Peace & Prosperity as Destruction & Corruption Part 5 of Bye Bye babylon by Doug Krieger

PEACE & PROSPERITY

as

DESTRUCTION & CORRUPTION

PART IV

By

Doug Krieger

“And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.” (Daniel 8:25, Kings James Version)

“And through his cunning shall he cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he will magnify [himself] in his heart, and by prosperity will corrupt many; and he will stand up against the Prince of princes: but he shall be broken without hand.” (Daniel 8:25, Darby Translation)

We are about to enter the platitudinous ionosphere of peace and prosperity—the oxymoronic world where peace begets destruction, and where prosperity leads to corruption. This is the sphere of Antichrist, whose end-times’ weapons of pacification and prosperity were foretold through the Prophet Daniel, wherein craft and cunning are multiplied in his hand; wherein grandiose self-delusion, leading to self-magnification, even glorification, reach an horrid fruition within the very heart of him whose idolatrous quest and five-fold, interior defiance declared:

“I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:13-14).

The themes of “peace and prosperity” – either peace through strength (the alleged strategies of the current Administration) or as Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich conflicts, strength through peace – await the American public and the world. Now, if only we’d embrace the policies of one, President George W. Bush, or the “cut and run” proposals of the loyal opposition, we’d free ourselves from “wavering between two opinions” and get on with it—i.e., the peace and prosperity we so desperately desire.

“Peace and prosperity” sounds so much better than “law and order” – just like presidential candidate Hillary Clinton espouses the role of a “modern progressive” juxtaposed to the worn-out label of a failed socialist: Liberal. Being a “Liberal” is now passé, stigmatized by LBJ’s Great Society, all the while perpetuating war in Southeast Asia; moreover, “liberal” has been wholly purloined—hijacked—by a multitude of conservative talk-show hosts, stomped upon, held in contempt.

How peculiar that the Democrats now identify with the likes of Teddy Roosevelt, whereas the Republicans seek after the revival of Harry Truman, man of strength in the midst of a descending Iron Curtain.

Identification with Presidential success is a strange admixture of myth and reality; yet, make no mistake, the peace and prosperity which these Imperial Proconsuls seek, bears with it a two-edged sword. In the case of Antichrist, as was the reflection of his prototype, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (God is Manifest), a ploy and “trickery” (Daniel 8:25, Amplified Version) are exercised with skillful cunning—yet, this peace destroys; this prosperity corrupts!

That said, let us, in this Presidential debate in the midst of Middle East trauma, explore the pending pursuits of peace through craft and cunning, leading to destruction, all the while spouting the choruses of ever-assured prosperity fraught with deplorable and unmitigated corruption—sad to say.

Furthermore, let us speak of our beloved Evangelical allies—brethren who know not the geo-political significance of Tony Blair (the new Middle East envoy of the Quartet), juxtaposed over against the political emaciation of one, High Representative, Javier Solana . . . or, cutting to the chase: Why the pathetic political clout of the EU vs. the USA in orchestrating “peace” in the Middle East cannot be taken seriously—for the toady Blair is fully in the hands of Bush, not the EU . . . and therein lies both the rub and the rubbish of those who continue to countenance the legitimacy of the EU as the base of Antichrist, and do so at their own peril, while causing multitudes of desperate evangelicals and worldlings alike, confusion, as well as immediate despair and disillusionment.

If we are to have even a semblance of credibility and prophetic witness in these last days to the Gentiles, Israel and the Church (let alone those unseen hosts known as “the principalities and powers of the air”), then we must gird up our Biblical loins and wade into the fray of geo-political realities—realities, thankfully, which wholly support the very Biblical realities that so loudly attest to His plan and purpose for the ages!

Finally, the unavoidable glance toward Syria-Iran-Hezbollah-Hamas-the PLO-al Qaeda observes their subterfuge against the incongruity of the “Great Peace Offensive” leading to “Your Treaty with Death, your Agreement with Hell!” Dear readers—do not be distracted from the unalterable folly of this ultimate deceit. Know full-well all the aforementioned “players” are but pawns in the final manifestation of Gentile World Powers, whose interior thoughts bear striking resemblance to those nefarious forces at work bent on the trident wars of the Oracle of Damascus, Gog-Magog and the final Armageddon.

“And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s (“the chosen ones”) sake those days will be shortened” (Matthew 24:22).

PEACE IN OUR TIME

In order to gain the peace—that costly commodity of social and moral stability throughout the earth (which is the burden of the United States of America—not the EU)—certain conditions, extreme conditions, must grip the national psyche of the Imperial citizenry. Perhaps history, if we only could learn there from, would implore our collective wisdom, thereby avoiding the pitfalls which sacrifice liberty at any price:

Prior to the Battle of Britain – and, almost in anticipation of the same – the Emergency Powers (Defense) Act (May 22, 1940) was introduced by the Deputy Leader of the Commons:

“Every private interest must give way to the urgent needs of the community . . . it is necessary that the Government should be given complete control over persons and property—not just some persons or some particular class of the community, but over all persons rich or poor, employer or workers, man or woman, and all property.

“What the measure does is to place the entire sources of the nation, both human and material, at the disposal and control of the Government. Henceforward every citizen will be required by law to perform whatever function the Government may deem necessary for the effective prosecution of the war.

“The new Act, printed on a single sheet of paper, comes near to suspending the very essence of the Constitution as it has been built up in a thousand years. Our ancient liberties are placed in pawn for victory: nothing less than the destruction of Hitlerism will redeem them.” (Daily Telegraph, May 23^rd, 1940).

So anticipatory was the desperation that a once free people, as had already happened in other lands, were driven to Socialism’s ultimate goal wherein the individual fully entered into the collective of the community. England’s Crown regressed to a time when the Norman king demanded total control over all persons and property throughout the isle—a time before the Magna Charta in 1215 AD.

Government sought the slavery of an entire people, for the very essence of slavery is the seduction of all peoples of that government under a singular party which claims all rights to persons and their property.

For Christians like G. H. Lang, whose witness to this impending plight of British citizenry, led to ominous conclusions of this tragic inevitability in the face of this horrific British national crisis:

“This (the Emergency Powers Act—EPA) simplifies the duty of the Christian, for at once he has the advantage of the guidance of the New Testament upon the conduct of slaves (Eph. 6:5-9; Col. 3:22-25; I Peter 2:18-25). Ready and faithful obedience is his course, as part of his service to his divine Master, from Whom also his reward will come . . . but however much the Administration here may be better than elsewhere the principle and the extent of the powers taken are as wide as in avowedly totalitarian states . . . it remains to be seen how far the former freedom of the individual will be restored. It may be fully, which may God graciously order: but it may be that May 22, 1940, tolled the death-kneel of individual liberty on earth.” (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, The Paternoster Press, London, 1940, Appendix B, pp. 198-199)

Let Lang’s prescient remarks be a warning and encouragement to us all:

“And when will this (EPA) be effected? It did not come with the death of Hitler. He was only one exponent of this political principle which has gripped the modern world. It will not be destroyed until the last world-emperor, the Antichrist, shall have been destroyed by Christ at His coming.

“Our province does not take us into the reasons for or the possible political and economic results of this profound change. The strength of the iron element is to remain in the image to the end (Daniel 2:41), and of late it has been reasserting itself strongly (viz. in Britain c. 1940). Yet on the whole this will make for some kind and measure of order, which is better for society than anarchy. But our concern is with the bearing of the situation on the religious side, with its present effects in other lands and its possible effects here also . . . The Prince of this world is steadily and stealthily preparing his whole world kingdom for its final developments.” (Ibid.)

These, and other, futuristic concerns regarding the liberties of humankind vis-à-vis state-imposed restrictions, as a result of the pending threat of National and/or Communist Socialism, deeply disturbed the insightful British prior to the Blitz . . .

“The totalitarian State involved a conception of personality incompatible with the Christian doctrines of God and of man, for it was bound to regard and to treat the individual as having this meaning and value of his relationship to itself. . .

“The man existed for the State, which was itself regarded as the community organized as a self-conscious unit. Such a theory conflicted with the conception of man as having his ultimate meaning and value in his direct relationship to God. Some forms of this new or revived heresy acknowledged the reality of God (viz. Hitler’s Positive Christianity), but for all purposes, except the devotional life itself, the State was interposed between God and the soul as effectively as ever was mediaeval priest or Pope. As the totalitarian theory militated against the Christian doctrines of God and man, so it was only by renewed apprehension of those doctrines that human liberty could be preserved and made worthy to be preserved.” (Archbishop of York, William Temple (now of Canterbury), Times, October 5th, 1938 – given on October 4th, 1938 in Bristol Cathedral to the Church Congress.)

Be it known the profundity of the Brits on the essence of true liberty and the very interior man which the State, gone totalitarian, seeks to defame:

“In His famous answer to the Pharisees ‘Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,’ Christ is sometimes thought merely to have made a ‘clever’ answer which embarrassed His questioners: in fact, it was a profound statement of a great truth. Caesar, or the temporal power, can control our actions, and can assess our taxes: he can punish us, unjustly if he will: he can even put us to death; but there remains, for ever outside his control, the really vital part of our life, our hearts and our things. These are our own, or, rather, for these we are accountable to God alone.” (Dean Alington, Daily Telegraph, June 1st, 1940.)

THE AMERICAN APPLICATION OF LIBERTY LOST

Into what context do these British designs upon the nature of liberty find their present dispatch? Upon these United States of America, and the reverberations thereof. Let us consider the foundations of such immediate totalitarian rule over a people as committed, as was Britain c. 1940, to the ideals of liberty and the preservations of those inherent freedoms we hold as self-evident, inalienable:

“Our democracy and way of life are now threatened because of our single-minded pursuit of empire with a well-entrenched militarism driving it that's become so powerful and pervasive it's now an uncontrollable state within the state. History is clear on this teaching we can choose as could all empires before us. We can keep ours and lose our democracy, but we can't have both. Rome made the wrong choice and perished. Britain chose more wisely and survived. We must now choose, and so far the signs are ominous. Our current behavior under all administrations post-WW II requires resources and commitments abroad that in the end, Johnson (Chalmers Johnson) believes, ‘will inevitably undercut our domestic democracy and....produce a military dictatorship or its civilian equivalent.’ We're perilously close already because a hyper-reactionary statist administration hijacked the government and is driving the nation to tyranny and ruin.” (Stephen Lendman, Crisis and Military Adventurism, A Review of Chalmers Johnson’s ‘Nemesis’ – Global Research, Feb. 27, 2007)

Lendman’s summations and synthesis of Chalmer’s Johnson’s ‘Nemesis’ are ominous and foreboding, to say the least, when one considers America’s post-9/11 mindset:

“-- A nation facing no outside threats permanently at war.

-- Secret torture-prisons around the world with no accountability to which anyone, anywhere for any reason can be sent never to return or receive justice.

-- The most secretive, intrusive and repressive government in our history and a president who’s a congenital, serial liar.

-- Social decay at home.

-- An unprecedented wealth disparity and extent of corporate power. Former US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis warned years ago: ‘We can either have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.’

-- A de facto one party state with two wings and a president claiming ‘unitary executive’ powers ignoring the rule of law and doing as he pleases in the name of national security on his say alone.

-- The absence of checks and balances and separation of powers with no restraint on a reckless ‘boy-emperor’ Executive on a ‘messianic mission.’

-- A secret intelligence establishment with near-limitless funding operating without oversight.

-- A dominant corporate-controlled media serving as a national thought-control police and collective quasi-state ministry of information and propaganda glorifying imperial wars to ‘real democracy’ without letting on they’re for conquest, domination and repression.

-- An omnipotent military-industrial complex Dwight Eisenhower couldn’t have imagined when he warned us nor could George Washington, to no avail. In his Farewell Address in September, 1796, Washington said: ‘Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.’ He meant large standing armies leading to an imperial presidency. They destroy our system of checks and balances and separation of powers and in the end our freedom.

-- A weak, servile Congress acceding to a dominant president under a system of authoritarian rule keeping a restive population in line it fears one day no longer will tolerate being denied essential services so the nation's wealth can go for imperial wars and handouts to the rich.

-- A cesspool of corruption stemming from incestuous ties between government and business mocking any notions of government of, for or by the people.” (Ibid.)

Well, if you will not consent to take the Johnson-Lendman condemnations seriously – perhaps you will, when you observe the realities embedded in the following:

“Gen. Tommy Franks (Commander of Coalition Forces during the invasion of Iraq in 2003) said in an interview with the lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado that if another terrorist attack occurs in the United States ‘The Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.’ The stunning revelation is the headline story on the right-wing news site NewsMax for Friday. Franks said that another terrorism attack will result in ‘... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years...’ He indicated that if another terrorism attack occurs Bush will likely declare martial law and the Constitution will apparently be ‘discarded’’” (By Rob, Tommy Franks Says Bush May Discard Constitution If Another Terrorist Attack Occurs, Daily Kos, November 21, 2003).

THE INCIDENT: MARSHALL LAW DECLARED?

“Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single leader--a dictator--willing to use those dreaded ‘extraordinary measures,’ which few know how, or are willing, to employ.” (Michael Ledeen, White House advisor and fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, Machiavelli on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli’s Iron Rules Are As Timely and Important Today As Five Centuries Ago)

Neocon Ledeen fits very nicely into the American Enterprise Institute mindset which seeks to justify both the “just war theory” as well as “extraordinary measures.”

A reprint in The Intelligence Daily on 22 March 2007 entitled Bush Paves the Way for Martial Law: 2007 National Defense Authorization Act overturns Posse Comitatus Act rehearsed the severity of the restrictions imposed by the Bush Administration in the event if the following takes place in the USA, and, for that matter, something outside the USA having national repercussions in the USA occurs:

“Under the new law (Entitled The John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007—quietly passed, though drafted in October, 2006) the president can (now) use the military in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or ‘other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order.’”

Now, a certain amplification of that Warner Act provides the following:

“Sec. 1042 of the Act, ‘Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies,’ effectively overturns what is known as posse comitatus. The Posse Comitatus Act is a law, passed in 1878, that prohibits the use of the regular military within the U.S. borders. The original passage of the Posse Comitatus Act was a very reactionary move that sealed the betrayal of Black people after the Civil War and brought the period of Reconstruction to an end. It decreed that federal troops could no longer be used inside the former Confederate states to enforce the new legal rights of Black people. Black people were turned over to the armed police and Klansmen serving the southern plantation owners, and the long period of Jim Crow began.” (Ibid.)

The ramifications upon civil liberties are horrendous—let me explain. Bush now has the right to wholly modify the “main exemptions” contained within posse comitatus which, in the main, were originally defined with the Insurrection Act of 1807. Previous to this, the president had the authority as Commander in Chief to amass the military in the United States only in so far as insurrection or a direct “rebellion against the authority of the United States” wherein such insurrection or “conditions of rebellion” would have made it impracticable to enforce federal law in any State or Territory through normal judicial processes.

Now, under the “Warner Act” the President simply notifies congress “as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of the authority.” Notwithstanding the immensity of this presidential jurisdiction in cases of such emergency, Bush, as he has repeatedly done throughout his administration, took executive liberty to enhance the Warner Act (unilaterally) through a “signing statement” wherein he announced:

“The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the President’s constitutional authority to withhold information the disclosure of which could impair foreign relations, the national security, and the deliberative processes of the Executive.”

In one fell swoop of the pen Bush declared he no longer needs to inform Congress that martial law has been implemented!

MOVING TO CANADA WAS A JOKE!

In a previous article entitled MOVING TO CANADA IS A JOKE we brought to your attention the implications of the 2002 federal implementation of the new Northern Command. Not since the days of the Civil War had the US military been given operational command throughout the continental USA, as well as NORTHCOM (Canada and Mexico), to wit:

“The creation of NORTHCOM announced in April 2002, constitutes a blatant violation of both Canadian and Mexican territorial sovereignty. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced unilaterally that US Northern Command would have jurisdiction over the entire North American region. Canada and Mexico were presented with a fait accompli. US Northern Command's jurisdiction as outlined by the US DoD (Department of Defense) includes, in addition to the continental US, all of Canada, Mexico, as well as portions of the Caribbean, contiguous waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans up to 500 miles off the Mexican, US and Canadian coastlines as well as the Canadian Arctic.” (Moving to Canada is a Joke, The Tribulation Network, and citing: http://www.sfu.ca/casr/ft-lagasse1.htm)

What we did not announce in that article is that NORTHCOM has configured battle plans for MARTIAL LAW in the U.S. (as well as Canada and Mexico—known as CONPLAN 2005 in which 15 separate scenarios in which CONPLAN could be implemented).

Katrina, the mega fiasco, was actually used by the Bush Administration to demonstrate the ineptitude of local (mostly Democratic) municipalities (State of Louisiana and New Orleans’ Mayor Ray Nagin). Indeed, Karl Rove informed Louisiana’s governor to impose martial law or to get “as close as we can get.” Notwithstanding FEMA’s fiascos et al, it was, in the end, the US military (even the Mexican military) that bailed out the hapless victims of Katrina!

CONCENTRATION CAMPS ARE BEING PREPARED!

Now you think I’ve really wigged out—not so!

“In 2006, the Military Commissions Act was passed which, in addition to legalizing torture, allows the president and military courts to declare anyone an enemy combatant without basic civil rights like habeas corpus (i.e., arrest without cause).

“Plans for massive detention centers (i.e., CONCENTRATION CAMPS in North America) are already being prepared. Pacific News Service reported that in early 2006, Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) received a $385 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security to build detention and processing facilities to be used ‘in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S. or to support the rapid development of new programs.’” (The Intelligence Daily, Ibid.)

“The Final Solution” lingo (“to support the rapid development of new programs”) is altogether the height of Hitlerian subterfuge. Rumors of such “camps” have been widespread for years in the USA.

The Guardian opined:

“The existence and development of internment camps are solely intended to be used to round up en masse and imprison ‘political dissidents’ (anyone who isn’t prepared to lick government boots) after

a simulated tactical nuke or biological attack on a major US or European city.” (HALLIBURTON TO SET UP AND RUN FIRST AMERICAN CONCENTRATION CAMP

Topic posted Fri, February 3, 2006 - 2:45 AM by Bob, Tribe)

Indeed, the militarization of police forces throughout the USA is an altogether open secret—a scary disclosure at that!



Remember we said, Moving to Canada is a Joke—not only are there COUNTLESS CONCENTRATION CAMPS already established in the USA but check out our collaboration with Canada:

“Our Canadian friends tell us that virtually all Canadian military bases, especially those north of the 50th Parallel, are all set up with concentration camps. Not even half of these can be listed, but here are a few sites with the massive land space to handle any population:
Suffield CFB - just north of Medicine Hat, less than 60 miles from the USA.
Primrose Lake Air Range - 70 miles northeast of Edmonton.
Wainwright CFB - halfway between Medicine Hat and Primrose Lake.
Ft. Nelson - Northernmost point on the BC Railway line.
Ft. McPherson - Very cold territory ~ NW Territories.
Ft. Providence - Located on Great Slave Lake.

Halifax - Nova Scotia. Dept. of National Defense reserve.... And others.” (American Patriot Friends Network, 01/20/2007)

Yes, you heard me right the first time: SCORES OF CAMPS! Certainly, some may be bogus—but there is so much smoke here, one simply cannot deny that “something huge” is going on in preparation for major civil unrest. In Kentucky alone . . .

“Ashland - Federal prison camp in Eastern Kentucky near the Ohio River.
Louisville - FEMA detention facility, located near restricted area US naval ordnance plant. Military airfield located at facility, which is on south side of city.
Lexington - FEMA detention facility, National Guard base with adjacent airport facility.
Manchester - Federal prison camp located inside Dan Boone National Forest.
Ft. Knox - Detention center, possibly located near Salt River, in restricted area of base.

Land Between the Lakes - This area was declared a UN biosphere and is an ideal geographic location for detention facilities. Area is an isthmus extending out from Tennessee, between Lake Barkley on the east and Kentucky Lake on the west. Just scant miles from Fort Campbell in Tennessee.” (American Patriot Friends Network, 01/20/2007)

FEMA, along with their REX 84 program, and Homeland Security, have made this “preparation” a major plank in their preparedness in the event of military rule—as bizarre and unbelievable as this may sound. Halliburton’s subsidiary, on behalf of Homeland Security, by securing the $385 million contract, will provide “temporary detention and processing capabilities” for the Federal Government. This all sounds like the Twilight Zone—phantasmagoric hyperbole and ethereal conjecture by rabid American, paranoid, patriot types gone berserk—but there is simply too much evidence to the contrary . . . this is happening in North America, and happening NOW!

CUMBEY PICKS SOLANA over BLAIR – BUT WHO KNOWS?

We now move on to those Evangelical pundits who persist in making Javier Solana (the EU’s High Representative) the ultimate “Man of Peace” (i.e., the would be Antichrist who will “confirm the covenant with the many for one week”). How strange that Ms. Cumbey, an otherwise astute informant of New Age penetrations both within society and, in particular, the Church, can perceive that President Bush was behind the Blair appointment as special Middle East Peace Envoy for the Quartet, but somehow sees in the disgust of Javier Solana the prospects of one-upmanship when real peace is to be had in the Middle East—i.e., only Solana can pull it off, not Blair and not Bush?

“Tony Blair has departed from his ten year held British Prime Ministership. His old job is now held by Gordon Brown. Over, it was said, the displeasure of Javier Solana, European foreign policy and security chief, Tony Blair was given a position as The Quartet's envoy to the Middle East. This happened with the active backing of George Bush. Javier Solana was said to have unhappily gone along. Later it was announced that per Javier Solana, Tony Blair would have no power to mediate Middle East Israeli-Palestinian disputes.

“The same article tells what we already know. Neither Blair nor Solana are happy about the present structure. It appears that Tony Blair is not happy with its limitations. It appears that Javier Solana is not happy with Blair's new job existing at all.

“It should be very interesting to see this one play out. Stay tuned! Presently, I'm betting that Javier Solana will come out on top, but then, who knows.” (Trouble in Jerusalem? Tony Blair vs. Javier Solana? Constance Cumbey, 23 July 2007 – Zimbio).

And, on her blog:

“Post writing update: The editors of Foreign Policy Magazine, by and large the CFR crowd, posted their own blog entitled ‘Five Reasons why Tony Blair would make a bad Middle East Envoy.’ This same crowd gave awards in the past five years to both Javier Solana and Tony Blair. This probably tilts the odds somewhere in the direction of Javier Solana's favor, but who knows? Stay tuned!”

Stay tuned for what? That Tony Blair is going to be overshadowed by the pipsqueak, Javier Solana? Spare me! This transfixion upon Javier Solana as the would-be Antichrist or precursor of the Man of Sin par excel lance is ludicrous to the extreme. Ms. Cumbey, whose respect in her field is well acknowledged, should stay clear of geo-politics and the rise of Antichrist—especially from the decrepit environs of post-Christian Europe, hardly where you will find a militant form of Christianity. And what’s that got to do with Antichrist—plenty.

For one, the composite Beast of Gentile World Powers led by the final days’ Antichrist-Beast is mounted by an apostate Church. Rome’s abilities to effect this arrangement, either solely or in concert with the more militant forms of Christendom in North America, is, as of this writing and far into the foreseeable future, a non-factor in this equation . . . she is the laughingstock and perverted pariah of Christendom in general, and in America, in particular—in sum, a grotesque embarrassment to the faith of millions undoubtedly who embrace the Savior within her walls in spite of her awful fornications.

Ms. Cumbey then proceeds to equate Solana’s naïve remarks that Hezbollah, according to Solana, is not classified by the EU as a terrorist organization—man, is there any wonder why Bush appointed Blair, not Solana, to carry forth peace initiatives, as well as economic development in the region?

HOLLY – FULFILLED PROPHECY (Herb Peters)

The revelations of the Antichrist from the European continent abound – and the stupendous discoveries of the EU’s burgeoning military truly astound . . . Holly continues:

“This morning I stumbled across a paper released yesterday by the Heritage Foundation, an American think-tank, titled, ‘The European Security and Defense Policy: A Challenge to the Transatlantic Security Alliance.’

“The paper warns that the EU has been developing its military -- not to help provide for its own defense, as it has claimed -- but to rival NATO and, specifically, the United States as a global superpower. The thing that fascinated me about this paper is it was like reading my dad’s book, Recommendation 666, published back in 2003. The policy analysts are finally catching on.

“My dad (Herb Peters, now with the Lord) warned about the EU’s true agenda at a time when high-level, US government officials were oblivious (many still appear to be). How did he know this was happening?

“Because he studied the Bible prophecies and believed them. He knew the Bible said that, one day, the Roman Empire would powerfully revive (we see this in the European Union) and that out of it, a 10-nation military alliance would emerge (we see this in the 10 Western European Union Member States). This alliance would put itself under the authority of a brilliant leader (the Antichrist), who would seek control over Israel and the Mediterranean region and gain the economic and political power to launch a massive persecution against God's people.

“So, knowing the prophecies allowed my dad to recognize when these things started happening in the European Union -- way before the ‘experts’ could see them.” (Holly’s Thoughts, They’re Finally Catching On)

God bless Holly; however, her Biblical wisdom regarding the Image of Daniel in no way wholly identifies the Fourth Beast as the Roman Empire, and ipso facto, does not give credibility to the concept that the ten toes of that image are the “Revived Roman Empire.” Indeed, the Scriptures plainly state that the “Head of Gold” is Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon; that the Bear is Medo-Persia; and that the Leopard with four heads is Greece—but that the Fourth Beast is NOT designated as the Roman Empire and, furthermore, in the Revelation, the Beast from the Abyss is described as a COMPOSITE of the original three Beasts/Empires and is, therefore, an EXTENSION, of all these empires (Revelation 13:2a—“Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion.”)

HOW DID I MISS THE ANTICHRIST?

This inordinate fascination with the likes of Javier Solana—to the extent that he “quite possibly” may have pulled off the actual “Covenant with the many” (the infamous commencement of Daniel’s Seventieth Week has ALREADY BEGUN) utterly dumfounds me – yet dear Holly, based on her father’s recollections, enters into this absurd conjecture (Note: Follow Holly’s/Herb Peters assumptions very carefully . . .):

“Yet, when I talk to Christian friends about the possibility of peace in the Middle East, they often express skepticism that this could ever happen. But they of all people should know that, one day, it will happen. According to the Bible, there will be a temporary time of peace for the region, made possible by a "covenant with many" brokered and strengthened by the Antichrist.

“Since it's very possible that the covenant with many has already been made and strengthened, then it's also very possible that a peace deal will soon be made. And when it is, I fear many Christians will miss its prophetic significance--just as they've missed the significance of all the events leading up to this peace deal.” (Why Have They Missed It? Holly’s Thoughts, Fulfilled Prophecy, July 26, 2007)

Now, if Antichrist has already pulled this off—when? Somehow through Javier Solana’s clever devices . . . notwithstanding, here’s George Bush, in Holly’s brain, circulating in the background, somehow pulling the strings—will the real Antichrist come forth!

“Many leaders in the Mid-East peace talks are saying peace is a real possibility. In fact, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has said it could occur in less than a year, before President Bush leaves office.

“There has certainly been a renewed flurry of diplomatic activity. And Bush is continuing to push along the Quartet's efforts. He and Jordan's King Abdullah met yesterday at the White House for ‘private talks.’” (Ibid.)

Will someone help me here – is not “the Covenant with the many” somehow the same as the “peace” orchestrated by the Antichrist? Or, perhaps I’m missing this nuance somehow? Solana pulls it off in December, 2004?

“December 9, 2004: It is announced that the Israeli government has approved their ENP (European Neighborhood Policy) Action Plan. That means, Israel is the first nation to begin participating in Solana’s ENP covenant with the many. And, on January 1, 2007, Israel’s Action Plan will be conformed to fit Solana's new seven-year ENPI. In other words, the stage may now be set for the 70th week of Daniel to begin on January 1, 2007.” (Herb Peters, Recommendation 666, Epilogue, And the Beat Goes On)

Let us disabuse the world that the Antichrist has surreptitiously made a covenant with Israel and the many for one week—we’re close, but hardly was Solana’s efforts with Israel what we’re looking for! It is this kind of “Biblical nonsense” that not only disturbs, but distracts from what the Gentile World Powers—Powers who have the POWER—are really attempting to do during these Last Days. Take my remarks as caustic and, if you must, not expressed in the spirit of Christian courtesy . . . but why? Not because I cannot be gregarious in my expression of Christian virtue—but because these claims of attribution to Antichrist are so outrageous, that I’m finding it difficult to separate them from the very seductive and deceitful spirit of Antichrist who’s desire is to confuse the masses as to his REAL and serpentine activities—activities, that even Holly somehow suspects may drift into the equation after the fact.

THE FOURTH BEAST

The EXTENT of this final Fourth Empire is the full expression of Gentile World Power in the end of days—plain and simple, that’s all—and that is precisely why the current GOD OF FORTRESSES, more than any other empire past, present or into the foreseeable future, and whose heritage is European in its origins, is naught but the world’s only super power: the USA!

Once again, allow me to dabble into the writings of G. H. Lang to substantiate this Biblical illumination regarding the Fourth Beast (Carefully note, it is when Gentile World Powers make Babylon their nexus and/or dominate the Mesopotamian plain that their “beastly” character is emphasized and REVEALED.):

“Thus also is it with the fourth empire. Its ferocity and supremacy are emphasized, but that it would commence, or had commenced, at a city named ‘Rome,’ is not even mentioned, and what its course would be is unnoticed. It is when the Antichrist shall have made Babylon its centre of universal government that the empire will become what is so vividly and minutely portrayed in prophetic Scripture.” (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, The Paternoster Press, 4th Edition, London, 1950, p. 189)

Now, Lang’s proximity to Babylon and these beasts is significant—significant today because of American persistence to militarize these environs, just as the Neo-Babylonian, Medo-Persian and Grecian Empires did. Grant it, other empires of lesser Biblical import occupied Babylon, but their significance (e.g., the Moguls) was hardly fixated upon its capture or strategic importance.

“And this essential geographical feature might have been learned from the one fact, because the four kingdoms were represented by an upright image, therefore the centre of gravity, if it maybe so expressed, of each of the three upper portions was exactly over the spot upon which the feet stood. The centre of each empire would be at the same

place. Babylon is Satan’s original and final earth centre, as Jerusalem

is the divine centre. And modern world movements (no kidding—and

this was said in 1940) tend unceasingly to the Near East.” (Ibid. pp. 189-190)

Now Lang goes after the notion that ancient Rome and its revival, in so far as the identity of the Fourth Beast, is off base and NOT the expression of the final empire outlined by Daniel the prophet:

“It should also be observed that the image is an unbroken continuity from the head to the feet; there is no break, with later reunion of its parts. Similarly, the fourth Beast continues in view uninterruptedly from its emergence to its destruction, it does not die and come again to life. The phrase, ‘The reviving of the Roman Empire’ is seriously misleading. There is no Roman Empire known to prophetic Scripture, though the Romans are mentioned in New Testament history; and the fourth empire has never ceased, though, like the three preceding kingdoms, it has gone and is going through internal changes which are unnoticed as not material to prophecy. It is the Beast personally, the Antichrist, who having lived, dies, and later comes up out of the Abyss . . . (Rev. 17:8-11). (Ibid. p. 190)

“Thus, in Rev. 13:2 the Beast (personal) is both lion, bear, and leopard, the symbols in Dan. 7 of the three preceding empires . . . The attempt to show that there always have been in the Roman Empire about ten kingdoms, is like attempting to prove that the image had about ten toes, sometimes eight in number, sometimes thirteen, but always about ten, and its toes grew out all down its legs, in fact formed its legs . . . we therefore reject the term “Roman” empire, and dismiss with it the notion that the area of the fourth empire, or the location of its final ten divisions, can be determined even approximately by what it formerly has been. The empire has not yet reached its full development, and when it does so it may be as much more extensive than at any time before as each of its predecessors when centered at Babylon became vastly greater than it had been at any previous time.” (Ibid. p. 190)

Now, the very article that Holly resourced by Sally McNamara on July 17, 2007 from the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. included these caveats:

“The military and civilian presence of the European Union has been more about promoting the EU’s integrationist agenda than about making a truly meaningful contribution to international stability. The sheer lack of EU commitment to facing today’s most serious foreign policy challenges, such as Iraq and Iran, demonstrates not only the ESDP’s (European Security and Defense Policy) limitations, but, more important, the EU’s profoundly different global outlook.” (Sally MacNamara, The European Security and Defense Policy: A Challenge to the Transatlantic Security Alliance, Heritage Foundation, July 18, 2007)

Specifically, Ms. McNamara’s Euro-NATO-American-British military analysis, exposes the ESDP’s efforts, and sounds an alarm that the USA has no intention of its immediate or bothersome success to destroy the American-British alliance and NATO’s American dominance. To the contrary:

“High-level American support for the ESDP has been lukewarm on both sides of the political divide. President George W. Bush’s tepid endorsement at Camp David in 2001 following a meeting with Tony Blair was undoubtedly given on Blair’s word that NATO would still be the primary security actor in the transatlantic alliance.[43] While these assurances were almost certainly given in good faith, they have since turned out to be false. The ESDP is neither what the British envisioned nor what NATO needs.

“Both America and Britain should act to ward off damage to the Special Relationship by investing heavily in the bilateral relationship and continuing their close alliance, which was so forcefully reaffirmed in the wake of 9/11.” (Ibid.)

With abject assurance I conjecture that the Europeans have neither the financial resources to explore the Euro Corps expansion beyond its miserly 60,000, nor the ultimate support from its members (especially Central and Eastern Europeans) to continue its much-touted, but miniscule expansion. Mr. Bush is not concerned about NATO’s curious experiment at military competition, and would rather leave the inane conversation to think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, thank you. The glaring fact that the Euro-Mouse irritates the colossal elephant only serves to demonstrate the USA has no intention of some Euro upstart overshadowing its presence, ever! The American-British alliance will continue unabated—Blair’s coronation by Bush is precisely in keeping with that commitment—notwithstanding the absurdities of one, Javier Solana, to the contrary.

It may be duly noted that the “show and tell” of the Euro Corps—much like Europe’s elegant mannerisms is naught but a demonstration that she can still put on a good show of it with clamorous pomp and circumstance to accompany. No wonder “Ode to Joy” is the National Anthem of the EU!

“WAR GAMES”

The chatter surrounding imminent war between either Israel and the USA on one side, and some constellation of Moslem militants on the other (e.g., Syria and Iran and/or Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, the PLO) is endless—notwithstanding the current acerbic dialogue between America and Iran or the recent PEACE INITIATIVE which is evolving (so Bush et al would hope) into the Mother of All Peace Initiatives.

Democratic Presidential hopefuls are incensed that the Bush Administration would countenance an imminent conflict with Iran (now that Cheney’s saber rattling has replaced the measured approach to this flashpoint once proposed and pursued by Condi Rice and Defense Secretary Gates). But, that is precisely what our Leader is doing—ratcheting up the rhetoric of conflict between Iran and the USA (Note: Imperial Japan was also having peace talks with the USA prior to the outbreak of hostilities.)

“The US President George W. Bush launched an invitation to conclude a peace conference in the Middle East and undertook to offer 190 Billion (sic. Million) Dollars to the Palestinian Government and that in the context of a speech he pronounced in the White House regarding the Middle East.

“During this speech he called the Arab States that didn’t sign a peace agreement with Israel yet to put an end to the illusion of the non-existence of Israel, thus, to open a dialogue with the Hebrew State. In addition, Bush said that the Palestinians are facing the moment of choice between the vision of Hamas and that of their President Mahmoud Abbas which (sic. “who”) is more moderate. Bush added that the choices that the Palestinian people have are crystal clear.

“Furthermore, Bush uttered that the world is exerting more efforts in order to support peace conditions. Hence, he called to (for) an international meeting this autumn that gathers international representatives who support the solution of establishing two states, who reject the violence, who recognize Israel’s right to exist as well as they acknowledge all the agreements between the two parties. The essential participants in this conference shall be the Israelis the Palestinians and their neighbors, Bush added.

“While the Palestinian Authority and Britain welcomed Bush’s call to conclude an international peace conference in which Israel Palestine and a number of Arab States participate, Hamas considered that this call is a favor for the Zionist foe.” (Bush launches a new peace initiative, Alsumaria Iraqi Satellite, July 17, 2007)

Now, notice this bizarre move of Solana into the Middle East imbroglio and then the full acknowledgement that America, not the EU, is calling the shots:

“Solana’s Spokeswoman Cristina Gallach said that Solana’s sudden and intense visit (talking to both Israeli and PLO leadership) will help him to assess the latest progress with the two parties and to determine the means that the European Union can adopt to carry on supporting the peace process. Moreover, Gallach clarified that the European Union expects that the Quartet will confirm its support to the President Abbas. She also stressed that the European Union presumes that the US Secretary of State (Condi Rice) would explain for the Quartet the new US initiative introduced by Bush.” (Ibid.)

This incessant one-upmanship is simply tolerated by the US, giving the EU the semblance of importance in the current negotiations of the Quartet (the USA, the EU, the UN, and Russia). Once, however, Solana and his mice mess with the American cheese, I can assure you forthrightly, they will get their comeuppance—the trap will shut very tightly.

It is President George W. Bush who shall achieve the unachievable—a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement . . . both at the expense of the Israelis and her Arab neighbors.

PEACE AT ISRAEL’S EXPENSE

“. . . one is hard pressed to understand how any intelligent individual can expect to turn murderous terrorists into lovers of peace. Arafat may have won the Nobel Peace prize, but one needn’t be a genius to know that he was always a terrorist. Abu Mazen (Abbas) is no different. Both he and Hamas want the same thing: The complete destruction of the Jewish State.

“Bush seems to be trying to bribe the Arabs by offering millions of dollars to Abu Mazen if he keeps away from Hamas, the fact is that he is denying authentic democracy. The greater majority of Arabs voted for Hamas. How dare Bush tell them that they picked the wrong folks?

“Any child can see that Bush is trying to force his agenda upon the parties without considering the likely consequences. Clearly Israel has always demonstrated her willingness to back down to America pressure, even at her own peril. But the Arabs have self respect and would prefer to fight to the death rather than submit to presidential dictates.” (Gary Cooperberg, Redemption is at Hand, LibertyPost.org, July 17, 2007)

PEACE AT ARAB EXPENSE – EXCLUDE SYRIA & IRAN?

From Syria –

“Syria's U.N. ambassador, Bashar Ja'afari, said the conference’s legitimacy hinged on the involvement of Syria and Iran.

“Bush ‘did not elaborate on who would be invited. One minute before he declared this initiative, he attacked Syria and Iran,’ Ja'afari said in New York.

“That means he is excluding, somehow, Syria and Iran from this so-called international conference.

“I read this morning that the American president spoke of his wish to work for a peace conference. I hope ... this is true, but to this moment these are just words as far as we are concerned," Syria's President Bashar Assad said in an address to parliament after being sworn in for a second seven-year term in office.” (Hamas Rejects Bush Peace Talks Proposal, Anna Johnson, AP, examiner.com, 17 July 2007)

From Hamas

“In Gaza, Hamas’ response was harsher, with the militant group denouncing the Bush proposal as ‘lies’ to the Palestinian people.

“‘We believe that all promises made by Bush are false promises ... They’re lies,’ said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri. ‘The promise of establishing a Palestinian state is old. It will not be implemented.’

“‘This process will lead to nowhere,’ Hamas' exiled leader, Khaled Mashaal, told the Al-Jazeera TV network late Tuesday.

“He accused Bush of trying to widen the rift between Fatah and Hamas. ‘As usual, Bush wants to divide the Palestinians and the Arabs into moderates and radicals,’ Mashaal said. ‘A moderate is accepted by America and a radical is rejected by America.’” (Ibid.)

From Saudi Arabia (Dedan and Sheba) and Egypt



“In Cairo, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abou Gheit, said the Bush proposal ‘contained positive elements that must be adhered to, built upon and developed.’

“Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah told Bush in a phone call that both ‘Palestinians and Arabs choose peace,’ according to a statement carried by the state Saudi Press Agency.

“Abdullah spoke in favor of the Arab peace plan, which provides for the normalization of relations between Israel and Arab countries in exchange for Israel's withdrawal from Arab territories it occupied in the 1967 Mideast War. It also calls for establishment of an independent Palestinian state and a settlement for the Palestinian refugees issue.” (Ibid.)

Thusly, it is foretold, that ancient Dedan and Sheba (the Saudi Arabian Peninsula) would, on that day, side with the Ships of Tarshish (the West) against Gog’s intentions towards Israel (Ezekiel 38:13).

The upshot of the latest peace offensive has received mixed results—even Tony Snow, White House spokesman, said:

“‘I think a lot of people are inclined to try to treat this as a big peace conference,’ said White House spokesman Tony Snow. ‘It's not.’” (Ibid.)

But, remember, it’s Bush, not Solana, not even Blair per se, who works for Bush, who’s calling the shots here and working his magic, and, it will inevitably be the destiny of the Western World, under its obvious leadership, to orchestrate the infamous “Covenant with death . . . your agreement with hell” . . . there simply aren’t any other takers! (Isaiah 28:18 & 15)

MONSTER BUNKER BUSTER BOMBS HEADING FOR IRAN?

Peace, peace – then cometh sudden destruction. How incongruous is this:

“The U.S. is retrofitting its B-2 Stealth bombers with massive bunker-buster bombs - a move that could be a prelude to an attack on Iran and its nuclear facilities.

“Northrop Grumman announced last week in a little noticed release that the company had begun integrating on the B-2's a new 30,000-pound-class ‘penetrator bomb’ or bunker buster.

“‘The U.S. Air Force's B-2 Stealth bomber would be able to attack and destroy an expanded set of hardened, deeply buried military targets’ using the monster bunker buster, the company said in its release.” (NewsMax.com Wires, U.S. Outfitting B-2's with Monster Bunker Buster Bombs - Iran May Be Target, July 27, 2007)

It gets exceedingly dicey when one considers that Iran’s nuclear programs is buried deep inside her soils:

“Northrop Grumman is the Air Force’s prime contractor on the B-2, the flagship of the nation's long-range strike arsenal.

“The new Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), which is being developed by the Boeing Co., is a GPS-guided weapon containing more than 5,300 pounds of conventional explosives inside a 20.5-foot-long enclosure of hardened steel. It is designed to penetrate dirt, rock and reinforced concrete to reach enemy bunker or tunnel installations.

“The B-2 is capable of carrying two MOPs, one in each weapons bay.

‘This integration contract is part of Northrop Grumman’s on-going effort to ensure that the B-2 remains capable of delivering a decisive blow to an increasingly sophisticated enemy,’ said Dave Mazur, vice president of long-range strike for the company's Integrated Systems sector.” (Ibid.)

Duplicitous? Of course – what part of “seizing the kingdom by intrigue” do you not understand (Daniel 11:21)?   On the one hand, the overtures of peace – on the other hand, the preparations for destruction!

CONCLUSION

The obvious is oft the most difficult to determine—even so, as sabers rattle in the Middle East—as the West downplays its expectations for peace—be it ever so plain to the scholar and simpleton: The United States of America is the only power on the block that can pull off such a peace in our time.

But there will be no peace, no lasting peace until He comes. Caught in the middle of the dilemma, these prophetic words are heard, and encapsulated within them is the mystery, I believe, of the Son of Man:

“Clearly redemption is closer than ever. When the majority of Jews finally realize that none of our leaders is able to help us they will turn in desperation to our Father in Heaven. They will begin to understand that the only explanation for our very existence is owing to His infinite mercy and personal protection. Then we will return unto Him in penitence, prayer and supplication and seek to serve Him by observing His Law. Then we will become worthy of His miracles which will permeate the world and fulfill the prophesies which have yet to come to pass. He will send us one True Jewish Leader who will lead us in battle and return genuine Jewish pride and fear of G-d to our nation.” (Gary Cooperberg, Redemption is at Hand, LibertyPost.org, July 17, 2007)