed up with no gear and no weapon.

After returning, Burger s platoon was involved in yet another firefight, during which he came upon three critically wounded Marines. Burger showed remarkable heroism and valor by charging into the house to recover the fallen Marines, according to his Silver Star citation.

While returning fire, Cpl. Burger was killed by an enemy bullet. According to Cpl. Burger’s mother, her son would have been embarrassed by all the pomp and circumstance.

“He s probably saying, They’re making too much of nothing because I was just doing my job, she said.

With such men as these, how can we be losing? Take heart, Leatherneck! The Useful Idiots only THINK they are winning – er, or we are losing, er, or something.

As for the rest of us, we know better. Semper Fi, Marines!

“Until there is no enemy, but PEACE.”

Note to the Members:

It’s always something. I fired up my computer and Windows XP told me my computer configuration had changed beyond whatever Microsoft considers acceptable limits and my operating system was about to be deactivated.

(In fact, nothing had been changed, but I still had to go through the whole process to get it fixed.)

Eventually, after going through twenty minutes of tape recorded instructions, I got connected to some guy in India somewhere, (who seemed quite annoyed with me for bothering him,) but we eventually got the problem resolved.

Some guy once observed, “If a Rolls Royce were built like Windows, it would cost a hundred dollars, get five hundred miles to the gallon, and every few months, would drive itself into a brick wall, killing everyone inside.” Smart guy.

Sorry for the delay.

The Mystery of Iniquity

The Mystery of Iniquity
Vol: 54 Issue: 15 Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Adolph Hitler used the state education system to turn what had been the most sophisticated and cultured nation in Europe into the most bloodthirsty military regime in modern history in a single generation.

After the first World War, he captured the hearts and minds of parents. Once they elected him Chancellor in 1933, he used the state’s educational system to steal the minds of their children.

Nazi-educated schoolchildren were taught Hitler was a god. Each school-day began with a state-mandated prayer to der Fuehrer. Family loyalty became secondary to loyalty to the Fuehrer. Children routinely denounced their parents.

As the children got older, their indoctrination was continued in state programs like the Hitler Youth. Each graduation day, another crop of youthful fanatics were absorbed into the state military machine.

Using the educational system, it took Hitler only 20 years to indoctrinate an entire generation so completely it could shovel 12 million people into ovens.

During the heydey of Soviet Communism, Russian citizens were among the best-educated in the world. One of the first social programs the Soviets instituted after the Revolution was free, compulsory education in the state educational system.

Entire generations of Soviet citizens were taught that the Soviet Union’s worker’s paradise was the envy of the civilized world. It was a point of national pride that every modern technology was a Soviet invention.

Soviet schoolchildren learned the East-West Cold War was due to Western envy of Soviet life and Western efforts to steal Soviet technology.

In 1932, William Foster, the chairman of the US Communist Party published a book, “Toward a Soviet America’, that indirectly outlined the Communist strategy as it then-successfully being implemented by the Stalin regime.

In it, Foster called for a U.S. Dept. of Education, the teaching of evolution, elimination of nationalism and religion in schools, the teaching of internationalism, the use of the Pavlovian method (direct instruction) on the students, and so on.

Ultimately, the Soviet Union crumbled from within, not-coincidentally after Western news feeds began broadcasting images of full Western supermarkets and modern Western life on the other side of The Wall.

Once the Soviets lost control of the state propaganda system to technological advances it couldn’t contain, the political system’s collapse was a foregone conclusion.

But most of Foster’s principles were already incorporated into Marxist ideology, repackaged and introduced into the American education system as ‘progressive’ education.

One can trace the progression of Marxist ideology through the American education system. The REALLY radical Marxist ‘revolutionaries’ of the Sixties grew up to become university professors in the Eighties.

Marxism became a hot item, and scarcely any academic department in the humanities and social sciences felt it could carry on without one or two Marxists on the faculty.

College protests became a thing of the past, mainly because the protestors were now in charge of the colleges. Liberal educators freely proselytized Marxism, feminism, Greensim, deconstructionism, and other isms, from Islamism to anti-Americanism and beyond.

The Marxist ethics of the 1960’s came into its own in the 1990’s. Longhaired professors in graying beards delivered their lectures wearing blue jeans and faded old shirts. They became friends with their students, eschewing traditional titles and conducting classes on a first-name basis.

They saw themselves as student mentors rather than teachers, and taught the ‘values’ of questioning and subverting traditional standards, openly espousing various activist agendas as part of the student’s ‘education’.

Ivy-League schools like Yale and Harvard turn out dedicated Marxists with each graduating class, many of whom go on to pass on those principles to the next generation of students.

Sadly, the one thing history teaches us about man is that man learns nothing from history.


The media uproar over high-school geography teacher Jay Bennish’s classroom comments as begun to die down, now that Bennish has been returned to the classroom.

For those having just awakened from a coma, a quick recap: Jay Bennish is a product of the evolved educational system of the 1990’s.

According to one of the parents, on the first day, Bennish announced to the class that Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” was going to be a part of the GEOGRAPHY curriculum.

According to a recording made by one of his students of Bennish’s assessment of Bush’s State of the Union speech, Bennish told his 10th grade class;

“Sounds a lot like the things Adolf Hitler used to say.” “Bush is threatening the whole planet.” “[The] U.S. wants to keep the world divided.”

Then he asks his class, “Who is probably the most violent nation on the planet?” before preempting guesswork by shouting out his own answer: “The United States!”

True to his promise to include Marxism as part of the curriculum, Bennish gave the students the “definition” of capitalism — telling them that “capitalism is at odds with humanity, at odds with caring and compassion and at odds with human rights.”

The 10th graders were taught by their teacher that; “the U.S. has engaged in “7,000 terrorist attacks against Cuba,” together with equally anti-American propaganda — as part of the unsuspecting student’s compulsory, state-sponsored education.

Bennish became an instant media darling. He was all over CNN. Criticism soon gave way to deep, thoughtful analysis of academic free speech, the threat of McCarthyism and the right of the students to hear ‘both sides’.

Finally, the media agreed that ‘both sides’ is Bennish’s side and ummm, well, everybody knows the ‘other’ side, so why waste the student’s time?

The Aurora, Colorado Overland High School District did too, and Bennish returned to his job of shaping the next generation of Marxists, severely punishing Bennish with the public criticism that Bennish’s “practice and deportment need growth and refinement.”

Paul described the social conditions in which the antichrist will find an eager electorate when his time arrives;

“For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof:” (2nd Timothy 3:2-5)

Unlike the brainwashed Nazi and Soviet generations who had Hitler and Stalin to follow, the latest generations of state-educated Marxists have no single ideological leader around which to galvanize.

Just traditional principles to oppose and socialist experiments to offer in exchange. They oppose traditional principles like patriotism, the traditional family, religious faith, traditional culture and social standards, religious-based morals, home schooling, etc.

They favor gay rights, abortion rights, freedom from religion, globalism, educational indoctrination in secular humanist theology like evolution and liberalism, arguing any social breakdown is the fault of the religious right attempting to force its values on an unwilling society.

All they really need is an ideological leader around which to stage their ‘revolution’. Right now, we are at Stage One. The ‘mystery of iniquity is already at work,’ indoctrinating unsuspecting children under the guise of compulsory ‘education’.

The rest of the world is already in its post-Christian era, and liberal America is anxious to follow its lead.

Once the Rapture eliminates the opposition in Red State ‘JesusLand’, there will be nothing to stand in the way.

“For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only He who now letteth will let, until He be taken out of the way. And THEN SHALL THAT Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the Spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming.” (2nd Thessalonians 2:7-8)

“Like a James Bond Story”

“Like a James Bond Story”
Vol: 54 Issue: 14 Tuesday, March 14, 2006

If Adolph Hitler has a useful historical legacy, it is to serve as the benchmark standard for evil personified. Hitler is history’s boogeyman, responsible for the death of twelve million people, half of them Jews, and the architect of the infamous ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Question.’

That isn’t to say that Hitler was the world’s worst tyrant, or even the most evil tyrant of the 20th century. Compared with Stalin, Hitler was an amateur. Stalin’s gulags absorbed hundreds of millions over the years.

Historians estimate Stalin ordered the deaths of between twenty and thirty millions. It was Josef Stalin who gave history the quote; “One death is a tragedy. A million deaths is a statistic.”

Stalin out-murdered Hitler, but Adolph Hitler’s evil was so unique, so chilling, and so direct that history shudders at the very name, Adolph Hitler.

Stalin was an atheist. He had no beef with any ‘mythical’ god nor any faith in a ‘mythical’ devil. His evil was the purely pragmatic kind, whereas Adolph Hitler was a spiritualist.

Hitler’s evil was a direct and conscious assault on God. He was an accomplished occultist whose Third Reich Nazism became a national religious cult. Schoolchildren addressed grace before meals to the Fuehrer; they offered their bedtime prayers to Adolph Hitler.

SS troops swore a religious blood oath to Adolph Hitler personally, Hitler took his theology around ancient Germanic Aryan mythology but modeled his forces after the Knights Templar of the Dark Ages.

Unlike Stalin, Hitler’s goal wasn’t the subjugation of his empire by the pragmatic application of terror against dissidents. Hitler’s goal was the destruction of God’s Chosen People. Adolph Hitler took God on as directly as the Bible says the coming antichrist will do.

His evil was so overtly demonic that, while the 20th century is littered with Hitler lookalikes, any comparison is only superficial.


That being said, Hitler and Stalin got a new roommate last week when the Serbian dictator with the funny name shuffled off this mortal coil from his prison cell in the Hague last week.

Slobodon Milosevic was the dictator of Serbia, and he was every bit as bad as Bill Clinton said he was, (despite the fact Clinton’s principle reason for the 1998 Serbian War was to draw attention away from Monica Lewinsky.)

Slobo drew all the inevitable comparisons to Hitler as Clinton made his case for war, but comparisons with Stalin would have been more appropriate.

Although the UN opposed Slobo’s removal, NATO turned him over to the UN for trial for war crimes.

(The Hague’s trial of Slobodon Milosevic was the main reason that Saddam is being tried in Iraq — Milosevic had been on trial for eight years when he died and the trial was expected to continue for at least two more years)

It was during the Serbian war that the silent coup d`etat effectively handed Boris Yeltsin’s government over to a previously-unknown former KGB officer named Vladimir Putin.

Russia and Serbia were traditional allies, and Milosevic and Yeltsin were old pals and newly-reformed Communists who both ascended to power as a consequence of the breakup of the Soviet Union. (They did ‘deals’ together.)

When NATO invaded in 1998, Yeltsin’s refusal to come to the aid of a traditional ally infuriated Kremlin hardliners, who offered Yeltsin a choice between a nice pension or a corruption trial.

Slobo knew where a lot of the bodies were buried. The Kremlin had been trying to get Slobo out of the Hague and into Russia under the ruse that Milosevic wasn’t being properly treated for his high blood pressure.

UN prosecutors opposed the transfer, saying they feared that once Slobo went to Russia, he wouldn’t come back.

When Milosevic died, the Russians indirectly accused the UN of poisoning him. Milosevic had written a letter to the Russian government last week saying that on March 7, “he received a report that “an extremely strong drug” was found in his blood and that doctors were treating him wrongly to silence him,” according to his lawyer.

The truth behind Slobodon Milosevic’s death in a prison cell takes some of the sting out of the fact his death allowed him to escape justice, (although only on this side of eternity).

The UN didn’t want to silence Milosevic. The Kremlin did.

That is why Moscow tried to get Milosevic transferred to Russia for treatment. The report Milosevic cited of the ‘extremely strong drug’ found in his system was part of an elaborate scam to get him transferred to Russia.

Milosevic had previously refused to take his high blood pressure medication, so he was forced to take it under supervision.

The medication prescribed wasn’t working, which made his UN-appointed doctors suspicious. Blood tests showed Milosevic was also taking a second drug that neutralized the effect of the medication.

Here is where it gets interesting. The drug found in Milosevic’s system is called rifampicin.

It is extremely difficult to get, since it is used primarily to treat tuberculosis. TB cases have to be reported to the World Health Organization, so prescribing the drug means producing a TB patient.

And rifampicin is extremely hard to use.

According to a UN doctor interviewed by the New York Times,

“The provider had to know what the effect of rifampicin was on other drugs, that it is not normally detected in toxic screenings, unless you look for it,” he said.

“He had to know what dose to give, sufficient for it to be effective, but not too high because you get a so-called red sweat: your saliva becomes red.”

And someone would have to know how to get it to the patient, he continued, “because you have to take a capsule of it every day to keep your blood pressure high.”

Milosevic, as a UN prisoner and former head of state, had an office in his prison where he received visitors, including Russian diplomats.

When the tox screen showed the presence of rifampicin, Milosevic dashed off his note to the Kremlin with the coded message that they had been caught.

Milosevic was found dead in his cell the next morning.

The irony is that Milosevic’s scam probably killed him. He had hoped his artificially-elevated blood pressure would make him so ill he’d get his ticket to Moscow, but a heart attack killed him first.

From the Kremlin’s perspective, a dead Milosevic is even better than the international outcry Russia would have had to endure had they refused to send Milosevic back.

Milosevic is just as silent dead as he would be under guard in some Russian dacha for the rest of his life. Whatever Milosevic knew about Putin’s silent coup in 1998 died with him. And Moscow gets to blame the UN for his death.

Noted the UN’s Dr. Uges; “It’s like a James Bond story.”

Bucking a Stacked Deck . . .

Bucking a Stacked Deck . . .
Vol: 54 Issue: 13 Monday, March 13, 2006

In the world according to the UN, the world’s two worst serial human rights abusers are the United States of America and the State of Israel.

More UN resolutions have been passed condemning Israel than any other state — far more than those passed against all Islamic states — including Saddam’s Iraq — combined.

There are 52 Islamic states. But of the 700-plus General Assembly resolutions passed since the UN’s 1945 establishment, nearly 450 condemn Israel.

There are 190 nations in the United Nations. And over sixty percent of all General Assembly resolutions condemn just ONE member, Israel!

Here are a few examples of the kinds of Israeli actions worthy of global condemnation;

# General Assembly Resolution 250 “calls on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem.”

# General Assembly Resolution 251 “deeply deplores Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250.”

# General Assembly Resolution 252 “declares invalid Israel’s acts to unify Jerusalem as her capital”

# General Assembly Resolution 271 “condemns’ Israel’s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem”

# General Assembly Resolution 476 “reiterates’ that Israel’s claims to Jerusalem are null and void”

# General Assembly Resolution 673 “deplores Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations”

In 2002, the State of Israel voted WITH the United States in 92.6% of all matters the US put before the UN. It is instructive to compare Israel’s loyalty to Washington with some of America’s other ‘allies’.

Great Britain, our allegedly ‘closest’ ally, voted WITH the US about 60% of the time. Australia 56% France about 54%.

Neighbor and trading partner Canada voted with the US about 49% of the time. America’s second largest trading partner, Japan, sided with Washington about 42% of the time.

As to our Islamic and Arab ‘allies’, the UAE voted AGAINST the US 88% of the time. The Saudis, 90%. Pakistan, 87%.

Egypt (who receives $2 billion in annual US aid) 86%. Jordan, representing ‘moderate’ Islam, votes against the US at the UN 88% of the time.

In May, 2001, the United States was kicked off the UN Human Rights Commission. Amnesty International concluded in its 2002 report to the UN that the United States “leads the world in human rights violations since September 2001.”

It is important to remember that, while the UN Security Council passed resolutions demanding Saddam’s compliance with existing resolutions, the General Assembly has NEVER issued a condemnation of an Arab state, including Saddam’s Iraq.

Sudan held a seat on the UNHRC while simultaneously conducting genocide against its non-Islamic population. The same year the UN kicked the US off the UNHRC, it elected Khadaffi’s Libya (33–3) to serve as the Commission’s chair.

The United Nations opposed the US invasion of Iraq, claiming the invasion was an ‘illegal violation of the UN Charter’ — a position it maintains to the present time.

One can hear it repeated in virtually every liberal news report. What is virtually buried, however, is the UN’s multi-billion dollar stake in keeping Saddam in power and the Oil-For-Food money flowing into the UN’s unregulated ‘trust’ fund.

China, France, Germany and Russia led the opposition, demanding that the UN be allowed to continue its ‘peaceful, diplomatic efforts’ — something else that makes nearly every liberal news report dealing with the events leading up to the war.

What doesn’t get mentioned is that China, France, Germany and Russia were all up to their necks in illegal deals with Saddam Hussein.

US forces found brand-new German chemical-warfare suits, brand-new French communication equipment, brand-new Chinese and Russian military equipment, and even some brand-new GPS jammers that would confuse US smart bombs into hitting the wrong targets.

In the interests of global international relations, Washington is keeping a low-profile about the serial violations of existing UN sanctions by our ‘allies’ and the UN’s rape of Iraq’s treasury.

America’s only genuine ally is Israel. Israel’s only genuine ally is America.

Interestingly, they are the only two nations denying what is, to the rest of the world, conventional wisdom.


Both the United States and Israel are bucking a stacked deck when it comes to the international community.

In the case of the Sudan, it took the UN almost four years to acknowledge that an Islamic regime wiping out it’s non-Islamic population was a human rights violation.

So far, the UN has done nothing except talk about it as the massacres continue unabated.

In the case of the United States, the UN has concluded that Guantanamo Bay is a place where “illegally held detainees are routinely tortured” and no less a personage than Kofi Annan himself has demanded the prison be closed.

The report was issued by a UN group who refused to even visit Guantanamo Bay when invited to do so by the Pentagon.

In its refusal, the UN gave some bizarre explanation that visiting Gitmo would “contravene UN principles of human rights investigations.”

The investigators particularly denounced the use of excessive violence, citing photographs that show how detainees were shackled, chained, hooded and forced to wear earphones and goggles.

Since none of them ever visiting Gitmo, the investigators don’t know if the photos were OF Gitmo, but that doesn’t matter, since the UN declined to identify the source of the pictures in the first place.

“They also showed beating, kicking, punching, but also stripping and forced shaving’ of detainees who resisted, the report said. ‘It is of particular concern that some of these violations have even been authorized by the authorities,” the report claimed without citing specific evidence.

The investigators also mentioned ‘plentiful evidence’ (again, never specified,) that prisoners suffered serious mental health problems.

Remember, the UN never visited. The source of the ‘plentiful evidence’ is evidently former detainees whose credibility the UN accepted without question.

There is one Jewish state in the UN. Its only ally is a nation widely criticized as the world’s only Christian nation.

There are fifty-two Islamic states, with the remainder being avowedly secular. Virtually ALL of them stand in lockstep opposition to both Israel and the United States.

The press calls it a ‘coming war of civilizations’ — but only someone with an incredible capacity for self-delusion could fail to recognize it as a war between the God of the Bible and the god of Islam.

The prophet Daniel had received his vision of the ‘Seventy Weeks’ (see “Daniel’s Seventieth Week” but it greatly troubled him.

“In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision. In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks.” (Daniel 10:1-2)

Daniel had seen a vision of the antichrist’s peace deal with Israel, and his abrogation of it halfway through. He prayed and fasted for three weeks as he waited for the angel to return to complete the vision.

When the revealing Angel returned, he explained he had been held up in battle with the ‘Prince of Persia’ [Iran] until ‘Michael one of the chief princes, came to help me . . ” (Daniel 10:33)

The Angel further reveals that Michael is “the great prince which standeth for the children of thy (Daniel’s) people.” (the Jews) (Daniel 12:1)

But Daniel was concerned about the unveiling of the antichrist, an event Daniel acknowledges “was true, but the time appointed was long.”

Daniel’s understanding of the vision was delayed by the Prince of Persia. On the other end of the timeline, in this generation, we are like Daniel in that respect.

Daniel was sick about the events of the tribulation as revealed to him. He waited for an explanation of the event itself, just as we are waiting for that event to take place in this generation.

But the revelation to Daniel was stalled by conflict with the Prince of Persia.

On this end of the timeline, the current Prince of Persia (President Ahmadinejad of Iran) has outlined his intent to use nuclear war to start the conflict he believes will bring about the return of the Mahdi, whom Islamic scholars identify as the rider on the white horse of Revelation 6:3.

The rider on the white horse of Revelation 6:3 is the same coming prince that threw Daniel into a three-week depression.

What about Daniel’s Revealing Angel? Daniel describes Him thusly:

“His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.” (Daniel 10:6)

John describes the risen Christ in Revelation 1:13-15:

“. . .One like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and His hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and His eyes were as a flame of fire; And His feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and His voice as the sound of many waters.”

America is the world’s national Christian representative, in this generation, whether Americans want to accept the title or not. And Daniel’s Revealing Angel is the pre Incarnate Christ, the Head of the Church, according to the Apostle John.

Israel is the world’s national Jewish representative. Israel’s guardian, as revealed by the pre-Incarnate Christ, is the archangel Michael.

America and Israel are the two most hated nations on earth, currently locked in an existential war with Islam, ‘the prince of Persia’.

There is no other nation on earth that ‘holds with’ the United States at the UN with the consistent reliability of the Israelis.

Now, take all this information and plug it into Daniel 10:21 and see what YOU come up with.

“But I will shew thee that which is noted in the Scripture of Truth: and there is none that holdeth with Me in these things, but Michael your prince.”

The deck is stacked, all right. But against the other side.

Jointly Irresponsible

Jointly Irresponsible
Vol: 54 Issue: 11 Saturday, March 11, 2006

It was just a matter of time. Indeed, I don’t really know why it took as long as it did. A lawsuit dubbed ‘Roe v Wade for Men’ was filed this week, complaining that forcing fathers to pay child support violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

In brief, it argues that women are afforded reproductive choices denied to men. Another way of summarizing would be to say men are demanding joint parental irresponsibility.

If one steps back from the messy details the way pro-abortion supporters do and looks at the overall argument, the lawsuit has considerable merit.

It is being supported by a men’s advocacy group called the National Center for Men (NCM).

They make a compelling argument which is posted at their website:

“More than three decades ago Roe vs. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but nothing in the law changed for men. Women can now have sexual intimacy without sacrificing reproductive choice. Women now have the freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced procreation. Women now have control of their lives after an unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as the price of intimacy.”

The pro-abortion lobby has claimed the “fundamental right of choice” as the bedrock upon which their legal argument is based. The NCM’s lawsuit uses the identical argument in its test case. Here are the details.

A guy from Michigan named Matt Dubay was ordered to pay $500 a month in support for a child he says he didn’t want. He doesn’t dispute parenthood; he claims instead he was duped into it.

His girlfriend assured him she couldn’t have children. He insists that she knew he did not want to have children with her. The courts, he and his advocates argue, are forcing parenthood upon him in a way that they cannot do to a woman.

As I said, if one steps back from the messy details of the abortion question the way its supporters do and look at the bare facts, Dubay has a point.

A woman has to carry a child in her womb for nine months and ultimately give birth. Abortion proponents argue that being forced to do so violates her reproductive rights.

Dubay argues that being saddled with 18 years of child support (which in Dubay’s case, amounts to $108,000.00 by the child turns 18) amounts to a substantial inhibition of HIS ‘reproductive rights.’

Here’s the way it works now. A woman learns she is pregnant. From that point on, all decisions are up to her. She can choose to abort it or keep it. The father has no input on this decision.

She can decide to raise it alone. The father’s input into raising the child is entirely in her hands.

The only right the father has is if the mother decides to put the child up for adoption, he can adopt it, but only if he wants to raise the child himself.

In all cases, the only one who has any input is the mother. The father is obligated to pay for the woman’s choice. Since a man cannot oblige a woman to carry his child to term, Dubay argues that she cannot oblige him to support it, if she does, for the next 18 years.

Dubay’s contentions clearly have as much merit as any argument advanced in support of Roe v. Wade.

It is, as I said, a case of joint irresponsibility.


It’s really pretty obvious. When the only frame of reference in this case is a competition of rights, Dubay’s lawsuit makes sense.

Before secular humanism and liberal Marxism reduced sex to a biological function of no particular moral importance, when one engaged in sex, the decision included an automatic obligation to any child that may result.

Marxist ideology insists there is no universal morality other than that which is introduced or sanctioned by the state. Roe v Wade took the position that there is no inherent moral responsibility attached to sex, only financial ones.

It created the moral standard of sex without consequences and handed that choice to women. That exclusive right of ‘choice’ is therefore unconstitutional under the equal protection clause.

It should come as no surprise to the liberals that men are demanding the same freedom from responsibility that women have enjoyed for decades.

Provided you ignore the messy details. The children. You know.

The way abortion rights advocates do.

“Behold, Ye Are of Nothing”

“Behold, Ye Are of Nothing”
Vol: 54 Issue: 10 Friday, March 10, 2006

Of all the world’s major religious texts, only the Bible makes the claim of being able to foretell the future with 100% accuracy, 100% of the time.

History (so far) has been unable to dispute that claim. Every prophecy of Scripture (accounting for some 27% of the entire text) has either been fulfilled precisely as detailed, or remains yet unfulfilled.

Those that remain unfulfilled are in complete harmony with current secularist futurist predictions. That is to say, events relied on by secular forecasters to develop long-term geopolitical or environmental trends suggest the same outcomes predicted by Scripture.

The Bible predicts ethnic unrest and wars between rival ethnic groups. Washington predicts a generational war with Islam and the Arab world.

The Bible predicts unusual weather patterns. Weather forecasters say the trend that saw nine of the hottest years on record occurring since 1995 will continue.

The Bible predicts signs in the sun, moon and stars. NASA predicts major shifts in the 11 year solar cycles that will raise the surface temperature of the earth.

The Bible predicts the sun will be given the power to “scorch men with fire” causing great sores (Revelation 14:8-11).

NASA says changes in the ozone layers and increasing ultraviolet light is responsible for most skin cancers.

God Himself issues a challenge to other so-called ‘gods’ to predict the future:

“Produce your cause, saith the LORD; bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob. Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come.” (Isaiah 41:21-22)

Only God is omniscient, or all-knowing. God not only reveals the future, but He foretells the circumstances that conspire together to bring them about.

And, unlike false prophets like Nostradamus or Edgar Cayce, God reveals the outcomes. False prophecies might contain astonishing details about a single event, since Satan knows what he has planned. But Satan is not omniscient.

The best he can do is detail was he has planned in advance to one of his ‘prophets’. He doesn’t know how those plans will turn out. He had a plan to defeat Jesus by having Him killed by His Chosen People. Had he known the outcome, he would have planned things differently:

“Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” (1st Corinthians 2:8)


God continues His challenge to the gods of this world, saying, “Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together.” (Isaiah 41:23)

God issued His challenge because He knows there are no other gods. He alone is God, and therefore, it stands to reason, that He alone is the only one who could accurately and consistently declare the end from the beginning.

“Behold, ye are of nothing, and your work of nought: an abomination is he that chooseth you.” (Isaiah 41:24)

Although Islam does profess a kind of end-time prophecy, the prophecies of Islam for the last days are simply reworked versions of Bible prophecy.

Islamic expectations of a messiah-figure riding a white horse at the head of a vast Islamic army of conquest are drawn from Revelation 6:3’s depiction of the rider on the white horse that Christians identify as the antichrist.

There are no Islamic prophecies foretelling the coming of Mohammed. None concerning his life, his ministry or his death. While the Shia’s ‘Twelver’ sect believes the Mahdi has remained alive and in hiding since 860, Mohammed himself is as dead as everybody else.

Islam expects their version of Jesus (Isa) to return at the end of the age, (although they think Him a prophet and not God) to link up with the Mahdi after Islam has subjugated the earth in a war that kills a third of mankind.

Again, this is drawn from New Testament prophecy, although the Islamic version has the Mahdi and Isa fulfilling the roles assigned the false prophet and antichrist by the Book of the Revelation.

As noted in Volume 53, Issue 16 of the Omegaletter, in their book, “Al Mahdi and the End of Time”, Muhammad Ibn Izzat and Muhammad Arif, two well-known Egyptian authors, identify the Mahdi from the Book of the Revelation:

“I find the Mahdi recorded in the books of the Prophets For instance, the Book of Revelation says: And I saw and behold a white horse. He that sat on him went forth conquering and to conquer.

Izzat and Arif then go on to say: “It is clear that this man is the Mahdi who will ride the white horse and judge by the Qur an (with justice) and with whom will be men with MARKS of prostration on their FOREHEADS.”

Compare Islam’s prophecy with that of John’s (made six hundred years earlier):

“And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a MARK in their right hand, or in their FOREHEADS.” (Revelation 13:16-17)

The Bible says of the false prophet: “And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.” (Revelation 13:11) The religion of the false prophet will claim Jesus (the Lamb) but it promotes Satan’s religion.

Islam claims to be the third Testament of Scripture, the completed work of Allah, whom they believe wrote the Old and New Testaments which were then corrupted by Christians and Jews. According to Islam, Moses (Musa) and Jesus (Isa) were both Muslims.

In this way, Islam can lay claim to predating Judaism and Christianity, despite being invented six hundred years after Christ. It has its own form of Christology that denies Jesus’ Deity:

“the Messiah, Isa (Jesus) son of Marium (Mary) is only an apostle of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; believe therefore in Allah and His apostles, and say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you; Allah is only one God; far be It from His glory that He should have a son, whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His, and Allah is sufficient for a Protector.” (“The Women” Sura 4:171)

“And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.” (1st John 4:3)

Islam is currently the world’s fastest-growing religion, as well as being among the fastest growing religions in the United States.

Although it admits that the terrorists are Islamic fundamentalists, it denies that Islamic teachings inspire war and violence, claiming instead to be a religion of ‘peace and love’.

Although there is no evidence of Islamic peace and love anywhere in Islamic world, and precious little denunciation of terror by the allegedly ‘moderate Muslim majority’ it is a fiction that is repeated throughout the Western world.

George Bush has categorically claimed Islam to be the third religion of God, and has officially pronounced it a ‘religion of peace and love’. So has the Pope, the European Union, most liberal mainstream media outlets and mainstream media commentaries.

Despite the total lack of supporting evidence, the global conventional wisdom is Islamic terrorists are ‘fundamentalists’ but that they aren’t following ‘true’ Islam.

“True’ Islam, they argue, doesn’t believe the Koran’s teachings about jihad and subjugation and dhimmitude. It is hard to imagine a more delusional assessment.

That is like arguing fundamental New Testament doctrines don’t represent ‘true’ Christianity. “True” Christianity would therefore be a form of Christianity that claims Christ but denies His teachings.

The Bible says of the religious system of antichrist; “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” (2nd Thessalonians 2:11)

And John described the false prophet’s religion the way the secular West describes ‘true’ Islam and ‘true’ Christianity.

“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” (Revelation 13:18)

For centuries, Bible scholars have been trying to crack the ‘666’ code, counting the letters in prominent politicians names; (Ronald Wilson Reagan = 666, the inscription in the papal tiara “Vicarius Filius Dei” = 666, etc.)

I am not about to ‘crack’ the code, but I am going to throw out some thoughts for discussion. The Prophet Daniel says of the antichrist’s system; “By peace he shall destroy many.” (Daniel 11:36)

Islam claims to be a peaceful religion, despite its fundamental doctrines as outlined in the Koran.

The Koran’s apologists often support this argument by pointing out that the word ‘peace’ or its derivatives occurs in the Koran 666 times.

In addition, the Islamic holy book, the Koran, is precisely 6,666 verses long. Islam was born in the 6th century.

Islamic fundamentalists claim the Six Pillars of Islam; Confession (shahada) Prayers (salat) Almsgiving (zakat) Fasting (sawm) Pilgrimage (hajj) and finally, “Jihad” — defined as “the struggle to propagate the faith of Islam throughout the world.”

Fundamentalist Muslims adhere to the Six Islamic Articles of Faith: The first is that “there is no God but Allah.” The second Article of Faith is belief in a hierarchy of angels. The third Article of Faith is belief in 104 holy books, with the Koran as the final revelation. The fourth is belief in the prophets. The fifth Article of Faith is belief in predestination. The sixth Article of Faith is the day of judgment.

6 Articles of Faith, 6 Pillars of Islam, developed in the 6th century from a holy book containing exactly 6,666 verses (according to the Washington Times – I haven’t counted them personally) and 666 references to the ‘peace’ Daniel says the antichrist will use as a weapon ‘to destroy many’.

But Daniel also forecasts the outcome: “he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.” (Daniel 8:25)

Racists Decry Racism

Racists Decry Racism
Vol: 54 Issue: 9 Thursday, March 9, 2006

The Reverend Jesse Jackson reminded all Americans (again) that white people are racists seeking to overturn the racial demographic of New Orleans. And Jesse Jackson isn’t going to stand for it.

According to ‘Reverend’ Jackson, New Orleans’ black voters are about to be ‘disenfranchised’ — thanks to Hurricane Katrina, who Jackson and his racist ‘Rainbow Coalition’ organization claim unfairly targeted South Louisiana blacks.

Wrote the good reverend in a Chicago Sun-Times op-ed, New Orleans black population’s “rights are about to be trampled once more in an injustice that may finally do more to destroy New Orleans than the storm did by forcibly disenfranchising the city’s black majority. People of conscience must stand up to stop this injustice.”

What IS this ‘injustice’ that is disenfranchising the black minority? Hurricane Katrina.

Jackson claims there is some racist agenda, rather than the most destructive hurricane to make landfall in US history, behind New Orleans’ black population having moved away.

Noted the world’s premiere race-baiting demagogue, “New Orleans is now reduced from 450,000 residents to about 150,000. Over 300,000 people — most of them African Americans, many of them poor — have been dispersed to some 44 states across the country.”

Rev. Jackson is nothing if not a guy with an ear for a hot-button slogan. Drawing on images of that other group of ‘disenfranchised’ — the Palestinians who abandoned their homes in 1948 until the Arab Legions destroyed the new state of Israel — Reverend Jackson wrote of New Orleans blacks, “Those who have been dispersed have been given no right of return.”

Jesse Jackson is second only to the late, unlamented Yasser Arafat when it comes to rabble-rousing. The phrase, “Right of Return” refers to the Arab inhabitants of what became the State of Israel in 1948.

Thousands of them, having been offered the spoils after Israel was destroyed, abandoned their homes and fled to ‘refugee camps’ set up in Jordan. When the Arabs lost, Israel declared the land abandoned. The two situations are as similar to one another as a smudgepot is to a Boeing 737.

Noted Jackson, “New Orleans has gone from two-thirds African American to majority white.” New Orleans also went from 450,000 to 150,000. If New Orleans was two-thirds black and is now two-thirds of its former populaton, the explanation isn’t racism. It’s mathematics. But not in Jackson’s world. . .

He explains, “Now those who fought through the storm and survived FEMA’s catastrophic incompetence at relief and utter mismanagement of the recovery are about to have their rights trampled once more.”

How’s that again? Black voters who failed to obey the evacuation orders are going to have their rights ‘trampled’ by whites, because other blacks obeyed?

This might be a good place to point out that the majority of Katrina’s victims were white, despite Reverend Jackson’s latest revision of recent history.

Reverend Jackson equates the upcoming New Orleans elections with the elections in Iraq, hinting that the administration manipulated Iraq’s elections because “the wanted the election in Iraq to “turn out right” — to elect people friendly to the U.S.”

Jackson then says that the Bush administration’s failure “to provide the same service to American citizens suggests the administration wants the New Orleans election to “turn out right” — that is, for the election to ‘turn out white.’

Evidently, THAT is racist. Wanting it to turn out black is not.

Jackson also claimed that the state of Louisiana, by “conspiring with the Bush administration to deny dispersed registered residents ready access to polling booths and absentee ballots, is once more acting with blatant discriminatory effect. ” Once more? Was there another majority-black US city destroyed by a hurricane that the administration entered into a conspiracy to discriminate against?

Reverend Jackson promised to stage another demonstration on April 1st, for the expressed purpose of “demand[ing] voting rights and the right to return for all the residents of New Orleans. We will not allow voting rights to be trampled by those happy to build a New Orleans stripped of its racial majority.”


To listen to Reverend Jackson, Louisiana’s election cycle is part of a massive conspiracy to take advantage of Katrina in order to steal New Orleans away from its black population.

If true, it was certainly a carefully planned conspiracy. New Orleans scheduled its upcoming elections four years ago.

Racism is not a white on black issue, no matter how hard demagogues like Reverend Jackson try to make it so. Jackson is easily one of the most well-known racists in America.

Jackson once referred to New York City as ‘Hymietown.” (So much for being victimized by racist slurs.)

He has made a literal fortune out of race-baiting, finding racism to be endemic among whites, but scoffing at any suggestion that his assumption that all whites are racist is itself racism.

Personally, I am not racist. The idea that one’s worth can be measured by the color of one’s skin is preposterous in the extreme. Racism is like pornography — you can’t quite define it, but you know it when you see it.

When Mayor Ray Nagin gives a speech in which he calls for rebuilding a ‘chocolate New Orleans’ — that’s racism.

When Jesse Jackson gives a speech in which he declares a natural disaster ‘racist’ — that’s racism.

When a city’s worth is measured by the percentage of the population that is black — that is racism.

Demagogues like Jesse Jackson find racism in every white and assume every white would like to live in a ‘Vanilla New Orleans’ — which is racist. But Nagin’s dreams of rebuilding a ‘chocolate’ New Orleans is not.

New Orleans was not the only city hit by Katrina. Biloxi and Gulfport, Mississippi, bore the brunt of Katrina’s landfall. Katrina damaged 98,000 homes in that region with 61,000 of them declared uninhabitable.

Most of the Gulf Coast was utterly destroyed. You wouldn’t know that from listening to the demagogues. The death and destruction visited on those communities barely rates a mention outside of the affected area.

Jackson knows his power comes from maintaining the fiction of his attachment to “downtrodden underclass.” It is this underclass that is held up to whites, to preserve white fear of potential riots and mayhem.

And it is the prospect of turmoil and pandemonium that underlies all the successful wheeling and dealing pulled off by race-baiting demagogues like Jackson and his fellow racists.

In a press release of Nov. 15, 1999 Jesse Lee Peterson, black writer and head of Brotherhood Organization of A New Destiny, calls for a “national repudiation” of Jesse Jackson and his ilk.

Says Peterson: “It is time this man is exposed for what he is–a cold, selfish manipulator. Really just a racist demagogue.”

He describes Jackson as one who waits for the next ugly race episode. “Time and time again, he lays in wait, only to spring up when he can inflame a racial situation. He does not care a whit about those thugs he is protecting, or the rest of the students. These boys need to be dealt with properly, not encouraged to be wrong.”

In conclusion, Peterson wryly claims, “We shall overcome Jesse Jackson.”

Seven years later, honest Americans of every color are still waiting for deliverance.

South Dakota Revisits Roe V. Wade

South Dakota Revisits Roe V. Wade
Vol: 54 Issue: 8 Wednesday, March 8, 2006

South Dakota Revisits Roe V. Wade

In 2005, South Dakota created a 17-member state task force to gather information and evidence about abortions.

The task force received testimony and materials from many national and international medical and scientific experts on abortions and unborn children, and more than 2,000 affidavits from women who had undergone abortions.

The task force concluded that life begins at conception and that abortions harm women. Neither of these facts was considered or contemplated by the Roe court.

The State of South Dakota then became the first state in almost a generation to legislatively overturn the Supreme Court’s Roe v Wade decision. South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds signed the nation’s first comprehensive anti-abortion law, setting the stage for a new challenge to Roe at the Supreme Court level.

Roe v Wade was decided in January, 1973 when the Supreme Court ruled that abortion was a right guaranteed by the Constitution under an IMPLIED right to privacy.

The Supremes ‘discovered’ a Constitutional right to privacy in 1965 when, in a case styled “Griswold v Connecticut” the Supremes found a state law making it a crime to use birth control violated married couples’ right to privacy. Seven years later, in Eisenstadt v. Baird, the justices found that this right also applied to single people.

Until Griswold, the Constitution guaranteed the 4th Amendment “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

In Griswold, the Court concluded the Founding Fathers intended to include ‘privacy’ among those guarantees, but evidently forgot to do so. Relying on Griswold, the Court concluded in 1973 that abortion is just another form of contraception and that existing laws criminalizing abortion infringed on that newly-found right to privacy.

Because the Roe decision allows individuals to legally murder the unborn, most abortion protestors and anti-abortion activists focus on the abrogation of the Declaration of Independence’s guarantee of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

In twisting the Constitution’s arm until it agreed the Founding Fathers intended to allow unrestricted abortion as an individual right, the Supremes also had to abrogate another entire section of the Bill of Rights that guarantees the rights of individual States within the Union.

The original purpose of the Bill of Rights was not so much to guarantee rights to individuals as it was intended to curtail the Federal government’s power to encroach upon the rights of both people and states.

If an issue isn’t specifically mentioned in the Constitution, the Federal government has no automatic right of jurisdiction in the matter. The Tenth Amendment is specific: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

The Constitution grants no authority to the federal government over birth control. At the time of Roe v. Wade, abortion was illegal in thirty-three states. And in 2004, the Associated Press reported that thirty states were preparing to ban abortion if Roe v. Wade was overturned

Roe v. Wade turned the Bill of Rights on its head, using the same provisions designed to limit the authority of the federal government to expand the authority of the federal government. In taking the abortion question out of the hands of individual states, the Court created a new Federal power not envisioned by the Founders by judicial fiat.

For Roe v Wade to pass Constitutional muster, the Supreme Court had to;

1) discover a ‘right’ to privacy not found anywhere else in the Constitution; 2) render a legal determination that an unborn baby is NOT a human being, 3) overturn the 10th Amendment’s limitations of the extent of federal power over the states, and finally, 4) overturn the Ninth Amendment guarantee that; “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The biggest hurdle was determining an unborn human being is not a human being under the Constitution, and further, that interpretation is in keeping with the unspoken intention of the Founding Fathers.

To make this all work, one has to picture 18th century Americans believing that their wives were not carrying their children, but rather carrying a mass of unresponsive, non-human protoplasm.

That argument might have worked in 1973, but back in 1776, the phrase ‘alive and kicking’ was the way a doctor described a healthy fetus.

The Supreme Court’s 1973 decision followed the same pattern as is 1857 Dred Scott decision. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled the federal government could not prohibit slavery in slave states by determining that Negroes were not ‘full persons’, and therefore were not protected by Constitutional guarantees.

Dred Scott was overturned by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment following the Civil War — a war fought less over slavery than over the principle of state’s rights. The reasoning in Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade is nearly identical.

In both cases the Court stripped all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others. Compare the arguments the Court used to justify slavery and abortion.

In the Court’s eyes, unborn children are now the same “beings of an inferior order” that the justices considered blacks to be over a century ago.


Abortion supporters argue that an unborn child is, medically speaking, no different than a wart or a tumor. An unborn child, therefore, enjoys the same Constitutional protection as a planter’s wart.

One need not obtain government permission to have a planter’s wart removed. That argument is expanded to included obtaining an abortion.

The pro-abortion lobby says that there is no difference between the government requiring an expectant mother to carry her child to term than for the government to require a woman to keep her warts.

The obvious (and unspoken) difference is that a wart will never be anything except a wart. A fetus carried to term will live, love, and reproduce other human beings.

It is worthy of note that, while abortion advocates pretend that a fetus is not human, they are at a loss to explain what it might be otherwise.

Again, that might have been easier to buy into back in 1973. But this is 2006 and we have unlocked the secrets of the genome.

DNA is formed at conception. It is unchangeable. The DNA from a fetus can identify both of its parents. The DNA from a parent can conclusively prove the heritage of a fetus.

An unborn child is therefore a human being under all the rules of logic, all the rules of medicine and all the rules of science. But not under the rule of law.

Since DNA establishes the personhood of a fetus, Roe v Wade also violates the Fifth Amendment guarantee that stipulates that “no person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

There is no due process involved in the taking of an unborn’s person’s life. Under Roe, an unborn person can be killed as a matter of convenience.

Abortion supporters can no longer hide behind such fictions. As South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds noted in signing the anti-abortion legislation:

“The true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them.”

In his statement, Rounds destroys the three pillars upon which Roe v Wade rests. He refers a fetus as ‘a child’, to unborn children as ‘helpless’ and he calls them ‘persons’.

If a fetus is a child not yet born, then it is a person whose life is protected by the Constitution. Not just a person, but a ‘helpless person’, it therefore follows that the responsibility of civilized society is to protect them, not kill them. To argue otherwise is to argue against the oldest historical constant in human civilization.

South Dakota’s ban on abortion will most certainly find its way before the Supreme Court for disposition. That is the intention of the state ban — to force the Court to revisit the ruling that predicated an American holocaust that has claimed more human lives than World War Two did — on all sides.

“These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto Him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that SHED INNOCENT BLOOD. . .” Proverbs 6:16-17)

South Dakota’s abortion ban gives America another chance — maybe our last chance. Time is running out for America to claim the promise of 2nd Chronicles 7:14:

“If My people, which are called by My Name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

If not, Scripture promises, “this house, which is high, shall be an astonishment to every one that passeth by it; so that he shall say, Why hath the LORD done thus unto this land, and unto this house? And it shall be answered, Because they forsook the LORD God of their fathers, which brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, and laid hold on other gods, and worshipped them, and served them: therefore hath He brought all this evil upon them.” (2nd Chronicles 7:21-22)