Manufacturing a Massacre

Manufacturing a Massacre
Vol: 7 Issue: 30 Tuesday, April 30, 2002

According to the Israeli Defense Forces, the Palestinians in Jenin are attempting to inflate the numbers of civilians killed during the incursion into Jenin. Officially, twenty-six civilians were killed during the operation. They are buried in a mass grave in Jenin. The IDF is reporting that the Palestinians are digging up bodies buried in a local cemetery and adding them to the mass grave, bringing the total number to fifty. The IDF also says the Palestinian Authority has instructed Jenin residents to stop searching for bodies buried amid the rubble in the camp. Instead they are to locate them and then discover them while the UN teams are present.

According to the army, Palestinian officials have paid residents left homeless to rent accommodations in Jenin, but have demanded that they return to the camp and be present during the day when UN personnel visit. Residents have also refrained from repairing structures damaged in the camp, at the request of PA officials. They have also been instructed to erase any militant symbols and hide weapons, and refrain from taking any militant action while the UN teams are present.


If the reports are true, well it s unimaginable. Unimaginable that anyone would desecrate a cemetery in order to perpetuate a lie. Unimaginable that the Palestinians could continue to press their claim to a religious mandate, given the Islamic laws concerning the treatment of dead bodies. Unimaginable that the Palestinians believe that they could get away with it. Autopsies could easily separate those who were killed in the battle from those buried previously and then re-interred in a mass grave.

If the report is untrue, Israel has reached a new low in its own propaganda war. If the report is a plant, who could ever believe anything the Israeli Army reported, ever again?

Final Word: No!

The Israeli cabinet overwhelmingly voted to refuse to cooperate with the UN investigation of the Jenin camp. Israel rightly points out there was no suggestion to appoint a similar committee to investigate how the United States fought in Afghanistan, how UN forces fought in Somalia, or international culpability for standing by as Bosnians or Rwandans were massacred by the thousands. The premise of the UN team is that there is doubt between the Palestinian claim that there was a massacre and Israel s insistence that there was not.

Even Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch two organizations that could hardly be more vitriolic toward Israel admit that there was no massacre. The charge, according to Amnesty secretary-general Irene Kahn after her visit to Jenin, has been reduced to serious violations of international humanitarian law.

The evidence that the jury is in before the trial has begun lies in UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan s April 27 letter to Israel laying out the ground rules of the Jenin committee.

Though the letter has not been released, it reportedly states that the committee may make observations, even though the UN resolution that created it speaks only of fact-finding. The committee also reserves the right to call any witnesses it wishes, meaning that Israeli officers could open themselves up to indictment by a future international tribunal.


The Palestinians claim Israel s refusal to cooperate is evidence of a cover-up. The United States has already refused to allow itself to be subject to the UN s war crimes tribunals, fearing the same fate that the UN could decide US action is a war crime and that US leaders could find themselves on the UN s World Court docket.

UK Court Upholds Farrakhan Ban

The UK’s Court of Appeal granted the government’s appeal of a High Court ruling that had overturned the ban that has kept Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam out of the United Kingdom since 1986.

UK officials say they fear his presence could lead to public disorder following anti-Semitic remarks he has made in the past. Farrakhan had challenged a decision to extend the ban in 2000 by then-Home Secretary Jack Straw. The British High Court ordered the government to reconsider the ban. On appeal, the government won, and Farrakhan remains persona non grata.

Farrakhan has described whites as “devils” and Judaism as a “gutter religion,” with Jews being called “bloodsuckers” who got rich by oppressing blacks.

Lawyers for Farrakhan argued that he should be allowed into Britain on the grounds that he had “moved on,” that he was “an extremely prominent spiritual, religious and social leader” and that in the United States he was regarded as a significant spokesman for the black community.


Libya still likes him.

Three Women Carrying Clones, Claims Fertility Doctor

Three Women Carrying Clones, Claims Fertility Doctor
Vol: 7 Issue: 29 Monday, April 29, 2002

An Italian fertility specialist claimed during a television interview that he has successfully implanted cloned human beings into three women.

All three, he says, remain healthy. According to Dr. Severino Antinori, two of the pregnant women are in Russia, the third in an undisclosed Islamic state in the Middle East. The pregnancies are six to nine weeks along, Antinori says.

Since the announcement by Dr. Ian Wilmot of the University of Edinburgh that his team had successfully cloned an adult sheep, science and science fiction has been nervously anticipating the arrival of a human clone.

Cloning has actually failed to live up to its hype, which is one reason few scientists really believe Antinori has successfully cloned three, or even one human embryo.

There s been zero progress. I mean it. Zero,” says Rudolf Jaenisch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a leading cloning researcher. “The only thing we ve begun to realize is how big the problem is… I still don t under stand why cloning works. It s amazing, it does work, but why? It s shocking.”

Dolly only came along after 276 failed attempts to clone a sheep. None of the other species since cloned, like cows, mice, cats, goats, pigs and rabbits – has improved much on that appalling failure rate. A third of the 70-odd calves to have been born alive from some 9000 cloned embryos died young, many of them grotesquely large.

Interestingly, some species of animals refuse to be cloned at all. Dogs, horses, rats, monkeys and chickens have all refused to climb out of the petrie dish.

Research on cloned mice in Japan suggests they live sick and die early. Even if a human being were to be successfully cloned, there is no way to know if it will be a superman or a cripple.

Dolly the sheep, now six years old this July, is suffering from premature arthritis so severe that, had she not been a celebrity, she would have long since been served with mint jelly.

Although many cloned calves appear to be normal, the oldest animals are four years old. Cows can live 20 years. Some of the conditions that have shown up in mice show up at an age that, proportionately, is far older than four years in a cow.


Research on cloning shows we don t really know much about it. Antinori s efforts are a bit like a kid playing with a chemistry set certain ingredients do something . . .but what?

What we do know is that clones are not perfect replicas. Most have a predisposition to live life sick and die early. However, the only ingredient science can t manipulate to test the success of a cloning effort is time.

Cows live 20 years, but who knows if the cloned ones will die at six or live to be sixty?

Cloning brings humanity into a dangerous new area that is the exclusive province of God Himself. The discovery of the double helix that led to the discovery of the structure of DNA was only forty years ago.

Today, Antonini claims to have cloned three human beings. Even though unlikely, the science says it s at least possible.

The prophet Daniel was given a vision of the world as it would be during the final seven years of human government before the return of Christ.

The images were so confusing and unreal to Daniel that he said that although he heard, he understood not and asked for clarification.

Instead, he was told to 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

Moore s Law dictates that the power of the computer processor doubles every eighteen months and that the time will decrease exponentially as computers get smarter.

As computers get smarter, so do we. The words of Daniel were, to previous generations, a strange mix of heads and horns and beasts and images.

In this generation, they are crystal clear, as Daniel s symbols take shape into a literal revived Roman Empire, a literal state of Israel, a literal conflict in the Middle East at the same time when knowledge is literally increasing at a measurable level.

The revealing angel said this would happen at the time of the end. And so it is.

More on Massacres and Battles

More on Massacres and Battles
Vol: 7 Issue: 28 Sunday, April 28, 2002

We’ve been focusing considerable attention on the global reaction to the Battle at Jenin. The reason we’ve been doing so is because there are two sides to the conflict and the mainstream media is only presenting one of them. Yesterday, I heard Margaret Carlson of TIME Magazine speaking on one of CNN’s talk shows. She referred to ‘Sharon’s destruction of Jenin’ as if it were fact.

Here are the facts as reported by newspapers from both Israel and the Arab world. There has been no impartial investigation.

Genuine Eyewitnesses Tell Different Story

All genuine eyewitness accounts — Palestinian or Israeli — testify to the fact most of the buildings destroyed were destroyed by Palestinian booby traps or during the battle. Both sides say many of the buildings bulldozed were razed to either dislodge combatants inside or because of the fear of booby traps.

By ‘genuine’ eyewitness accounts, we are relying on published accounts given by the combatants on both sides. Those who fought it, like Omar, the subject of yesterday s Intelligence Digest, must be describing some other battle than that of the eyewitnesses offered by the Palestinian Authority.

Global Uproar Continues

The United Nations and the European Union both continue to wave their arms and shout about an investigation into the Israeli Massacre at Jenin, but the calls are rapidly becoming pro-forma, rather than the hysterical tone of last week. Both organizations are coming to the realization that they’ve been had by Arafat again. They’ve had more than a week to poke around. They have undoubtedly demanded evidence from the Palestinians to support their claimed massacre. If they had anything of substance, it would be the topic of hot debate both in the EU parliament and the UN Security Council as you read this. It is not. So the global uproar continues, but with far fewer prominent politicians sticking their necks out to shout ‘massacre’. Instead, they are letting their underlings do it.

The difference between a ‘battle’ and a ‘massacre’

In recent days, we’ve described a battle at Jenin. Both sides were heavily armed. On both sides, the combatants were prepared to die for their cause if necessary. Those on the battlefield knew what they were there to kill or be killed. When you are in battle — on either side — protecting a building is secondary to protecting your own life.

A Battle is Not a Massacre

A battle is different than a massacre. At a massacre, people are murdered without a chance to defend themselves. By definition, massacre victims pose no threat to the victors. The dictionary defines ‘massacre’ this way: ‘the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty.’

I’ve expended a lot of words regarding what a ‘massacre’ is. Let’s describe what the world typically calls an ‘act of resistance’ against the occupation.

This Is A ‘Massacre’

Shira Shefi was sitting on her bed with her three preschool children Saturday in the West Bank Jewish settlement of Adora. [It is ‘occupied’ by Jews]

A Palestinian gunman burst into the upstairs bedroom and opened fire — killing her 5-year-old daughter Danielle and wounding her two sons. The gunman looked the children in the eyes as they sat on the edge of the bed and shot them. Yaakov Shefi was at the synagogue for Sabbath prayers. He said his wife told him she didn’t hear the attacker entering her house.

“He just opened the door. My wife and the children were sitting on the bed and he just sprayed them with bullets. She remembers pushing the children under the bed. She said, ‘Be quiet and don’t cry, so that they don’t come back,”‘ Shefi said.

“She saw our daughter breathe her last breath. Anyone capable of looking a 4-year-boy and a 5-year-girl in the face and then shooting them is not human,” Shefi said.

Another attacker shot his way into a nearby home in this West Bank settlement, killing 47-year-old Katya Greenberg in her bed and wounding her husband and 14-year-old son. The terrorists were disguised in Israeli army uniforms. They went house-to-house in the settlement. Witnesses say the attack went on for forty minutes.

Residents of the community hid in closets, under beds, as terrorists entered their homes and shot anything they could see. When it was over, four people lay dead in their beds. This is a massacre.


Where is the UN outcry against the massacre of civilians in their beds at four in the morning by terrorists disguised as Israeli forces? Where are the UN lawyers crying out against the violation of the Geneva Conventions on the rules of war that prohibit legitimate combatants from either making war against civilians or wearing an enemy uniform in combat?

The UN affords terrorists fighting Israel the status of freedom fighters in legitimate combat. That makes them subject to the international rules of war.

If Israel were to capture a Palestinian in an Israeli uniform, international law says Israel could hang him from the nearest tree or shoot them on the spot. [That’s what we did in our wars.] But you can bet that Israel would be accused of war crimes if they did.

The BBC today carried nothing about the killings in today’s edition. Its Middle East coverage contained headlines like “Israel Holds Up Talks on Jenin”, “Iraq Celebrates Saddam’s Birthday” “Gaza’s Angry Children” and “Hamas Bans Children’s Sacrifices”. No headline saying “UN Deplores Massacre in Adora”. Just as there was none deploring the Passover Massacre.

The London Guardian covered the massacre at Adara with this opening line, “Palestinians in the West Bank were bracing themselves for massive Israeli military retaliation last night after an attack on a Jewish settlement near Hebron.”

Note the focus is on a ‘massive Israeli military retaliation’ — that hadn’t even happened yet! The massacre is merely the provocation to the expected ‘massive retaliaton’. Israel is just an aggressor awaiting an excuse like an ‘attack on a Jewish settlement near Hebron’.

The column devotes two paragraphs out of eighteen to the actual murders in Adora.

The London Telegraph didn’t feel it worth mentioning at all. If the London Sunday Times mentioned it, I couldn’t find it.

Go back up and read the eyewitness account of what happened at Adara again. Children shot down as they sat on the edge of their bed, upstairs in their bedroom.

Compare that scene to the description afforded by Omar to the Battle of Jenin. Then you will know the difference between a ‘battle’ and a ‘massacre’ even if the rest of the world doesn’t.

They can’t see it, because in the worldview of the anti-Semite, one can’t ‘massacre’ Jews.

The whole world stands against Israel, including even many Christians. Why? Because the Bible said it would in the last days.

“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 12:3

New Pal Abdullah Heads Home

New Pal Abdullah Heads Home
Vol: 7 Issue: 27 Saturday, April 27, 2002

President Bush and Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia are now buddies, says the President. After spending ninety minutes touring his ranch in his pickup, the President said he formed a close personal bond with the Saudi leader.

Abdullah pledged not to use oil as a weapon against the West and solemnly assured President Bush that the Saudi telethon that raised $55 million was to aid the suffering Palestinians. Abdullah and his family personally contributed more than two million dollars to the effort.

Arafat learned much about propaganda and how to manipulate the public mind from the Nazis, but he evidently failed to avoid making one of their greatest mistakes. He kept meticulous records.

And among those records are documents listing one hundred and two deceased Palestinians and a record of the payment of $5,340 [20,000 riyals] to the families of each. In the areas under Palestinian control, this is an immense sum of money.

Click here for a facsimile of Saudi document.

The names on the list were of suicide bombers and Palestinian commanders who had been killed in attacks against Israeli targets. It included the names of some of the highest-profile bombers who have been killed in recent attacks, among them children and women. The documents contradict the Saudi government s consistent claim that it does not directly pay suicide bombers families. The Saudis have repeatedly insisted the money they send the Palestinians goes to rebuilding areas damaged or destroyed by Israeli forces operating in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

A spokesman for the Saudi Embassy, who was traveling with Crown Prince Abdullah in Texas following his meeting Thursday with President Bush, said he could not comment on the documents because he had not seen them.

But he repeated claims the Saudis “don t pay suicide bombers.” He criticized what he said was Israel s attempt to link fundraising for Palestinians to suicide bombers, calling it “a disgrace.”

The spokesman also said the story about the documents was Israel’s way of trying to undermine the Bush-Abdullah talks.


Evidently, the Bush administration officials just can’t bring themselves to believe that Crown Prince Adbullah would tell the president a falsehood. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher didn’t dispute the authenticity of the document, but said it would take the Crown Prince at his word.

“The Saudis have assured us that they don t want the money going to support violence,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said on Friday. He added that the Saudis had promised the funds would only go to “legitimate charities” in the Palestinian areas.

Another Version of the Battle At Jenin

An article in Al-Ahram Weekly and published by the Jerusalem Post gives the account of a Palestinian terrorist who escaped Jenin and made his way to Egypt. The terrorist — identified as Omar — is one of Israel s most wanted men.

He gives his account to a sympathetic Arab reporter for an Arab weekly paper sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

Instead of describing a massacre, he described a ferocious battle. In his own words, “We started working on our plan: to trap the invading soldiers and blow them up from the moment the Israeli tanks pulled out of Jenin last month.”

Omar and other “engineers” made hundreds of explosive devices and carefully chose their locations.

“We had more than 50 houses booby-trapped around the camp. We chose old and empty buildings and the houses of men who were wanted by Israel, because we knew the soldiers would search for them,” he said.

“We cut off lengths of main water pipes and packed them with explosives and nails. Then we placed them about four meters apart throughout the houses – in cupboards, under sinks, in sofas.”

The terrorists hoped to disable the Israeli army’s tanks with much more powerful bombs placed inside rubbish bins on the street. More explosives were hidden inside the cars of Jenin’s most wanted men.

Connected by wires, the bombs were set off remotely, triggered by the current from a car battery. Omar also described with great pride the most deadly attack on Israeli troops the one that claimed thirteen soldiers at a stroke.

“They were lured there,” he says.

“We all stopped shooting and the women went out to tell the soldiers that we had run out of bullets and were leaving.”

The women alerted the fighters as the soldiers reached the booby- trapped area.

“When the senior officers realized what had happened, they shouted through megaphones that they wanted an immediate cease-fire. We let them approach to retrieve the men and then opened fire.

“Some of the soldiers were so shocked and frightened that they mistakenly ran towards us.” On Wednesday, after the fighters ran out of ammunition, he says, armored vehicles roamed the streets calling out to them in Arabic: “You are finished and can’t win against us. We are more powerful than you. Surrender.”

Omar lost an arm during a previous battle with Israeli troops. He asked the Al-Ahram reporter if he thought he could get an artificial arm with working fingers. When asked why, he replied,

Omar replied, “Because I want to be able to hold a heavy rifle again. That way I can kill more Israeli soldiers. It’s that or become a suicide bomber.”

Again, Omar s account is to a sympathetic reporter to a sympathetic newspaper. He was not under Israeli duress. He wasn t an Israeli captive. And he is hardly sympathetic to Israel, as evidenced by his question about an artificial arm.

But he alleged no massacre. He saw no massacre. He admitted the Palestinians themselves caused much of the devastation blamed on Israeli forces by Europe and the United Nations.

Both continue to call for an investigation into the massacre at Jenin. The European press and some American media [see Palestine Peter Jennings”] continue to use the word massacre at every opportunity. Still, there is no evidence of a massacre. Battlefield survivors are unanimous in their denial of witnessing any massacre.

[Apart from that of the thirteen Israeli soldiers. What if Israel had lured thirteen Palestinians into a similar explosive booby-trap? Wouldn t that be a massacre demanding a global investigation? Where is the outrage against Arafat?]

This is the Principle of the Big Lie at work again. If one repeats a lie often enough, it will eventually become the accepted truth . Especially if one wants it to be true.

The Big Lie worked in 1930’s Europe because that’s what the population wanted to believe. It appears history is coming full circle.

In this case, the accepted truth is that there was an Israeli massacre of Palestinian civilians at Jenin and that the Israelis are covering it up by making petty demands of the investigative team. Demands like the team include investigators with military command experience, or investigators without a pro-Palestinian bias.

The UN had no problem filling the order for command-experienced officers. They are having a bit more trouble finding UN or EU officials without a proven bias.

In the end, the investigation will accomplish nothing. The conventional wisdom is that a massacre took place. Failure to discover evidence will just confirm in the minds of the willing that Israel pulled off their cover-up.

Israel is guilty until proven innocent. How does one prove something did not happen? Answer: it s impossible.

And don t think the pro-Arab spin machine doesn t know it.

Universe as God?

Universe as God?
Vol: 7 Issue: 26 Friday, April 26, 2002

Secular science, ever vigilant against interpreting their observations as evidence of a Creator, has decided that the universe is eternal.

Such is the latest pronouncement coming from the hallowed halls of science.

It is incredible to me that so many are willing to settle for science as their deity. Science has intoned solemnly that the universe began with a Big Bang and has been expanding ever since. Then, science announced that the universe is actually shrinking, imploding, if you will.

Scientists discovered that neutrinos are moving in the wrong direction and intoned their findings.

Now, the universe isn’t shrinking or expanding anymore. It is eternal, driven by what they call a ‘dark force’.

Two scientists have put forward a new model to explain how the cosmos is and where it might be going.

They say it is necessary to take account of startling new discoveries – in particular, the observation that everything in the Universe is moving apart at an accelerating rate.

Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok propose the idea that the cosmos goes through an endless cycle – of Big Bang, expansion and stagnation – which is driven by an as yet unexplained “dark energy”. [at this point, I am almost vibrating — “as yet unexplained ‘dark’ energy?” The Energy that drives the Universe is clearly explained. The Bible calls that Energy ‘God’.] They published their findings in the journal, ‘Science’.

Even some secular science writers who understand this stuff better than I do also know better. Cosmology writer Marcus Chown concedes it will be extremely difficult to finally prove any model of the Universe.

“The history of cosmology is the history of us being completely wrong,” he told the BBC. “I mean, cosmology is the hardest of all sciences; we sit on this tiny planet in the middle of this vast Universe, we can’t go anywhere and do any experiments – all we can do is pick up the light that happens to fall on us and deduce some things about the Universe.”


I am admittedly not a scientist and confess I have no faith in a system that changes directions more often than Colin Powell. But I am relatively conversant with the scientific system outlined by the Bible.

It wasn’t Columbus who discovered the earth was round. The Bible tells us that in Isaiah 40:22. Although secular science learned about germs and microbes in the past century, the Bible testifies to the spread of germs.

The ancient Hebrews were warned that he that toucheth a dead body shall be unclean for seven days Numbers 19:11. The foods specified as unclean, like ferrets, moles, weasels, mice — all carry disease. [Levitcus 11] Other unclean foods like pork or shellfish carry bacteria that can be deadly long before the senses can tell it is spoiled.

The Bible’s admonitions about washing, cleanness and uncleaness, care around dead bodies, warnings about eating the flesh of animals that die of natural causes; all indicate an advanced knowledge of germs and their method of transmission.

The information was there for thousands of years. Like that ‘dark energy’ science is now desperately seeking to explain.

Until the turn of the 20th century, it was still a common medical practice to treat disease by ‘bleeding’ the victim. If science had turned to the Scriptures for guidance, they’d have discovered that the Hebrews have known for more than three thousand years that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” [Lev 17:11].

Secular science is the Holy Writ of secular humanism — a religion dedicated to proving man is god.

The Apostle Paul explained secular humanism this way: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. . .Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator.” [Romans 1:20-21,25].

The Bible is a Book of science, inspired, not by a ‘dark energy’ but by the Creator of the Universe. He is Eternal, not the universe itself. It is that sense of the Eternal that science is detecting. That explains the sense of desperation in coming up with a secular explanation.

God is science, since He is the author of natural law. Which is why Paul was careful to admonish Timothy when he sent him out to begin his ministry, “Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.” [1 Tim 6:6]

On scientific prounouncemnts that contradict revelation, Paul warned, “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called, which some professing have erred concerning the faith.

Science is real. The Bible is real. God is real. But the universe is not eternal. God is.

“Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness?” [2 Peter 3:12]

Cardinals Reject Zero Tolerance

Cardinals Reject Zero Tolerance
Vol: 7 Issue: 25 Thursday, April 25, 2002

American cardinals, summoned to an emergency meeting in Rome with the Pope, spent several days debating how to best deal with the growing sexual abuse scandal among its priests.

The Pope issued a statement saying, “The abuse which has caused this crisis is by every standard wrong and rightly considered a crime by society; it is also an appalling sin in the eyes of God.” The Pope went on to express his “profound sense of solidarity and concern.” The Pope went on to say, “People need to know that there is no place in the priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young.” Having summoned the thirteen cardinals all the way to Rome to state the obvious, he evidently went back to sleep.

In the end, the cardinals agreed to streamline rules on defrocking sexually abusive priests but said the only automatic dismissals would be for “notorious” serial abusers of children.

The cardinal’s final statement stopped short of a zero-tolerance policy demanded by American Catholics, whereby any priest caught molesting minors would be thrown out of the Church on his first offense.

According to the statement, it should be up to the local bishop to decide what to do in “non-notorious” cases.


This is a dangerous topic. As a former Roman Catholic, I know. I’d like preface it by restating the Omega Letter’s doctrinal position that salvation is not dependent on church membership.

Sitting in church no more makes one a Christian than being in a garage makes one a car. Salvation is dependent upon a personal relationship with Christ. Ephesians 2:8 says, “For by grace are ye saved through faith,; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.”

The contrary is also true. There are many born-again heaven-bound Catholics. I have no wish to offend them, or to be offensive in general. This is an offensive subject, but the offense wasn’t committed by me.

I offer the counsel, “Great peace have they which love thy law and nothing shall offend them.” That being said, the topic demands open examination illuminated by the Bible the cardinals claimed played a role in their decision. And how it connects to Bible prophecy.

In carefully examining the statement, three salient points jump out immediately. First, it reads like something drawn up by Bill Clinton’s lawyers defining what constitutes ‘sex’. The Pope identified “the abuse which caused this crisis” as an “appalling sin” but then spoke of “the power of Christian conversion, that radical decision to turn away from sin and back to God.”

One would hope that one would have experienced that power of Christian conversion before entering the priesthood.

There is something off-key, here, despite the careful wording. Jesus forgives sins. But He does not shield the forgiven from the consequences of that sin. You might confess embezzlement, but that doesn’t mean Jesus will keep you out of jail. Just out of hell.

A Distinction Without a Difference

The Pope said that there was no place in the priesthood for those ‘who would harm the young’. No mention of moral accountability of those involved. Individual morality is evidently not at issue. The cardinals had little to say regarding the corrupt nature of a system that would hide the molesters of children behind the veil of the Catholic Church.

A second point that leapt out, albeit related to the first point, is the fact that automatic dismissals are called for only in the case of ‘serial sex abusers’ and ‘notorious’ cases that focus unwanted attention on the church. Again, no mention of any moral standard of conduct.

Instead, the Prime Directive is to protect the Church first, the molesters afterwards, if possible. Unless there is a serial sexual abuse case [much more difficult to coverup] or a ‘notorious’ [high-profile] case, it remains as it was — in the hands of the local bishop.

In other words, a guy like Geoghan who molested hundreds of kids would still get kicked out — and even get prosecuted — provided he did it enough times and angered enough people. How was the much-anticipated Statement of the American Cardinals materially different than the status quo?

And third, instead of a definitive policy in keeping with the stated mission of the Catholic Church to represent Jesus Christ, the cardinals offered a statement outlining a distinction without a difference.

Spiritual Wickedness in High Places

For centuries, there have been dark whisperings about sexual immorality in the priesthood. Pope Alexander VI, Roderigo Borgia was noted for his vast sexual appetites and immoralities, including fathering a number of children, several of whom he made cardinals. Another became famous in her own right, Lucretia Borgia.

Alexander became known as the first of the “Borgia Popes.” The Vatican denies many of the details of its history, unless they have no choice. Even then, it can take centuries.

The list is long, but my purpose is to make a point, not deliver an indictment. History is what it is.

The point is, the system, at its heart, is corrupt. Historically, it has always been corrupt. Church excesses, like the Spanish Inquisition, the various European wars it started, financed and fought [the Pope once had his own army] are ignored or denied. If pressed, the Vatican traditionally falls back on the ‘power of Christian conversion’ argument.

It’s an effective argument. Disputing it puts one on the edge of disputing the foundational principle of Christianity — that salvation is open to all men and no man is too depraved to be beyond Christ.

Who’s Who On the List

The Apostle John tells us much about the religious system of the antichrist. We know it is linked to the economic system [Rev 13:17]. We know that it is an apostate form of Christianity. [Rev 13:11]. We know it is of global reach and influence. [Rev 13:15] We know that the religious system has a long political history [Rev 17:2. 18:3, 18:9]. We know the system is located in a city on seven mountains [Rev 17:9]. We know that it will be a system headed by a single corrupt apostate religious leader.That’s what we know from Scripture.

Here’s what we know from history. For more than a thousand years, Europe was essentially ruled by the papacy. They installed kings, deposed kings, invaded countries and conquered armies — in the name of the church. They persecuted the Reformers, burnt Protestants at the stake, [including those who translated and published Bibles in common language instead of Latin], and is without question of global reach, even to this day.

The power of the Church is such that even today, the government of the United States defers to the Vatican on issues such as whether or not the Vatican will allow the US to prosecute priests. That, my friends, is power!

Is the present Roman Catholic Church the Church of the False Prophet? The answer is no. The Christians will no longer be members.

But the system as it exists wasn’t built for nothing. As the war against terror progresses, it is increasingly a war against religions and religious fundamentalists — Muslim fundamentalists, at the moment. But fundamentalist Jews and fundamentalist Christians are taking stands their governments would prefer they kept to themselves.

It is not too much a stretch to expect a global declaration of war against fundamentalism in general. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, it makes no difference. A case can be made against fundamentalists in all three camps. All that is necessary is the correctly defining a ‘fundamentalist’.

After the Rapture, there are no more Christians. The Church Age is over. The Tribulation Period has a two-fold purpose. To judge a lost and Christ-rejecting world and to fulfill the outlined goal of Daniel’s 70th Week [Daniel 9:24]. There is no place in that equation for those who are neither lost nor rejecters of Christ.

But it is not hard to imagine that the Vatican system itself will survive, together with a significant portion of its hierarchy.

The kind of hierarchy that can’t quite bring itself to deny its members their little perqs. Even if they are a bit kinky.

Boys will be boys, after all. “And I beheld another beast coming up our of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.” [Revelation 13:11]

The Battle For Jenin – A Hostile Eyewitness Account:

The Battle For Jenin – A Hostile Eyewitness Account:
Vol: 7 Issue: 24 Wednesday, April 24, 2002

The calls for an investigation of the Jenin “massacre” continue despite the fact that nobody can find evidence of a massacre, no victims, no list of missing and no bodies.

According to an eyewitness, that’s because there was no massacre. There is little reason to doubt the account of Tabaat Mardawi, a senior Hamas member who was captured during the battle. Having only days before put his life on the line to hurt Israel, it is unlikely he would lie to protect Israel.

Mardawi gave an interview to CNN from the Israeli prison where he is being held. His account lines up more closely with that of Israel’s than it does anything being said by the UN, EU and PA.

“Like Hunting”

Mardawi said he and other Palestinian fighters had expected Israel to attack with planes and tanks. He was very pleased to see infantry instead.

“It was like hunting … like being given a prize. I couldn’t believe it when I saw the soldiers,” he said. “The Israelis knew that any soldier who went into the camp like that was going to get killed. . . I’ve been waiting for a moment like that for years.”

Israel says the decision to use infantry to spearhead the attack rather than using air power and artillery stemmed from a desire to limit civilian casualties, even at the risk of higher IDF casualties.

Twenty-three dead Israeli soldiers made Jenin one of the most costly Israeli operations since the intifada began.

“A Very Hard Fight”

Mardawi drew a map of the camp and talked about the course of the battle. Their weapons were guns and crudely made bombs and booby traps — “big ones” for tanks and “others the size of a water bottle.” He estimated 1,000 to 2,000 bombs and booby traps were spread through the camp. “It was a very hard fight. We fought at close quarters,” he said, “sometimes just a matter of a few meters between us, sometimes even in the same house.”

Mardawi also said there were about 100 Palestinians in the battle — 60 to 70 fighters from the camp and 20-30 members of the Palestinian security forces. The Israelis say there were about 200 fighters in the camp and about half surrendered during the fighting.

Saw No Massacre

The CNN reporter asked Mardawi about the allegations that Israel led groups of people away to be massacred. Mardawi said he saw a massacre, but it was the kind seen by every soldier defeated by a superior force.

“By my own standard, what happened there was a massacre. But if you are asking, ‘Did I see tens of people killed?’ Frankly, no. In my group, we were in an area with no other people. Three fighters with me were killed. Later when we started to move from place to place, we saw destroyed houses and could smell bodies.”

Verdict Awaiting Evidence

The United Nations and European Union have together already reached a verdict. Israel overreacted, destroyed a Palestinian ‘refugee camp’ [refugees from whom?] and massacred hundreds of refugees. To prove it, they are sending a ‘fact-finding’ team to find evidence of what even the combatants deny took place.

The world just can’t accept the possibility that Israel did exactly what it said it would do: Engage terrorist elements heavily entrenched in an urban area, taking extreme care to limit civilian casualties.

Israel could have attacked with planes or artillery, as Mardawi expected. Instead, to his delight, Israel sent infantry in order to keep from killing civilians. It was a decision that cost Israel 23 soldiers.


It is easy enough to follow logically, simply by asking a couple of questions the combined leadership of the EU and UN never thought of asking.

How many soldiers would Israel have risked in an air assault? Why would they use infantry? How much damage would be caused to an urban area 1/3 the size of Central Park if the 2000 bombs the Palestinians hid there were detonated — even if Israel didn’t fire a shot?

The possibility that 2000 booby traps [the small ones the size of water bottles] may account for some of the death and destruction of Palestinians in Jenin has not even been raised.

The rush to judgement against Israel doesn’t rise from any genuine sense of Israeli overreaction. There is no nation in Europe that wouldn’t do exactly the same thing, given the identical circumstances. The UN demonstrated what it would do against terrorist nations if sufficiently provoked. Ask the Iraqis.

Washington has made it clear how it would respond to a terror attack. Ask al-Qaeda. No outcry for a ‘fact-finding’ team against America, even though more allied troops have been killed by US friendly fire than have been killed by hostile enemy fire.

The UN fact-finding team isn’t interested in finding facts. It is interested in finding evidence to support the verdict of guilty it has already reached.

Extremists Making Big Inroads In Europe

Extremists Making Big Inroads In Europe
Vol: 7 Issue: 23 Tuesday, April 23, 2002

Europe is in a state of shock following the defeat of French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin. What stunned the European establishment was the success of right-wing extremist and ultra-nationalist Jean-Marie Le Pen. Le Pen came second in the first round of the presidential vote on Sunday, beating off the left’s favorite, Lionel Jospin, to reach the final run-off against the conservative incumbent, Jacques Chirac.

To give some sense of relativity, the term ‘conservative’ as applied to Jacques Chirac is by French standards.

Additionally, in the US, the appellation ‘right’ is generally applied to conservatives, ‘left’ to liberals. But in Europe, when one speaks of the right, one is speaking of political views approaching those of the ’30’s.

By US standards, Chirac would stand somewhere to the liberal left of Ted Kennedy. As a result, the terms liberal and conservative are misleading. The French are among the most liberal in Europe.

So the victory of Jean Le Pen over the more-liberal-than-Chirac Lionel Jospin means more than at first meets the eye. Le Pen scares both the liberals and the conservatives across Europe.

Jospin’s Socialists and the other main parties of the left have called on their supporters to back Mr Chirac on 5 May in a concerted effort to defeat the far-right challenger.

About ten thousand people demostrated against the results in Paris alone. Banners denounced Mr Le Pen, who earned notoriety for his remarks on the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews and his opposition to immigration. “Mussolini: 1922. Hitler: 1933. Le Pen: never” was the cry at a rally in the eastern city of Strasbourg.


While the mainstream may have been shocked by the election of Le Pen, it is important to remember that he beat the sitting Prime Minister, meaning his ultranationalist views are shared by a significant segment of the French population.

Europe may still be far from the pandemic despair that gave rise to fascism in the 1930s. Today’s sense of insecurity, however, is provoking some comparisons to the brooding atmosphere that led to social upheaval, dictatorship, atrocities and war.

Although Le Pen, who once dismissed Nazi gas chambers as “a minor detail in the history of World War II,” is likely to be routed by incumbent President Jacques Chirac in the May 5 runoff, far-right figures have triumphed elsewhere in Europe.

The xenophobic Freedom Party shares power in Austria, even though its charismatic leader, Joerg Haider, has stepped down.

In Denmark, voter disaffection with left-of-center rule was galvanized by the strong anti-immigration platform of the Danish People’s Party, which also sits in government.

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, a media magnate and no friend of the left, governs the country with the support of the right-wing National Alliance and Northern League.

Mainstream Europe is feeling an ominous hint of recognition in the drift to the right. In Greece, fascist occupation during World War II left deep scars on the national psyche.

Greek daily Ta Nea wrote that “Europe freezes as fascism rises” and likened the spread of far-right influence to “resurrection of the vampire” that drained the continent’s lifeblood during the Holocaust.

Kristallnacht Revisted?

Meanwhile, the Washington Times headlined a story yesterday, “Synagogues burn as Europeans rage”.

The Times reported that in recent days, one synagogue in Marseille, France, has been doused in gasoline and burned to the ground.

Another in Lyon, France, was damaged in a car attack. A third, in Brussels, was firebombed. A fourth, in Kiev, was attacked by 50 youths chanting, “Kill the Jews,” before beating up a rabbi.

In Great Britain, police have logged at least 15 anti-Jewish episodes this month, including eight physical assaults, synagogues daubed with racist slogans and hate mail sent to prominent figures among the nation’s 300,000 Jews.

A Jewish theology student was reading a book of Psalms aboard a London bus when he was stabbed 27 times.

The destruction of the synagogue at Marseille was the sixth attack on a Jewish religious site in France in less than a week. In Lyon, 15 masked assailants smashed two cars into a synagogue and set it on fire. Other arsonists tried to set fire to a synagogue in Strasbourg.

There were also attacks on Jewish citizens. A man opened fire on a kosher butcher’s shop in a village near Toulouse. A Jewish school at Sarcelles, near Paris, was ransacked.

Youths stoned one Jewish school bus and set fire to two others in Paris, and a gang waded into a team of Jewish soccer players, beating them with iron bars.

A Jewish synagogue in the German town of Herford was daubed with the words “Six million were not enough”. Six million Jews were shoveled into ovens by the Nazis during World War II.


Jesus warned of an upswing in anti-Semitism in the last days, warning, “pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day. For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” [Matthew 24:20,21].

Speaking of the coming persecution of Israel during Daniel’s 70th Week, Jesus said that persecution would be part of “great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” [Matthew 24:21]

There are many that argue this passage relates to the Church, which they believe will go through the Tribulation.

Except the Church would not understand the ‘abomination of desolation’ would not worry about travel on the Sabbath and Jesus specifically addressed his warning to the Jews of Judea [Matth 24:16]. What was Biblical Judea is part of today’s West Bank.

So, we put it all together. Here’s the global picture. A world-wide wave of anti-Semitism with a particularly vicious version taking root across Europe.

Add to that an Arab-Israel conflict over the West Bank [Judea] and Jerusalem that Europe is dying to involve itself in.

Here’s the prophetic outlook. Daniel says the covenant confirmed by the antichrist [Dan 9:27] ends the conflict. But then he breaks it half-way through and launches a maniacal effort to wipe Israel and global Jewry from the face of the earth.

Jesus says the effort will make previous pogroms — and even the Holocaust — pale by comparison.

The kind of global anti-Semitism that the antichrist will harness from his headquarters in Europe can’t take place in a vacuum.

A popular anti-Israeli world view must be first there for him to harness. The anti-Israel propaganda campaign by the European press is part and parcel of the last day’s scenario.

Anti-Jewish sentiment is spreading across Europe like wildfire. Exactly on schedule, if these are the times spoken of in prophecy.

And if not, what then, would those times look like?

Arafat Not Only Almost Has-Been

Arafat Not Only Almost Has-Been
Vol: 7 Issue: 22 Monday, April 22, 2002

Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Ben-Eliezer reportedly held secret meetings in a Jerusalem hotel to work out a deal on how to carve up Israel’s political pie in the event current Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is removed from office.

Ben-Eliezer and Netanyahu met in three separate meetings over the last few months to work out a deal on establishing a unity government after the next national elections, assuming that both lead their respective parties at the time. Netanyahu reportedly went so far as to offer Ben-Eliezer the post of defense minister. The former prime minister does not currently hold the leadership of Likud, but internal polls give Netanyahu the edge over Sharon among party faithful, according to The Associated Press.

Netanyahu may be a bit premature; Sharon’s popularity is on the upswing despite — or perhaps due to — the Israeli military operations in the West Bank. A local poll two weeks ago gave Sharon a 62 percent approval rating, up more than 20 points from last month. The Labor Party pledged April 9 not to withdraw from the coalition during a time of war, while the next parliamentary elections are not scheduled until October 2003.

Operation Defensive Shield Over, Says Sharon

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said “the present phase of the battle against terrorism is over.” “We finished it,” said Sharon, referring to “Operation Defensive Shield.” But while Israel may have pulled back, saying it is over doesn t mean Israel is standing down. Sharon said “Defensive Shield,” which Israel said was intended to root out terrorists and their infrastructure in the West Bank, has produced “serious results, but the struggle against terror will continue.”


Israel is for the moment content to allow Sharon to act as their wartime leader but wartime leaders seldom last longer than the war. Winston Churchill was the UK s greatest living statesman in 1945. In 1946 he was a former government official.

Sharon will face a coalition crisis as soon as negotiations with the Palestinians begin in earnest. The right wing will walk out if it believes the prime minister is too conciliatory, but the left will withdraw if he stonewalls the negotiations. Either way, Sharon will likely find himself out of a job.

For now, however, negotiations are unlikely. The Palestinians have yet to respond for the three week Israeli incursion. Israel still has tanks and troops in harm s way, increasing their exposure and therefore the probability of attack.

To the north, Hezbollah has reined in, temporarily, but only until Syria and Iran feel sufficiently secure to unleash them again. Israel s confinement and isolation of Arafat was an unexpected move they had intended to coordinate with the Palestinian central authority an authority that no longer exists as a cohesive guerilla force.

Israel Objects To UN Personnel Choice

Following his vicious condemnation of Israeli conduct at Jenin before any facts were known Israel has rejected UN Envoy Terje Larsen as a participant in any subsequent UN investigative team. Larsen blasted Israel for the destruction wrought by Operation Defensive Shield, saying it was unwarranted by any military objective and created a human catastrophe “horrifying beyond belief.”

One Israeli lawmaker said Larsen disqualified himself by his one-sided comments. His words, she said, were “not worthy of an objective diplomat.”

Israel says Larsen has already made up his mind and therefore his investigation would simply be pro forma. Larsen’s relations with the IDF and the defense establishment have been strained since last year, when he denied the UN had a video of the kidnapping of soldiers from Har Dov – a video that later did emerge.

Israel says Larsen violated the UN Charter, which calls upon their diplomats to act in an objective manner. By going to the international press Larsen went beyond the accepted behavior of an international diplomat. There is strong support in the Knesset for having Larsen declared persona non-grata and unceremoniously booting him out of Israel. But that would just bring down more UN heat, as Larsen enjoys the title of under-secretary-general of the United Nations.

Robinson Can Stay Home, Too

Israel has also rejected the participation of former UN High Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson. Robinson presided over the UN Conference on Racism in South Africa last year that devolved into a racist conference of anti-Semites whose behavior was so egregious that many countries, including the US and Canada, simply walked out.


The Arabs are already painting Israel s rejection of Larsen and Robinson as evidence of an Israeli cover-up of dark deeds at Jenin.

The United Nations says Israel is overreacting to Larsen s comments and says it fully supports him .

According to Kofi Annan, “Throughout the many years he has worked to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Roed-Larsen has always behaved professionally, with objectivity and sympathy.”

Larsen s comments came without the benefit of any evidence, based solely on unsupported Palestinian allegations. And Larsen has been far less vociferous about the wave of Palestinian terror and suicide bomber attacks against innocent civilians in Israel than he has about the Jenin battle.

To date there s been no discovery of hidden mass graves. More than that, there is no list of names of those allegedly missing and believed massacred.

Larsen s comments made it clear he had already made up his mind. Israel would be insane to stack the deck against itself with Robinson and Larsen.

Kofi Annan continues to call for an international UN peacekeeping force to be deployed to the region, whether Israel wants one or not.

Larsen, who is also an official of the Norwegian government and the European Union, is a reflection of the overall global position regarding Israel and its right to defend itself.

The overt anti-Semitism of the international community is made even more astonishing by it’s own inability to see it. Providing even evidence of the supernatural nature of this conflict and the accuracy of Bible prophecy.

Europe Offers To Broker Peace Talks

Europe Offers To Broker Peace Talks
Vol: 7 Issue: 21 Sunday, April 21, 2002

The European Union is going to try and broker its own peace deal between the Israelis and Palestinians on Monday when it hosts a meeting of 25 European and Mediterranean countries. Officially, the meeting s agenda is to improve economic cooperation with the long-term perspective of a free trade zone around the Mediterranean by 2010. But they have a side mission to hammer out their own Middle East peace plan with Europe as the main peace broker.

Seeking Legitimacy

Europe is desperately seeking legitimacy on the global stage. It had high hopes for unification Europe would have a common market even larger than the United States. European civilization is considered [by them] to be far more advanced than the rougher American version. Europe is for abortion and euthanasia, for trees and all the little creatures, universal health care, diversity and religious tolerance. It is against exploring natural wildlife refuges for oil.

Failed Expectations

Europe expected its super-state to eclipse the arrogant United States economically, politically and especially diplomatically, where it feels Washington is most out of touch with the rest of the world.

But Super-Europe hasn t made the splash its supporters expected. The Euro didn t become the new benchmark currency for the world. The world didn t look to Europe for leadership in fighting terror, even though Europe has been the target of terrorists for decades.

And most annoying of all, when a conflict broke out in their own backyard in the Middle East, the Israelis didn t look to Europe, they looked to Washington.

Hell Hath No Fury Like A SuperState Scorned

Since the Israelis have good reason to mistrust the enlightened European view that Israel should put its security in European hands, the EU has increasingly courted the Arab side. The European press continues to find a way to work the word massacre into every story about Jenin, while the European Union continues to call for a just and lasting peace based on Israel ending the occupation .

But European leaders have spent no more time examining what the phrase ending the occupation means than has the European press. Since Israel does not occupy the Palestinian controlled-areas [apart from its current temporary military incursion], ending the occupation means what it has always meant. It means when the Jews no longer occupy land claimed by the Arabs.

That means the definition of occupation is in the hands of the Arabs, and it also means the Arabs will be the ones to decide when the occupation has ended.


The Europeans aren t stupid they know what the Arab agenda is as well as you or I. They can read. But Israel is filled with Jews, whereas the Arab states are filled with oil. And he who controls the oil makes the rules.

Europe s role in the last days is clearly defined. Daniel made it plain that final form of human government would be headquartered in Europe. Daniel interpreted Nebuchadnezzar s image of the two legs of iron and the ten toes of iron and clay as the fourth successive world empire. History identifies the first three as Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greek. The fourth, Rome, was the empire that Daniel interpreted as the two legs of iron.

The Roman Empire divided itself into two the Western Empire at Rome and the Eastern Empire at Constantinople — in the years before it collapsed.

Daniel said the ten toes of that image, partly strong and partly weak, like iron mixed with clay [Daniel 2:41] would be revived and would serve as the government of antichrist in the last days. Daniel also says that the platform on which the antichrist will come to power will be a peace deal between Israel and the many . [Daniel 9:27]

The Bible recorded this information thousands of years ago. The same information is today’s headlines. There are those who scoff, call it coincidence and point out that, ‘people have been waiting for the last days forever, and it still hasn’t happened’ — as if that were somehow meaningful.

As ridiculous as that line of reasoning is, it was also anticipated by Scripture for the last days.

“Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” [2 Peter 3:3-4]