How Real is the Iranian Threat?

How Real is the Iranian Threat?
Vol: 91 Issue: 22 Wednesday, April 22, 2009

There is no question but that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did Israel a favor by kicking off the Durban II Conference with his racist rant against Israel.

Surely he knew the speech would prompt the reaction that it did even before the representatives of forty countries got up and walked out on him. Didn’t he?

Maybe he did, but probably he didn’t. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said what he said because he believes every word of it, and so does the regime that supports him.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is clearly one of the most misunderstood leaders in the world today. For if he were understood correctly, the entire world would rise up as one and demand both Iranian disarmament and an immediate regime change.

When Ahmadinejad stood before the assembled global dignitaries to launch his tirade against Israel, he didn’t do it to get a rise out of the West.

Ahmadinejad recently gave an interview to Der Spiegel in which he expressed his opinion that the majority of Germans hate Israel as much as he does and would be secretly relieved to see it wiped out.

In his heart, Ahmadinejad believes the same sentiment exists across Europe and he has ample reason to believe it is so.

Ahmadinejad has telegraphed his intentions for Israel as clearly as did Adolf Hitler for Eastern Europe and its Jewish population in his book, “Mein Kampf.”

The question is often asked, why didn’t the Jews of Eastern Europe do more to escape the Holocaust? There were no doubt lots of good reasons, but the most powerful was disbelief.

The Jews of Europe were a powerful asset to the Nazi war machine as slave labor. They kept the domestic infrastructure running, manufacturing goods, laboring on farms, repairing roads and bridges.

It was totally illogical that the Nazis would destroy such a valuable asset. They simply didn’t believe the Nazis would murder them all. Some refused to believe it right to the end. It was just too monstrous to comprehend.

The same principle applies to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated threats to wipe Israel from the map with nuclear weapons — it’s too monstrous to believe.

There was a point in the 1973 Yom Kippur War when it looked like Israel was going to lose. Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered thirteen nuclear bombs assembled and loaded on bombers with thirteen different assigned targets.

The tide turned on the ground and the bombers were in the end, unnecessary. But the story is true and there is no doubt Ahmadinejad is aware of it. He therefore knows that even a successful nuclear strike on Israel will not prevent a massive Israeli nuclear retaliation.

The world can’t bring itself to believe that Ahmadinejad would risk it — the doctrine of mutually assured destruction comes into play. The MAD doctrine kept the world safe from nuclear destruction during the hottest moments of the Cold War.

The difference is, during the Cold War, both sides wanted to live more than they wanted the other side to die.


There is a sect within Shia Islam that is awaiting the return of the 12th Imam, also known as the Mahdi. The Twelvers believe that the Mahdi is “the righteous descendant of the prophet Muhammed” named Muhammed ibn Hasan.

According to the state religion of Iran, Muhammed ibn Hasan has been in hiding since the year 941. End times prophecy is one of the ‘five pillars of Islam’ — prophecy occupies as central a role in Islam as the 2nd Coming of Christ does within Christianity.

Most of Islamic ‘prophecy’ is inspired by the book of the Revelation but Islam sees itself in the role that Christians assign to the antichrist.

The coming of the Mahdi will be preceded by cosmic chaos, war, bloodshed and pestilence. After this cataclysmic confrontation between the forces of good and evil, the Mahdi will lead the world to an era of Islamic paradise on earth.

Ahmadinejad believes, as does Iran’s dominant religious sect, that lesser mortals can not merely influence his return, but, by initiating that end-times conflict between Dar al Islam (the Zone of Islam) and Dar al Haran (the Zone of War), he can actually HASTEN the Mahdi’s return.

“The ultimate promise of all Divine religions,” Ahmadinejad said in an address to the UN in 2005, “will be fulfilled with the emergence of a perfect human being [the 12th Imam], who is heir to all prophets. He will lead the world to justice and absolute peace. Oh mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one.”

As Christians, we believe that we can hasten Christ’s return by leading as many of the lost to salvation as possible. The Scriptures tell us that there are a finite number of people who will come to faith and when that number is filled, the Church is removed and the antichrist is revealed and he leads the world to Armageddon.

The Twelvers believe they can hasten the return of the Mahdi by starting the war of Armageddon. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is more than just a Twelver.

Ahmadinejad is connected with the messianic Hojjatieh Society, which is governed by the conviction that the 12th Imam’s return will be hastened by “the creation of chaos on Earth.”

Ahmadinejad’s ideological mentor and spiritual guide is Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi who heads the ultraconservative acolytes who believe the 12th Imam’s return is “imminent.”

He believes he was chosen by Allah to start that war, which will then force the Mahdi out of hiding. Ahmadinejad has made no secret of his belief, saying at a mosque recently that he expected such a war within two years.

According to Muslim tradition, the Mahdi is believed to ride forth on a white horse at the head of his forces.

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 Koran (with justice) and with whom will be men with marks of prostration on their foreheads.”

Israel understands this about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It doesn’t find the concept that he would start a nuclear war too monstrous to be believed, but rather, it understands how monstrous it really is and therefore too monstrous to ignore.

“Seventy-three years after the Berlin Olympiad, yesterday the world saw the return of Adolf Hitler,” Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin said Tuesday after Ahmadinejad’s speech.

“This time he is bearded and he talks Persian. But the words are the same words, the goals the same goals and the resolve to use effective means to achieve them is the same threatening resolve.”

What Israel understands — and the world does not — is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is little more than a suicide bomber waiting for the right time and place to detonate himself for allah. If he gets his hands on a nuclear bomb and a missile capable of delivering it, it will be his religious duty to use it against Israel.

The Israelis understand how powerful a motivator religious duty becomes. The rest of the world only thinks it does. How does one negotiate with a suicide bomber? What do you offer him?

The latest estimates say that with 7000 centrifuges in operation, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could have a nuclear weapon within sixty days.

And the clock is already ticking.

The Auschwitz Protocols

The Auschwitz Protocols
Vol: 91 Issue: 21 Tuesday, April 21, 2009

The Auschwitz Protocols

During the Second World War, the Nazis set up extermination camps all over Europe designed for no other purpose except to efficiently murder and dispose of millions of people.

In all, the Nazis murdered somewhere between ten and twelve million people; Gypsies, homosexuals, criminals, the mentally deficient, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Poles, Russian POWs’, etc.

But more than half of Hitler’s victims — at least six million of them — were European Jews. Men, women, children, babies — it made no difference. If they were Jews they were to be exterminated like animals.

Worse than animals, since even in those days, there were humane laws in place for euthanizing animals.

The major camps were located in German-occupied Poland, including Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibor and Treblinka. Of the millions who entered these camps, only a handful emerged.

The Nazis elevated mass murder to an art form; almost a million Jews were exterminated at Treblinka — yet Treblinka had a staff of just 120 — of whom only the 20-30 SS personnel did the actual killing.

Can you imagine the outrage, had the Allies known of these camps? Clearly, the moment the Allies discovered that the Germans were systematically exterminating the entire Jewish population of Europe, the entire tenor of the war would have changed.

No matter how critical other military targets may have been, it is difficult to imagine that any of them could be more critical than the death camps. No matter how many lives might have been at stake because of other targets, there was nothing that compared to the carnage of the Nazi death camps.

What a terrible shame that they didn’t know. Think of the millions of lives that could have been saved, had they destroyed those death camps, even as late as the last year of the war!

Except they did know. And they did nothing.

In 1944, as the Nazis began to empty Hungary of its 750,000 Jews and deport them to Auschwitz. Among them as a 19 year-old Jew named Rudolf Vrba.

Together with fellow prisoner Alfred Wetzler, Vrba devised a plan of escape from Auschwitz.

The pair slipped away from their slave-labor battalion and hid themselves in a hollowed out woodpile they had prepared earlier. They sprinkled the area with tobacco and gasoline to fool the dogs.

After hiding for several days, the pair set off on a 80 mile trek to Slovakia, where they met with Jewish leaders. There, they dictated a thirty-page report dubbed “The Auschwitz Protocols.”

It included details of the mass-murder process, maps pinpointing the gas chambers and crematoria and warnings of the impending slaughter of Hungary’s Jews.

“One million Hungarian [Jews] are going to die,” Vrba told them. “Auschwitz is ready for them. But if you tell them now, they will rebel. They will never go to the ovens.”

A copy of Vrba’s Auschwitz Protocols was given to Rabbi Michoel Dov Weissmandl, a rescue activist in Bratislava, who then wrote the first known appeal for the use of Allied air power to disrupt the mass murder.

Weissmandl’s plea to the Allies to bomb the railroad lines between Hungary and Auschwitz reached the Roosevelt administration in June, 1944.

The full version of the Vrba report was actually held up in Switzerland for three months by US diplomats who regarded it as low priority.

And when the report finally reached Washington in October, the Office of War Information opposed distributing it.

Assistant Secretary of War John McCloy responded that the request was “impracticable” because it would require “diversion of considerable air support essential to the success of our forces now engaged in decisive operations.”

He also claimed the War Department’s position was based on “a study” of the issue. But no evidence of such a study has ever been found by researchers.

In reality, McCloy’s position was based on the War Department’s standing policy that no military resources should be allocated for “rescuing victims of enemy oppression.”

(‘Victims of enemy oppression’ was a code for “Jews”. The Allies ACTUALLY had a policy in place to let them die.)

After receiving the Auschwitz Protocols, the Jewish Agency lobbied British, American and Soviet officials to bomb the camps or the railways leading to it. The Allies refused. The murders continued — Jews were still being exterminated even as Allied ground troops were approaching the gates of the camps.

Today in Israel, the wail of sirens brought the nation to a standstill as they observed two minutes of silence for the victims of the Nazi murderers and the indifferent Allies who did nothing to stop them.

During a two-minute silence across the Jewish state for Holocaust Remembrance Day, pedestrians stopped in their tracks, some with their heads bowed, and road traffic came to a halt.

The collective commemoration came a day after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly described the Holocaust as a “myth,” stirred a storm of criticism when he described Israel as “the most cruel and repressive racist regime” at the UN conference on racism in Switzerland.

His comments triggered outrage in the West and prompted a walkout by many European countries at the opening of the Geneva conference.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his remarks at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial, said; “If anyone thought that following the horrific events of the Holocaust this malignant phenomenon would vanish from this world, it is today obvious that he was wrong.”

“The sad fact is that while we mark the Holocaust Memorial Day here at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, some chose to attend the show of hatred against Israel held as we speak in the heart of Europe,” Netanyahu said.

“We will not let Holocaust deniers carry out another Holocaust of the Jewish people. This is the supreme commitment of the state of Israel.”

The UN conference, which had already been hit by a boycott by several governments led by the United States and Israel, fell into disarray after Ahmadinejad launched his new outburst against the Jewish state.

Ahmadinejad, who has previously called for the Jewish state to be wiped off the map, said that as compensation for racism in Europe “the most cruel and racist regime” was created in the Middle East after World War II.

“Following World War II they resorted to military aggressions to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering,” the mad little mullah told the assembled body.

To the dismay of the UN conference’s organizers, representatives from forty countries got up and walked out.


OK, so more than forty countries walked out. A handful of countries — Canada, the US, Israel, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Germany and Italy — boycotted it altogether. (Yes, that’s all of them.)

And lest we become too proud, the US, Germany, the Netherlands and New Zealand didn’t decide until Sunday not to attend. (To their credit, Canada, Australia, Israel and Italy all dropped out of the gathering weeks or months earlier.)

But what of the one-hundred plus countries that refused to join the boycott, that found nothing wrong with having Mahmoud Ahmadinejad serve as keynote speaker and guest of honor of the conference, and that remained in their seats to politely applaud the little Iranian dictator’s renewed call for Israel’s destruction?

Think about it for a second, and in context. This conference was dubbed “Durban II” even though it is being held in Geneva, because the original Durban Conference became so infamous.

The Durban Conference on Racism was so antisemitic and racist that one could scarcely believe that the UN would try it again.

Not only did the UN decide to go ahead with the second conference, it chose such champions of international human rights as Libya to chair it and Iran to serve as a vice-chair.

The draft document upon which the conference was based affirmed the preceding conference’s concluding statement vilifying Israel, demanding Western reparations for slavery and making blasphemy against Islam an international crime.

The date selected for the conference not only coincided with the eve of Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day — it ‘just so happened’ that it opened on Hitler’s birthday.

So, what did the attending nations expect? They expected exactly what Ahmadinejad offered them — a vicious attack against Israel as a racist state — followed by a justification of racism according to the principles of Islam.

A number of delegations, mainly from Arab or Muslim countries, applauded his address, welcoming his claim that the creation of Israel had led to a “totally racist government in occupied Palestine.”

Although they claim Israel’s existence as a Jewish State is ‘racist’ they are completely comfortable with the Palestinian demand that its state be Judenrein (Jew-free).

Most mainstream Islamic countries have either expelled their Jewish populations or created such a hostile environment that they were forced to emigrate. It is difficult to imagine a more racist regime than that of Saudi Arabia, birthplace of Islam.

A Jew caught inside that country would face immediate execution — for being a Jew.

A few Islamic countries (like Iran) refuse to let their Jews emigrate so that they can use them as propaganda to show “how well they treat their Jews.”

(Don’t assume the world won’t buy into it. Hitler had a special camp — Theresienstadt — that was used as a ‘model’ camp to show the Red Cross how well the Jews were treated by the Nazis. The Red Cross never raised an eyebrow.)

The United Nations was created, ironically enough, for the same reason that world Jewry banded together and created a Jewish state in Israel. “Never again!” was Israel’s foundational slogan. The United Nations was created to prevent another Hitler and another Holocaust.

The UN exists now for the sole purpose of extending legitimacy to the haters of this world. It has been hijacked by global Islam in much the same way that the 1930’s League of Nations was hijacked by the fascists.

In 1944, the world had a chance to stop the genocide when Rudolf Vrba’s Auschwitz Protocols exposed the Nazi extermination plan for all the world to see. The world didn’t want to know anything about it until it was all over.

Despite the lessons of the Holocaust, the world learned nothing. The burden of Jerusalem remains as heavy today as ever it has over the millennia.

“Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.” (Zechariah 12:2-3)

The UN’s Conference on Racism’s keynote speaker presented the world, in no uncertain terms, with his plan to finish what the Nazis began. Only forty countries — out of more than 190 — found Ahmadinejad’s speech unacceptable.

More than 100 countries applauded politely.

America’s 2012 ?

America’s 2012 ?
Vol: 91 Issue: 20 Monday, April 20, 2009

One of the lead stories topping the Drudge Report over the weekend was one by the AP hailing Barack Hussein Obama as ‘the new Gorbachev’. Here’s how the AP sees it:

“While historic analogies are never perfect, Obama’s stark efforts to change the U.S. image abroad are reminiscent of the stunning realignments sought by former Soviet leader Michael Gorbachev. During his short by Soviet standards tenure, he scrambled incessantly to shed the ideological entanglements that were leading the communist empire toward ruin.”

In context, the AP is hailing Barack Hussein Obama’s recent visit to Latin America where he cozied up to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez. Evidently, the AP just loved Gorbachev and can think of no higher compliment to offer Obama than to say he’s even better.

The AP made a list of all the good things that Obama has done for America in just the last three months:

Admitted to Europeans that America deserves at least part of the blame for the world’s financial crisis because it did not regulate high-flying and greedy Wall Street gamblers.

(And that ‘admission’ benefited America by . . . ?)

Then again, what if he’s wrong? What if the world’s financial crisis wasn’t brought on by a lack of US federal oversight? Ah, who cares? It’s out there now.

Told the Russians he wants to reset relations that fell to Cold War-style levels under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

(The AP writer must be new on the job. Or maybe too young to remember Russia in the 90’s?)

Asked NATO for more help in the fight in Afghanistan, and, not getting much, did not castigate alliance partners.

(Hooray for Obama for giving up against NATO without a fight. That’s the kind of leader America needs. One that puts European concerns ahead of America’s.)

Shook hands with, more than once, and accepted a book from Hugo Chavez, the virulently anti-American leader of oil-rich Venezuela.

(Evidently, Obama also believes that George Bush was the devil incarnate?)

Said America’s appetite for illegal drugs and its lax control of the flow of guns and cash to Mexico were partly to blame for the drug-lord-inspired violence that is rattling the southern U.S. neighbor.

One can see the benefits Obama has brought to American foreign policy in just his first three months. If you are among America’s growing cadre of sworn enemies, you can count on getting Obama’s full attention.

If you were ever America’s friend, (say, for example, Israel) you must be scratching your head and reconsidering your options.

At the news conference ending the three-day Summit of the Americas on Sunday, Obama was asked to explain what a reporter called this emerging “Obama Doctrine.”

He said that first, he remains intent on telling the world that the United States is a powerful and wealthy nation that realizes it is just one country among many. Obama said he believes that other countries have “good ideas” and interests that cannot be ignored.

Second, while the United States best represents itself by living up to its universal values and ideas, Obama said it must also respect the variety of cultures and perspectives that guide both American foes and friends.

“I firmly believe that if we’re willing to break free from the arguments and ideologies of an earlier era and continue to act, as we have at this summit, with a sense of mutual responsibility and mutual respect and mutual interest, then each of our nations can come out of this challenging period stronger and more prosperous, and we can advance opportunity, equality, and security across the Americas,” the president said.

Obama as the ‘new’ Gorbachev? Does anybody remember what happened to the old Gorbachev?

Mikhail Gorbachev was the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Mikhail Gorbachev became convinced that the Soviet Union needed to be reformed. (But Gorby was right.)

In this sense, he and Obama have much in common. Obama came to office convinced that America is a flawed state desperately in need of reform.

Gorbachev called his policy ‘perestroika’ meaning, ‘new thinking’. Obama calls his ‘change — no other explanation necessary’.

Gorbachev was, from the perspective of the West, a heroic statesman who led his nation out of the dark ages of Communism into a brave new world of 21st century capitalism.

To the Russians, he was the man who destroyed their country. What he left behind was a shattered body politic, a wrecked economy, and a destroyed military. Russian generals were selling their medals at flea markets (and weapons and nuclear material on the black market)

By the time Gorbachev was done ‘changing’ his country, the only thing left for his successor, Boris Yeltsin to do, was to make the announcement of its political death.

“I think it was irresponsible for the president to be seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez,” said Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican.

“This is a person along the lines with Fidel Castro and the types of dictatorship that he has down there in Venezuela and the anti-Americanism that he has been spreading around the world is not somebody the president of the United States should be seen as having, you know, kind of friendly relations with.”

At his news conference Obama said he didn’t think he did much damage to U.S. security or interests by shaking the hand of Chavez.

Mikhail Gorbachev didn’t think he was doing much damage to Soviet interests when he shook hands with Ronald Reagan, either.


While Obama was in Latin America cultivating friendships with guys like Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez, in Jerusalem they must be wondering what they did wrong.

Unless there’s an elaborate diplomatic disinformation campaign going on, the two governments couldn’t be further apart on what to do about the growing threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran.

The London Sunday Times breathless headline, “Israel Stands Ready To Bomb Iran’s Nuclear Sites” made the case that US opposition is the only thing preventing the strike plan’s execution.

It noted that Israel has made public its intention to hold the largest-ever nationwide drill next month.

Colonel Hilik Sofer told Haaretz, a daily Israeli newspaper, that the drill would train for a reality in which during war missiles can fall on any part of the country without warning … We want the citizens to understand that war can happen tomorrow morning .

But if it does, will Israel stand alone? That was never a question before. The issue of the president bowing before the King of Mecca still bothers me somewhere deep inside where I can’t quite explain it.

I listened to some partisan flack on TV try and dismiss it by comparing it to images of George Bush holding hands with King Abdullah during Abdullah’s visit to Crawford.

Men hold hands in the Middle East. It’s a sign of friendship,not fealty. Bush holding hands with Abdullah looks silly to us. But it was equally an expression of equality between the two men.

I’ve looked at the various picture angles of Obama’s bow, trying to read the diplomatic body language.

Mikhail Gorbachev ascended to power as General Secretary in 1985, succeeding Konstantin Chernenko. The USSR was one of two great superpowers, as invincible-seeming as it ever was.

Gorbachev introduced his new thinking platform in 1987. Four years later, the USSR collapsed. Historians credit Gorbachev’s reforms. An American Gorbachev? The last American president?

Amazing how much stuff seems to be pointing to 2012. I’m not saying that I think 2012 means anything specific. I don’t want to be accused of date-setting.

But still . . .

The Satanic Verses

The Satanic Verses
Vol: 91 Issue: 18 Saturday, April 18, 2009

I read recently that the doctrine of a pre-tribulation Rapture is not only unbiblical, it is probably satanic.

I was blessed to have the opportunity to work with Hal Lindsey on his book, “Vanished” in 1997. It was one of the most intense learning experiences of my career — (and also the most fun I ever had while getting paid for it.)

In order to work on “Vanished” it was incumbent upon me to become an expert in all four views of the Rapture.

Hal’s advice was to forget everything I already knew about the Rapture and then study each possible view separately with an eye toward convincing myself that the view I was currently examining was the correct one.

If I couldn’t convince myself that it was correct, Hal said, take note of those things that stood in my way. The end result was a book that presented all four possible views as fairly as possible.

My own conclusion was that of the four possible views, the one that had the least conflict with Scripture was the most probable one. And the view most harmonious with the Scripture was the pre-Tribulation Rapture.

The idea that a pre-Trib Rapure is probably satanic in origin demands an examination of the ‘origin’ of the opposing views.

The post trib perspective is the most widely taught and from that fact, rather than any Scriptural support, draws most of its credibility, in much the same way that arguing ‘the pretribulation view is a product of the 1800’s” is used to argue against pre-trib.

Protestant Christianity is a product of the Reformation Movement of mid-15th century. Traditional Protestant denominations arose as different Reformers chose different parts of Catholic dogma to reject as being unscriptural.

The Rapture was a problem for the Vatican since it teaches that sinners are only partially washed by the Blood of Christ and have to undergo further purification in Purgatory.

There can be no Rapture. Therefore, there is no real 2nd Coming and no Millennial Kingdom to follow. The Catholic Encyclopedia explains:

“The amillennial view interprets Revelation 20 symbolically and sees the millennium not as an earthly golden age in which the world will be totally Christianized, but as the present period of Christ s rule in heaven and on the earth through his Church. This was the view of the Protestant Reformers and is still the most common view among traditional Protestants, though not among most of the newer Evangelical and Fundamentalist groups.

New doesn’t mean ‘wrong’ when ‘old’ refers to the Church during the Dark Ages. They were called the “Dark Ages” because the Bible was repressed by the Vatican. That’s what the term refers to — the period between the fall of Rome and the Reformation.

The Scriptures say that at the 2nd Coming, the Lord returns with ten thousands OF His saints, not FOR them. The origin of the post Trib view doesn’t inspire much confidence when compared with the Scriptures.

Paul’s 2nd Letter to the Thessalonians addressed a pre-trib Rapture directly.

Chapter 2 begins with a discussion of the coming of the Lord and ‘our gathering together unto Him” and then rebukes them for believing the Day of Christ is ‘at hand’.

Warning them to “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come” (until certain preparatory events take place) “except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.”

First, Paul warns of a great apostasy, out of which a man could credibly claim the title of Messiah. Paul draws the messianic imagery in the next verse:

“Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.”

Then Paul rebukes them again.

“Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” (2nd Thessalonians 2:1-5)

Now, let’s try a totally different perspective on for size. Read through that chapter and see if you can understand it in some other sense.

What else could “our gathering together unto Him” mean?

What event called “the Day of Christ” being “at hand” could Paul have been referring?

What other ‘man of sin’ could Paul logically have been referencing, if not the antichrist?

Stay with me, here. There is no gratuitous or unnecessary passage of Scripture. It ALL means something. What else COULD this passage mean? Nobody wants to be wrong about something as important as eternity.

No honest Christian would want to teach a doctrine of satanic origin. And certainly, no Christian would want to learn it.

Is Paul talking about a Rapture event here? Logic and context leave no room for any other interpretation.

Is Paul talking about it in the context of the Tribulation? Clearly. Paul says it has to happen BEFORE the man of sin is revealed.

“And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.”

This verse is NOT that obscure or complicated. The Thessalonians were well aware of the antichrist — they thought it was Nero. Paul was explaining that Nero can’t be the antichrist because if he was, they wouldn’t be there.

(Remember, they thought they had been left behind — that’s why Paul was writing to them in the first place.)

Paul is reminding the 1st-century Christians who lived at Thessalonika what is holding back the man of sin until the time is right. (“Sure, Nero could be the antichrist, the world is sinful enough to deserve judgment, but not yet.”)

“For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only He who now letteth will let, until He be taken out of the way.”

Who is “he”? It can’t be referring to the antichrist. The phrase ‘let’ means ‘to occupy’ in Old English.

We still use it to some degree today. When one offers a “room to let” it is an offer to occupy a place in an established dwelling.

So, He who now occupies will occupy until He be taken out of the way.

So, Paul says that while there is sin enough for the antichrist to prosper, the time is not right, and it won’t be right as long as He who occupies continues to occupy. Is there any possible alternative understanding of that verse’s intent or meaning?

Without dancing around the Bible with seemingly contradictory verses aimed at proving something one way or the other, but just at face value, is there ANY other way to interpret just these verses presented?

To continue, after He who occupies is taken out of the way, Paul writes, “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.”

I always capitalize pronouns that refer to the Lord out of respect — in this case, I didn’t. The translators of the KJV capitalized “Wicked” as a personal pronoun, since there is only one figure in Scripture to whom it can refer — the literal antichrist who is personally indwelt by Satan during the Tribulation.

Now, the Occupier occupies me. He began His occupation when I trusted Christ. Christ promised me that the Holy Spirit would comfort and guide me until He comes.

Paul says the antichrist cannot be revealed until after the Occupier ceases to occupy.

So teaches me that just when I need the Holy Spirit’s strength and comfort the most, He is going to abandon me to face the worst time of spiritual trial the world has ever known on my own.

Or it teaches me that the Rapture must precede the revelation of the antichrist.

Can you read it literally and make it come out differently?


“Because thou hast kept the word of My patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.” ( Revelation 3:10)

I am regularly accused of teaching some kind of satanic doctrine that doesn’t prepare the Church for the coming tribulation period. Particularly by those who believe we’re already in the tribulation and that the antichrist has already been revealed.

They argue that the promise to keep the Church from God’s wrath really means God will preserve it through His wrath. So the Church should prepare itself to withstand the coming of the antichrist.

But I can’t find anywhere in Scripture that directs me to do that, or anything from Scripture that would teach me how.

The Scriptures only tell me how to come to Christ, how to lead others to Christ, and how to trust in Christ. What it teaches about the Tribulation comes from two perspectives.

The first is the one presented by Paul: “Don’t be fooled. When the real thing approaches, here’s how you’ll know. . . you won’t be here.”

The Tribulation is unique in human history. In centuries past, there have been persecutions and pogroms against God’s people. The pogroms against the Jews was the product of wicked men and the devil conspiring against God’s Chosen People.

The persecutions against Christians was the product of wicked men and the devil conspiring against God’s Son. In both cases, and down throughout human history, the perpetrators were wicked men and the devil and the targets were the chosen of God.

The Tribulation is the time of God’s wrath — God is the perpetrator of the judgments. The targets are wicked men and the devil.

Jesus said of the Tribulation, “as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.” (Luke 21:35) If it comes upon the whole earth, it means everybody. It rains on the wicked and the righteous alike.

The post-trib argument is the traditional argument, not the Scriptural one. It fails to acknowledge the purpose of the Tribulation Period. The purpose of the Tribulation is the pouring out of God’s Wrath upon ALL those that “dwell upon the earth.”

“And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.” (Revelation 11:10)

“And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Revelation 13:8)

Four times does the Scripture repeat the phrase, “they that dwell upon the earth.” In the first, it is a promise to those who “kept the Word of My patience” (trusted Jesus) that they will be “kept from” God’s Wrath.

It is also a statement of purpose. The purpose was “to try them that “dwell upon the earth.”

The second and third instances refer to those who will rejoice and make merry at the death of the Two Witnesses. The final reference to those ‘that dwell upon the earth’ identifies them as those whose names are not written in the Book of Life.

It does not seem that complicated to me. If your name is written in the Book of Life, then you can’t be numbered among those who dwell upon the earth when God is pouring out His wrath.

The Church Age has a purpose. It is to present Christ to a lost world and to afford that lost world every opportunity to accept the promise of Pardon secured for them at the Cross. It is to afford each of us the opportunity to be clothed in the righteousness of Christ instead of trusting in our own.

The Tribulation has a purpose. It is to pour out the wrath of God on the earth and to judge it according to its own righteousness. Mix the two and neither has a purpose.

Paul says the antichrist can’t be revealed until the Occupier is taken out of the way. I just can’t read it any other way.

Members Note:

We’re going to be moving our servers over the weekend, so you might experience a few burps and bumps over the weekend while the DNS crawlers update the location information.

The worst of the problems will be over by Monday. Unless the Lord comes back first.


Is Land For Peace Dead?

Is Land For Peace Dead?
Vol: 91 Issue: 17 Friday, April 17, 2009

The election of Benjamin Netanyahu as Israel’s new prime minister was as much a result of desperation as it was of choice.

Israelis are desperate for peace. They’ve done practically everything asked of them in return for peace.

In 1993, Israel embarked on a desperate gamble in which it agreed to trade land for peace and accepting Yasser Arafat as the Palestinian representative.

The principle of exchanging land for peace is fatally flawed; in America, its called ‘extortion’ and is grounds for criminal prosecution.

It is a variation of mob ‘protection rackets’ where some thug promises your front window won’t get broken if you pay for ‘protection’.

The problem is, once you start paying, you can never stop. Once you begin to reward a blackmailer, you take away his incentive to ever settle.

Why stop before you have it all? The moment that the Palestinian side makes peace, Israel stops paying them.

In 1993, Arafat agreed to peace in exchange for ‘autonomy’ over Jericho. Before the ink was dry, he was demanding all the the West Bank for a Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital.

Slowly, piece by piece, Israel ‘negotiated’ away the Gaza Strip and virtually all of the West Bank, until today Israel finds itself pushed back to its pre-1967 Green Line borders. That Israel would have ever found herself in such a predicament would have been unthinkable thirty years ago.

In 1967 and again in 1973, the combined might of the Arab world descended on the Jewish State in a war aimed at Israel’s annihilation. Israel emerged from each war stronger [and larger] than it had been before being attacked.

After the Yom Kippur War, the more pragmatic Arab leaders concluded that they’d better stop trying to annihilate Israel while there was still time. Israel had just captured most of the Egyptian Sinai and was prepared to take both Amman and Damascus.

What the Arabs couldn’t capture by war, Yasser Arafat and his successors managed to capture by stealth. Israel met a seemingly never-ending series of demands and concessions in exchange for phony promises of peace.

By 1996, Israelis grew weary of making concessions in exchange for empty promises and elected Benjamin Netanyahu on a promise to end concessions without concrete results.

Shortly after his inauguration, Netanyahu came under American pressure to implement long-delayed Oslo deadlines, while Israel was still waiting for the Palestinians to implement the first of its 1993 promises, a recognition of Israel’s right to exist.

This is from TODAY’s (April 17, 2009) Jerusalem Post:

“Ahead of US envoy George Mitchell’s arrival in Ramallah on Friday morning, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s spokesman blasted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who told the envoy Thursday that Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state was a fundamental element for any talks between the two parties. “The news Israeli leadership is setting obstacles in the way of a solution to the conflict,” he said. “

This particular ‘obstacle’ was supposed to have been resolved as the first step in Palestinian compliance back in September, 1993. Sixteen years later, it remains an obstacle. Why?

Because the Palestinian leadership does NOT recognize the Jewish State’s right to exist. This isn’t hard to puzzle out. The Palestinian Authority, which now encompasses all of the Gaza Strip and 94% of the West Bank, has never acceded to a single meaningful concession to Israel.

All the land it now controls it obtained in exchange for unfulfilled promises. This is not pro-Israeli propaganda. Neither is it anti Palestinian propaganda. It is simply the truth.

In 1996, Netanyahu stopped granting concessions without peace. Land for peace stalled. Arafat ordered the end of the uprising. An uneasy peace ensued. Israelis dumped Netanyahu for Ehud Barak, who offered Arafat everything he had asked for.

With nothing left to be gained by negotiations, in 2000 Arafat ordered a new war.

All that land and no peace to show for it.

Netanyahu opposed Oslo from the beginning, calling it a smokescreen from behind which Yasser Arafat would launch his ‘Phased Plan’ for Israel’s destruction. And that’s exactly what history proved it to be.

The Netanyahu government announced that the new Israeli government peace plan will not follow either the Oslo formula or the Saudi ‘two-state solution’ formula. Foreign Minister Avidgdor Lieberman told US envoy George Mitchell that trade-offs had, in the past, caused wars and said Israel needed to find a ‘new approach’.

“Past prime ministers were prepared to make wide-ranging concessions and the result of the Olmert-Livni government was the second Lebanon war, the operation in Gaza, severance of relations with Qatar and Mauritania, Gilad Schalit still in captivity and the peace process at a dead end,” he said.

Problem. US president Barack Obama loves the Saudi plan. His envoy, George Mitchell said after the meeting: ‘U.S. policy favors – in respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – a two-state solution which will have a Palestinian state living in peace alongside the Jewish state of Israel.”

And just to confuse it further, there was this statement from Israeli President Shimon Peres: “The policy of President Obama and his efforts for peace in this region are the same as the position of Israel.”

As long as “the same” can be interpreted as “completely different.”


This is fascinating, in light of the Prophet Daniel’s predictions about the fate of Israel in the last days. Daniel foresaw the conflict that would exist, and foretold a coming ‘prince’ of the people who would destroy Jerusalem and the Temple.

The ‘people’ were the Romans under Titus in AD 70.

But Daniel didn’t see the 2000 year interval between the destruction of the city and sanctuary and the rise of antichrist, which confused him so much he asked the angel to explain.

Instead of explaining, the angel told him, “But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to THE TIME OF THE END: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” (Daniel 12:4)

The Book of Daniel remained ‘shut up’ and ‘sealed’ for the past two thousand years, until this generation, when knowledge has been sufficiently increased for us to understand what the prophet meant when he said of the antichrist, “by peace he shall destroy many” before being “being broken without hand” after standing up against the “Prince of Princes” (Daniel 8:25)

The Oslo agreement and its ‘Land for Peace’ formula has claimed the lives of thousands of Israelis and Arabs alike, with the majority of the deaths coming AFTER years of relative ‘peace’ during Oslo’s tenure.

The Palestinian terrorists, claiming inspiration from Islamic teachings, demand the return of all of Israel as a formerly conquered Muslim land, but the Palestinian Authority is still committed, at least openly, to a policy of land for peace.

Of the coming antichrist, Daniel wrote, “Thus shall he do in the most strong holds WITH A STRANGE GOD, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall DIVIDE THE LAND FOR GAIN” (Daniel 11:39)

Finally, there is the antichrist’s covenant. Daniel writes, “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [seven years]: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.” (Daniel 9:27)

While the antichrist’s covenant is of the same duration as Oslo, the Oslo Agreement did not include the right of Jews to resume Temple sacrifice and worship, so the 1993 Oslo Agreement, although very close, does not quite fit Daniel’s description.

HOWEVER, it is important to note that Daniel doesn’t say the antichrist AUTHORS the ‘covenant’ — he says he ‘confirms’ it, indicating the covenant already existed, but for some reason had been previously unenforceable.

Now we come back to the Oslo Agreement, the Annapolis Accords, and the policy clashes about to erupt between the Obama and Netanyahu administrations.

Netanyahu is prepared to call land for peace dead and embark in a new direction. Obama, on the other hand, wants to see the covenant confirmed along the lines of the original formula of dividing the land for gain.

“And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are CLOSED UP AND SEALED UNTIL THE TIME OF THE END.”

For twenty-five centuries, Daniel’s visions were little more than a confusing collection of symbols. But overlay those same confusing symbols on today’s headlines and you have a guide against which to sort it all out.

Because this is the time and we are the people to whom the vision was addressed.

I don’t know who the antichrist is. I don’t expect to be here when he makes his debut. But it is obvious that the stage is being set, so he’s not far away.

And the Rapture is one step before that.

Conspiracy of Silence

Conspiracy of Silence
Vol: 91 Issue: 16 Thursday, April 16, 2009

Tens of thousands of American citizens converged in hundred of American cities in virtually every state of the Union yesterday. From Lansing, Michigan to Sacramento, California, crowds of between five and ten thousand converged to protest against the government.

About a thousand people braved the cold and the rain to attend a protest at Lafayette Park in Washington, DC. Another two thousand protestors were cleared from the immediate White House area after some threw tea bags over the fence.

Ten thousand protestors met on Tennessee’s Legislative Plaza in Knoxville. Thousands more marched through Boise, Idaho and Rochester, NY. Eight thousand protestors gathered in Madison, Wisconsin!

We get four newspapers delivered to our home every day; the Toronto Globe and Mail, the NY Times, USAToday and the Buffalo News.

My 87 year-old mother-in-law reads every one of them, front page to back, every morning. Ev has always been a Democrat; “my husband was a Democrat, my father was a Democrat. If it’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for me.”

She’s become a bit less liberal than most Democrats, but she loved Bill Clinton and would have voted for Hillary if she had made it to the general election.

(She stayed home rather than vote for Barack Obama.)

This morning, just one of her four newspapers made any mention of the tax protests on the front page, and USAToday only noted that fuller coverage was available somewhere in the back.

About a thousand tea protestors showed up at the McKinley Monument in downtown Buffalo. Some came dressed in Revolutionary War costumes. For a thousand people to crowd the streets of Buffalo is big news.

For Buffalo to be involved in anything of national import is major news. If it’s national news and there’s a Buffalo connection, the local news will ferret it out.

I’m not making fun of Buffalo — Buffalo’s just that kind of town. I grew up there. It’s part of its charm.

But if you wanted to learn anything about the national tax protest from the Buffalo News, you had to dig back to the local/regional section to find the single story — about the local protest.

“Participants here and elsewhere argued for greater citizen involvement in politics and for the passage of reform measures such as term limits for elected officials.”

“Elsewhere” presumably refers to the more than 300 other protests that took place at the same time all across the nation.

The NY Times made no mention the three hundred plus demonstrations that took place across the country on it’s front page, deeming the coverage of a single demonstration — in Afghanistan! — as a more fitting use of it’s valuable front-page real estate.

But what I found particularly interesting was that the Toronto Globe and Mail, which delights in printing all things embarrassing to America, was equally silent about the coast-to-coast American taxpayer demonstrations. The Canadian mainstream media is a liberal monolith.

It took almost ten years for the Canadian Radio and Television Regulatory Commission to approve Fox News license to broadcast into Canada. The CRTC refused every Fox News application until al-Jazeera applied for, and received, a license to broadcast on its first application.

One Canadian cable company bundles Fox News together with CourtTV, MysteryTV and the Military Channel in a package called “Fact and Fiction” — while CNN remains part of the basic package.

It was a stunning admission that progressive liberalism recognizes no borders. I understand that they don’t as a matter of ideology, but this was the first time I’d seen the media bias so openly demonstrated.

If this had been something the media could have clearly identified as ‘right-wing’ they would have been all over it.

But the demonstrations were neither right-wing nor partisan. There were no labels to hide behind. If they couldn’t discredit it, they ignored it. It was itself a grass-roots protest on behalf of the liberal mainstream media.

A grass-roots, unorganized and unspoken conspiracy of silence.


Let’s return to my 87 year-old mother-in-law for a second to illustrate the point. Until she moved in with us a couple of years ago, her only sources of information were ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN and the four newspapers I already mentioned.

How many people do you know who actually READ four newspapers per day? I mean, literally every single page? Evelyn does. Every single day. The newspaper delivery is the high point of her morning.

But if she didn’t live with me, she would not have known that tens of thousands of Americans converged on more than three hundred cities to protest an out-of-control government.

The Associated Press, (which couldn’t actually ignore it,) spun it this way in its opening paragraph:

“Whipped up by conservative commentators and bloggers, tens of thousands of protesters staged “tea parties” around the country Wednesday to tap into the collective angst stirred up by a bad economy, government spending and bailouts.”

The rest of the AP story wasn’t so much about the actual facts, like the size, scope and depth of the demonstrations themselves. It was about how it was really a Republican-sponsored event.

If you can’t ignore it, marginalize it by spinning it into some kind of right-wing conservative demonstration.

Is this not criminal negligence on the part of the Constitutionally protected “Fourth Estate”? The Constitutional protections that afforded the free press are granted with the understanding there is a responsibility to BE a free press.

The ‘free press’ has been more than a little negligent in reporting on the DHS bulletin that defined dangerous right-wing extremists as Christians, returning veterans and Ron Paul supporters.

Like the tens of thousands of demonstrators who showed up at the 300-plus nationwide demonstrations they did their best to bury.

In the late 1920’s and early 1930’s the fascists controlled the media through fear or by manipulating a shared ideology.

But if the media wasn’t willing to be co-opted by ideology or political worldview in the first place, the fascists could never have taken control of Europe.

Let’s step back and take a hard look at what we’re seeing take place in America. The voices of hundreds of thousands have been silenced by a media-driven conspiracy of silence. The media’s demonstrated disdain for the demonstrators and their concerns is exceeded only by that demonstrated by the government.

The government is circulating warning flyers specifically singling out those same demonstrators — for precisely the reasons they were demonstrating.

“[T]hose groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

Obama referred to it obliquely, suggesting that anyone who opposes his policies is somehow an enemy of the state “using fear to drive a wedge” etc. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the White House found the demonstrations “amusing”.

Meanwhile, in a somewhat unrelated story, it appears that Georgetown University (a Catholic university) has agreed with an Obama request to cover all all references to Jesus when he spoke there. It seems to somehow bring everything full circle and into focus.

I’ve mentioned before that the world sees American as the world’s most Christian nation in the same sense that it sees Israel as the world’s only Jewish state. Not every Israeli is a Jew and not every American is a Christian. But the odds that an Israeli or an American chosen at random would identify as one or the other is almost the same.

With that in mind, the warning from the Apostle Paul to the Church of the last days seems particularly relevant. (If you believe these are the last days, then you might be an Enemy of the State.

“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 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: from such turn away.” (2nd Timothy 3:1-5)

Yesterday, uncounted thousands of Americans converged on hundreds of American cities to protest against perilous times. Most of them see the characteristics outlined by Paul mirrored in Washington. Particularly the part about having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. So yesterday, they turned away.

And the only ones that apparently took notice were our friends at the Department of Homeland Security.

You’re Only Paranoid When They’re After You

You’re Only Paranoid When They’re Not After You
Vol: 91 Issue: 15 Wednesday, April 15, 2009

At first, I thought it was just another sensationalist story — it couldn’t be true. It reminded me of all those stories from the early 90’s about secret detention camps and a rising anti-government ‘militia’ movement.

On our website are two parts of a three-part video series from 1995 entitled, “If You’re Not Paranoid, It’s Because You’re Not Paying Attention.” There are only two parts because of what happened during the actual taping of Part 3.

The country was still reeling from the April 19, 1993 Branch Davidian catastrophe. Seventy-six people burned to death outside of Waco from a standoff resulting from a misdemeanor gun charge. Vernon Wayne Howell (David Koresh) came under investigation by the ATF after it was reported that he was stockpiling weapons.

The ATF put an undercover agent in place who reported that Koresh may have ordered parts useful to converting a semi-automatic to fire on full auto, which would make it a machine gun for which a permit was required.

Koresh had no permit on file, so the ATF decided to raid the place.

When they got there, the Branch Davidians refused them entry. Nobody is positive who fired first — most investigations tend to point to the government, but the government says it was the Branch Davidians.

The standoff lasted fifty-one days before the FBI decided to end it by introducing tear gas, raising another controversial charge that the FBI used flammable tear gas in an effort to end the siege by burning them out.

The FBI fully expected them to come running out when the fire started. Janet Reno admitted that they’d miscalculated during her subsequent testimony before Congress.

The Branch Davidian assault came on the heels of US government’s Siege at Ruby Ridge. Randy Weaver had attended meetings of the Aryan Nations, a white supremacist church group. The federal government approached him and asked him to work as an informant.

Weaver refused and the ATF built a case against him for selling a sawed-off shotgun to an ATF informant. The ATF then approached Weaver again, told him they had a case against him, and offered to drop the charges if he would inform on the Aryan Nations group. Weaver was never a member of the group and refused to go back there.

In August, 1992, several US Marshals went to the Weaver property to clandestinely survey it (without a warrant) in advance of a possible raid.

The marshals were detected by the Weaver’s dogs, and a firefight ensued between the marshals and Weaver’s 14 year old son, Sammy. Sammy was killed. He was shot in the back.

The next day, an FBI sniper shot Randy Weaver in the back, but failed to kill him. The same sniper then shot Vickie Weaver in the head as she held their 10 month old baby, killing her instantly.

It wasn’t until AFTER Randy was shot and wife and son were killed that the FBI announced that they were the source of the violence. Until then, all the Weavers knew was that they were under attack by unknown actors.

In the end, Weaver was acquitted of all charges, including the unlawful weapons charge. The government later settled with the Weaver family for $1 million per child plus $100,000 for Weaver and $308,000 to Kevin Harris, a family friend unfortunate enough to be visiting at the time of the raid.

Shortly after the Waco Siege, a quote began to circulate defining a cult that was attributed to Janet Reno.

“A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the Second Coming of Christ; who frequently attends Bible studies; who has a high level of financial giving to a Christian cause; who home schools for their children; who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belief in the Second Amendment; and who distrusts big government.”

The DoJ denied it. Nobody can locate the source of the quote, if it was ever made. But keep it in mind as we move along.


I began with the mention of a three-part series that was only two parts long. The series was mainly about the rise of the patriot movement and the reasons (Ruby Ridge, Waco) that it was coming to prominence.

As I was interviewing Gary Kah for that segment, the news of the Oklahoma bombing flashed on the screen. The bombing was already being attributed to members of the ‘militia movement’ that sprang up in the wake of the Waco and Ruby Ridge assaults.

The so-called ‘militia movement’ (also called the Patriot movement) was an unorganized political movement in which various paramilitary groups across the country claimed legitimacy under the Second Amendment and cited Ruby Ridge and Waco as their justification.

As we watched the story unfold, it was clear to both of us that the militia movement was going to be held responsible, no matter who actually did the crime. It seemed the perfect antidote to the growing distrust of the Reno Justice Department and the fear of and out-of-control federal government in general.

Blame the militia movement. If Timothy McVeigh wasn’t the only player, he was certainly the perfect patsy.

Since both Gary Kah and I were paying attention, we got ‘paranoid’ and the third part of the series never aired.

Janet Reno’s DoJ was involved with Ruby Ridge, Waco, OKC, the astonishingly quick trial and execution of Timothy McVeigh, the first WTC bombing, the destruction of Richard Jewell, the seizure and deportation of Elian Gonzales and the cover-up of the various Clinton scandals.

Reno was even cited for contempt of Congress and obstruction for refusing to turn over documents during the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I mentioned the Janet Reno quote whose source was never verified.

The Department of Homeland Security issued a law enforcement bulletin warning of the threat posed by “right-wing extremist groups. The document defines a “right wing extremist”. Look back up the page and read Reno’s so-called quotation. Then read the official DHS definition of right wing extremists who pose a threat to the United States:

“[T]hose groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

This one, even though it sounds just like the allegedly fictitious Reno quote, is NOT a hoax. I downloaded the nine-page DHS bulletin and even printed it out.

Primarily ‘hate-oriented’ AND (it isn’t either/or, it is both) those who reject federal authority in favor of state and local authority.

Folks, the other name for that hateful worldview is ‘Constitutionalist.’

It includes those “dedicated to a single issue” like abortion and “immigration”. That includes those who believe that the right to life, as mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, and those who believe that federal immigration laws should be followed.

So, if you are a hate-monger who opposes abortion and illegal immigration, you are a dangerous right-wing extremist. But there’s more!

If you believe that we are living in the end times, then you made the list of dangerous subversives, as well.

“‘[E]nd times’ prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as the violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement.”

Those who do not love The One are also singled out for special law enforcement attention. The report first identifies those who do not love The One as racists:

“Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool.” It goes on to cite the first black American president, blah, blah, blah.

Then, because even some blacks don’t love The One (and the racist label doesn’t stick quite so well), you can still be a right wing extremist.

Obama is nothing if he isn’t a champion of equal opportunity (with some opportunities more equal than others.)

“Many right-wing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms.”

So if you oppose Obama on immigration, citizenship, welfare or firearms restrictions, then you are probably a right-wing extremist on some federal law enforcement watch list.

And if you’ve served your country honorably in battle, then you also deserve to be on the watch list. “Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists.”

To support this contention, the report harkens back to Timothy McVeigh, SINCE THAT IS THE ONLY EXAMPLE THEY HAVE. The ONLY one. Out of millions of combat veterans. (You’d think there’d be more if the threat is serious enough to warrant a Department of Homeland Security bulletin. Or at least, I would have thought so.)

During the 1930’s the Nazis embarked on a systematic program of identifying and labeling ‘undesirables’ and ‘subversives’ and marking them for later disposition. The Gestapo had warehouses filled with names long before they had accumulated sufficient political power to begin rounding them up.

I wouldn’t have believed it could happen in America if I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes. At least, I didn’t expect it prior to the Rapture. I believed the Church’s presence might be able to hold it back.

Now, I’m not so sure.

Paranoia is defined as “delusions” of persecution. You’re not paranoid if they really are after you.

The Omega Letter qualifies under pretty much every single provision of the DHS law enforcement bulletin as being a right-wing extremist hate-mongering website.

I oppose Barack Obama’s presidency on the grounds he is; a) probably Constitutionally unqualified; b) is likely to complete America’s slide from democracy into fascism; and c) supportive of late-term abortion.

I also believe that we’re living in the last days and I think that the word ‘immigrant’ applies to those who enter the country through the back door legally. There is no such thing as an ‘illegal immigrant’. America’s problem consists of illegal aliens.

The Omega Letter’s views on gay marriage and Islamic terrorism also qualify me as a dangerous right wing extremist. I’ve said in the past that the time is fast approaching where opinions would be criminalized and those who believe in the rule of law and a literal interpretation of the Bible would be demonized as radical lunatics.

For years, I’ve predicated those warnings by saying, “if we are as far along the prophetic timetable as I think we are. . . ” then we can expect to see this or that in the future.

Bible prophecy has always been about looking ahead. Always. That’s what makes it prophecy. What does one call it when you stop looking ahead and start looking around, instead?

There’s not much remaining to be looking ahead for. Instead of looking ahead, I think now is a good time to start listening around — maybe for that midnight knock on the door.

Or maybe for the sound of a trumpet.