What s Up, Jacques?

What s Up, Jacques?
Vol: 17 Issue: 18 Tuesday, February 18, 2003

French President Jacques Chirac launched a stinging attack on east European candidates for EU membership on Monday, saying they had missed a great opportunity to shut up when they issued pro-American statements on Iraq.

Chirac had great plans for the east European candidates in his expanded vision of a new Europe, ruled (of course) by the French in partnership with Germany.

But when King Jacques the Worst declared there would be no European participation in a war with Iraq, sixteen EU states ignored him and voted with the United States.

A furious Chirac ordered his UN guy, Dominique de Vallepin, to block the US at every turn at the Security Council, including threatening to use its veto to kill any future resolutions against Saddam Hussein.

NATO member Turkey asked the Alliance for military aid to defend it against an Iraqi counter attack. Turkey invoked Article 5, which is a NATO member s most powerful SOS signal. NATO operates according to the understanding that an attack on any NATO member is deemed an attack on them all. That is set forth by Article 5 of the NATO Charter.

The NATO Charter also expressly separates itself from, and declares itself not subordinate to, the United Nations.

King Jacques responded by blocking NATO s response, saying, Why should France involve itself in a war it doesn t agree with? Germany sided with the French, and so did little Belgium.

For a month, France, Germany and Belgium blocked a US proposal to begin planning to help defend Turkey from possible retaliatory attacks by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in the event of another war in the Gulf. They argued such a move was premature and would undermine UN efforts to avoid war.

The Germans added the lame excuse that they are constitutional pacifists (then why are they in NATO in the first place) and the Belgians just spoke sagely about the wisdom that comes from being an older country.

Wisdom, maybe, but the memory doesn t do that well, or they d remember that being wise didn t stop Belgium from being the battleground for two world wars in the last century.

On Sunday, the 19-member alliance turned to its Defense Planning Committee, which Paris withdrew from in 1966, to negotiate an end to the NATO deadlock.

King Jacques lashed out against the rest of Europe, especially those countries not yet fully admitted into the EU.

“These countries have been not very well behaved and rather reckless of the danger of aligning themselves too rapidly with the American position,” Chirac told a news conference after the emergency EU summit on the Iraq crisis.

According to King Jacques, being well-behaved means toeing the French line. And misbehaving countries run the risk of being spanked, especially ones who have not yet achieved full membership status in the EU.

“When you are in the family … you have more rights than when you are asking to join and knocking on the door,” he said.

He warned Romania and Bulgaria they had been particularly incautious as they were still seeking membership of the now 15-strong bloc, saying that if they wanted to reduce their chances “they could hardly find a better way of doing it.”

Branding joint letters signed by Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic with EU members Britain, Spain, Italy, Denmark and Portugal, and by the so-called Vilnius 10 group of EU and NATO candidates “infantile” and “dangerous,” Chirac said: “They missed a great opportunity to shut up.”


When asked if France s unwillingness to meet its NATO commitment to Turkey was due to an aversion to war, Chirac snapped, France is not a pacifist.

It s true. The French are more than happy to go to war. They do it all the time. They ve spent the last fifty years at war with little countries throughout Africa, propping up and then knocking down dictatorships that failed to behave according to French dictates.

Germany admits it is pacifist, but that isn t the reason they oppose war with Iraq. They supported the 1991 Gulf War with troops and materiel. Russia and China are opposed as well. Can the whole world be wrong?

Actually, the whole world supports removing Saddam. A handful of important countries oppose it. It isn t idealism, or concern for the Iraqi people, or fear of destabilizing the region or even anti-Americanism that is behind it.

It s oil. The same oil that they claim is motivating the United States.

As of October 2002, Iraq reportedly had signed several multi-billion dollar deals with foreign oil companies mainly from Russia, France and China.

Deutsche bank estimates US$38 billion total profit on new fields – ‘greenfield’ development – with potential production capacity of 4.7 million barrels per day if all the deals come to fruition.

The oil companies reportedly having signed deals with Iraq are Lukoil and Tatneft from Russia, TotalFinaElf from France, China National Petroleum Corp from China.

Starting to get the picture? Who are the countries opposing us at the UN again?

France has a separate deal with Saddam worth more than $50 billion a deal that heavily favors the French, thanks to UN sanctions.

A post-Saddam government would not be obliged to keep existing contracts. And no legitimate Iraqi government would let the French deal stand.

So that s what all those noble sounding phrases about France being an old country too civilized to countenance war with Iraq was all about at the UN.

It was about oil.

King Jacques fury could kill EU plans to extend full EU membership to nations beyond the original ten.

Chirac said public opinion in EU countries had been reluctant about enlargement and the invitation to the 10 was approved at a triumphant Copenhagen summit last December without a real understanding of what it entailed.

He warned that Europe’s divisions now risked reinforcing “a feeling of hostility” towards enlargement in existing EU member states, and the whole process could be derailed if even one of those countries voted against it in a referendum.

We are without question living in the last days.

AntiWar Protest Teaches Valuable Lesson – If Anybody Caught It

AntiWar Protest Teaches Valuable Lesson – If Anybody Caught It
Vol: 17 Issue: 17 Monday, February 17, 2003

On Saturday, as the marches were gearing up throughout the world, I pointed out that there were a half million expatriate Iraqis in Great Britain. I asked then, where were all the Iraqis? They would be the first to protest, one would assume, if the war against Saddam Hussein were an unjust and immoral war.

There are an estimated 75,000 Iraqis living in the United States. Where were all of them? In all the coverage of all the demonstrations, I only saw one person who claimed to be an Iraqi against the war.

Is it possible that the media missed a story here? The rabidly anti-Bush New York Times did its best to maximize the alleged impact the demonstrations had on London and Washington.

The Times pontificated, “As millions across this divided continent marched in Europe’s biggest antiwar demonstrations on Saturday, with at least 750,000 in London, Mr. Blair seemed to acknowledge that his increasingly vocal moral commitment to ousting Saddam Hussein had set him apart from many of his own people.”

“The continent has not seen protests on that scale in memory. The crowds were so vast in Barcelona and Madrid that they jammed the streets and were unable to march. Protest organizers often exaggerate numbers, but from official accounts alone at least three million people marched across Europe. Other non-partisan accounts put the total at between four million and six million. Even in Italy, which has sought to qualify its support for the United States, at least 600,000 people and possibly many more thronged Rome.”

Nowhere did the Times note that the countries with the largest demonstrations were the countries with the largest Muslim populations. That important detail was left out of virtually all the mainstream press, particularly the liberal anti-administration mainstream, like ABC News or CNN.

I read through the top headlines this morning, and they followed two separate themes. One theme was expressed by the headline in the “World Socialist”, “Mass demonstrations inaugurate international antiwar movement”.

The “World Socialist” crowed, “More than ten million people marched and rallied in over 60 countries and 300 cities, with demonstrations taking place on every continent . . .,” claiming the turnout was a great victory for international socialism.

Trotsky would have been proud, sure, but even the world socialists are missing the point.

ABC broke down the protesters by country, but never made the correlation.

A few headlines caught the other side of the effect of the demonstration, although none of them got the point either. Those headlines were represented by Jacksonville Florida’s WJXT-TV website, which read, “Iraq Gloats After Huge Antiwar Rallies”


The point remains that the largest turnouts were in the countries that have the largest Muslim populations. I told you Saturday that sponsoring ‘coalition’ is mostly made up of Muslim groups, with a few groups of politically correct liberal airheads who lend their faces to the movement to homogenize its image.

And that the marches march were taking place under the umbrella of the Stop the War Coalition, formed after Sept. 11, 2001, that consists of hundreds of organizations, from pro-Palestinian Muslims to hard-core leftists with an agenda.

We’ve done this math before, but its worth looking at again. There are almost two billion Muslims on earth. If only a tiny fraction were anti-America, pro-bin-Laden, and felt the same way as is expressed by whole countries, like Iran and Syria, for example, then how hard would it be to organize 10 million people globally to march against whatever the radical Muslims wanted to protest?

Say ten percent of world-wide Islam is of the radicalized variety. That’s two hundred MILLION radical Muslims. That would be a lot of rabble rousers.

What if only one percent of global Islam felt the same way as the anti-war demonstrators? That would be TWENTY MILLION radical Muslims.

The marchers marched under the banners of socialism, communism, anti-Zionism, pro-Palestine, mixed with the pacifists, politicians, celebrities, environmentalists and intellectuals that never saw a cause they didn’t like.

Am I saying that because most of the marchers were Muslims that Muslims don’t count? Not at all. Indeed, they count very much. There are two BILLION of them, but there were only ten million protestors, worldwide.

So, what did the protests tell London and America? It told them that, during a global war on terror in a climate in which Osama bin Laden would be elected by acclamation in half the states of the Middle East, that ten million people, world wide, organized by and consisting mostly of Muslims, are sufficiently against a US invasion of Iraq to come out and protest.

It also says that more than six billion people, including about 1.9 billion Muslims, (expressed in numbers that would be 1,900,000,000 Muslims) were NOT.

They stayed home.

We spoke on Saturday about the strong delusion and that God will simply let people believe what they want to believe. (2Thessalonians 2:11, Isaiah 66:4)

Here are two ways to look at what the antiwar demonstrations actually tell us about global sentiment regarding removing Saddam Hussein from power by force.

The lesson you take away from it will be the one you wanted to believe in the first place.

‘Take Heed That No Man Deceive You’

‘Take Heed That No Man Deceive You’
Vol: 17 Issue: 16 Sunday, February 16, 2003

This ‘alternate reality’ stuff that seems to have infected about half the world. Some weeks ago, I wrote about the ‘Alternate State of the Union’ and how our government operates (or fails to) based on two, concurrent yet alternate realities.

It would seem that in the Big Picture, there are actually THREE realities. There is the world according to the right, the world according to the left, and the world as it actually is.

For example, if one were to read the Irish Times, you’d read that British Prime Minister Tony Blair was ‘urging more time for arms inspectors’.

The headline was picked up by European newspapers and went round the world in a flash. The Left used it to demonstrate a division between the UK and the US and to crow that it was evidence that the anti-war protests rattled his resolve.

The Right thundered that it was evidence America couldn’t trust any of its allies.

What Blair actually said was that if Iraq were to actively cooperate, the ‘inspectors could take all the time they needed’.

In the middle is the third reality. What Blair actually said was what he, the UN and the United States had been saying all along.

The difference between reality and the agenda driven reporting from the left or the right is called the ‘spin’.

The phrase comes from billiards. If one strikes the cue ball on the left side, it will spin to the left. When the spinning cue ball strikes the target ball, the left spin will cause it to spin off to the right.

That’s how pool experts can do those eyepopping feats on the table, making one ball curve around another, or make the cue ball come back to its starting point, and so forth.

Its all in how you spin the ball.

Spin as propaganda works because it is carefully crafted to fit what the intended audience wanted to believe all along.

For example, while the Irish Times headline read, “Tony Blair Urges More Time For Inspectors”, it never actually quoted him, since the context was so clearly opposite to the spin applied.


The purpose of today’s OL isn’t to talk about Iraq or Tony Blair, but rather to discuss spin and the three realities. Everybody spins, whether they intend to or not, according to their own version of reality.

Everybody spins. I spin things according to my baseline reality, which is the world as it actually is. How do I know that my vision of the world as it is isn’t just my own spin?

I get my baseline reality and my definition of the world as it is from the Bible. The Bible says the real world is filled with men advancing their own agendas.

Proverbs 16:2 says that “All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes” where Proverbs 12:15 tells us “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes:”

This is very valuable information to have when assessing baseline reality. First, it helps to separate conspiracy theory from conspiracy fact.

Conspiracy THEORY would suggest a smoke-filled room somewhere in which a handful of powerful men plan out the course of history according to their own agenda.

Conspiracy FACT tells us that there are a number of smoke-filled rooms in which handsful of powerful men plan out competing courses of history according to their own agendas.

The group that has the agenda most attractive to other smaller power groups with similar agendas ends up on top. But it isn’t a handful of evil men conspiring to rule the world.

It’s lots of evil men advancing their own agendas, which is in fact setting the stage for the REAL conspirator, who is Satan and his antichrist.

The alleged Masters of the Game at the Federal Reserve, the UN, the EU, the Vatican, etc., and ad nauseum are NOT all deliberate players in a massive global conspiracy to turn the world over to Satan and the antichrist.

In reality, they are all doing what they think is right according to their own worldview. They’d be horrified to think they were advancing the cause of Satan, which is why they don’t believe he is real.

They believe that they are advancing an agenda the world needs, in spite of the opposition, who they believe don’t have the world’s best interests at heart.

The Bible defines the world as filled with evil men and seducers (2 Timothy 3:13) whose hearts are desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17:9).

That is the baseline against which to read through the spin.

The worldview of the agenda drivers begins with their rejection of the fact that there is a God in heaven.

The Bible defines such as fools. “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” Psalms 14:1, 53:1)

The Republican Party pays lip service to God, but where God and a political agenda part ways, so do GOP lawmakers and baseline reality.

For example, the GOP now has a pro-abortion plank in its platform, a pro-homosexual plank, (Log Cabin Republicans) it has a growing element within its ranks that favors stem cell research, cloning and finds it expedient to invoke His Name at will, while at the same time claiming He and Allah are one and the same.

They therefore spin accordingly, and one needs to separate baseline reality from the Far Right (which is NOT the Christian element of the GOP, but rather the PROFESSING Christian element. Not exactly the same thing).

The Democrats continue to babble about a “woman’s right to choose” without finishing the sentence “to kill her baby”, live in an alternate reality in which there is NO God at all, so its ok with them if we call him Allah, and generally espouse a platform of twisted reality that more reflects European socialism than American political traditions.

Blackstone, whose commentaries on the law still represent the Supreme Court’s legal Bible, explained the difference between a ‘republic’ and a ‘democracy’.

Blackstone said that in a republic, certain laws are granted by the Divine and cannot be overturned by a majority decision, as would be the case in a pure democracy.

So the difference between a Republic and a Democracy is the source of its authority. A Republic, like the United States, derives the Source of its Authority to govern from God, whereas a democracy derives its authority to govern from the people.

The United States was set up to be governed by the people, but under the authority of God based on ‘principles which did not change’. A government BY the people, FOR the people, but not FROM the people.

In the American republic, the “principles which did not change” and which were “certain and universal in their operation upon all the members of the community” were the principles of Biblical natural law. In fact, so firmly were these principles ensconced in the American republic that early law books taught that government was free to set its own policy only if God had not ruled in an area.

“To instance in the case of murder: this is expressly forbidden by the Divine. . . . If any human law should allow or enjoin us to commit it we are bound to transgress that human law. . . . But, with regard to matters that are . . . not commanded or forbidden by those superior laws such, for instance, as exporting of wool into foreign countries; here the . . . legislature has scope and opportunity to interpose.”

(Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (Philadelphia: Robert Bell, 1771), Vol. I, pp. 42-43)

We are often accused of being ‘Far Right’ in our views. Many of you probably believe you are Far Right because that’s what the spin doctors want you to believe.

The Far Right and the Far Left live in the alternate realities of spin and partisanship.

In the middle, devoid of spin, is the baseline reality. That reality is this.

God is in charge. He gave us the right to self government bound by certain limits. None of our leaders are perfect, none follow God’s law to the letter and all have conflicting agendas they want to advance.

The worldview that favors one side or the other at the expense of baseline reality is spin. A little applied Bible is all that it takes to dig down to the real story.

We Christians have an ironclad, airtight and absolute protection against deception that the rest of the world does not. We know the Bible is true. We know that God has already outlined history in advance according to an expressed purpose.

The Bible outlines how it will develop, when it will happen, who it will affect, and how it will all turn out. The proof is in the pudding. If the Bible is wrong, then your Omega Letter will be wrong. You all have access to our archives. On the front page, we regularly run previously published columns at random. We haven’t been wrong. And it isn’t because the editor is especially brilliant. It’s not a hard road map to follow.

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: (2 Peter 1:19)

That is why there are THREE realities.

One for those who say there is no God, and one for those who say there is some kind of Something out there but He isn’t really in touch with the modern world and needs a little help running things.

Then there is the truth as outlined for us in the Word of God. Paul writes of the last days, “But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.” (2 Timothy 3:13)

When asked ‘what will be the sign of Your coming?’ the FIRST thing Jesus said was “Take heed that no man deceive you.” (Matthew 24:4)

Paul told the Thessalonians, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

Excellent counsel for the last days.

Where Are All The Iraqis?

Where Are All The Iraqis?
Vol: 17 Issue: 15 Saturday, February 15, 2003

Where Are All The Iraqis?

A global anti-war coalition is planning to march in Washington, London and even in Paris and Berlin (whose anti-warrior stance has earned them nicknames like ‘cheese-eating surrender monkeys’ and ‘axis of weasels’).

The ‘coalition’ is mostly made up of Muslim groups, with a few groups of politically correct liberal airheads who lend their faces to the movement to homogenize its image. But one of the official slogans of the London march is “Freedom for Palestine’ and is co-sponsored by the Muslim Association of Britain.

The march is taking place under the umbrella of the Stop the War Coalition, formed after Sept. 11, 2001, that consists of hundreds of organizations, from pro-Palestinian Muslims to hard-core leftists with an agenda.

They homogenize that agenda, as I pointed out, by surrounding themselves with the usual suspects; pacifists, politicians, celebrities, environmentalists, intellectuals and labor union figures.

They hope to gather together a hundred thousand protestors in London to demonstrate the HUGE opposition that exists against going to war with Iraq.

Says Lindsey German, a leader of the Stop the War Coalition, “If Blair did change his mind, Bush would find it very difficult to go to war.” She noted that, “people in the United States are very reluctant to go to war without allies.”

(Note to this nice lady: people who aren’t reluctant to go to war without allies are soon part of somebody else’s country)

That this is a collection of Islamic agitators surrounded by profoundly gullible airheads is easy enough to establish. The Stop The War Coalition has two different, conflicting goals.

The first is to advance Islamic causes, like London’s official “Freedom For Palestine” slogan. Does no one else question a coalition called “Stop the War” using a war-cry for its official slogan?

Freedom for Palestine means war with Israel, does it not?

A few dozen of these well-meaning, profoundly stupid individuals have already gone to Iraq to offer themselves as human shields against US bombs.

Among the airheads, the motive is more pure, although staggeringly misplaced. They are against killing innocent Iraqis, they say. Who isn’t? But that puts them in the pardoxical position of defending the Iraqis who are already killing innocent Iraqis by the busload.


Why, you ask, am I getting so personal in my criticism of this group? Because they ARE profoundly stupid. The group hopes to get a hundred thousand people to march in Great Britain to demonstrate the depth of opposition to the war.

There are FIVE HUNDRED thousand expatriate IRAQIS (those who fled the regime of Saddam Hussein since he took power in 1979) that live in Great Britain. FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND!

These are the ones who KNOW the innocent Iraqis about to be ‘massacred’ by the ‘invading Americans.’ The Iraqis that are preparing for war are their brothers, uncles, sisters, friends, parents – -where are they?

If only one in five Iraqis participated, the Stop the War Coalition would meet its goal and wouldn’t need a single liberal airhead to show up to do it.

But the ones who actually KNOW what life is like under Saddam don’t come to anti-war demonstrations. They go on American news programs to tell the world that no price is too high a price to pay to dislodge Saddam Hussein. Some of them don’t want an American occupation force, some of them don’t even like Americans. I’ve seem those guys on TV as well.

But they ALL agree to war if it means ending Saddam’s regime. Have YOU ever seen an Iraqi outside Iraq testify on a TV talk show to his approval of Saddam’s regime?

If the news producers at ABC could find one that didn’t have ties to Saddam’s secret police, you can bet they’d give him a forum. But they can’t find any.

Those Iraqis who aren’t on TV and who aren’t cheering on the war aren’t at the anti-war demonstrations. They sit quietly at home, grieving for what must come. It MUST come because there are more innocent Iraqis dying at the hands of Saddam Hussein than will die in a short American war.

The simple fact is that Saddam Hussein has killed more Muslims in his lifetime than any Arab on earth. Millions of young Iraqi men were sent in suicidal waves against Iranian forces during the pointless Iran-Iraq war. (Iran is also Muslim, as were it’s millions of casualties in that war).

Tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers died as collateral damage from Saddam’s use of chemical weapons in that war.

Thousands of Kurdish Iraqi villagers have also died from Saddam’s use of poison gas in forty (yes, forty) Iraqi Kurdish villages that no longer exist.

Saddam’s prisons and torture chambers have killed thousands more. Iraqi soldiers raped and pillaged and murdered throughout Kuwait, leaving no Kuwaiti family untouched by tragedy. Muslims all.

The Iraqi expatriates that aren’t at the demonstrations speak volumes by their silence.

They know.

It is a testimony to the power of propaganda that there can be an anti-war movement made up of “pacifists, politicians, celebrities, environmentalists, intellectuals and labor union figures” in league with a Muslim alliance to stop a war against Iraq in the name of ‘saving the innocents’ — when it is clear that the ‘innocents’ would prefer not to be ‘saved’ for Saddam.

When asked what would be the signs of His coming, the FIRST thing Jesus said was, “Take heed that no man deceive you.”

I am amused by those who believe that they are immune to the power of suggestion. They are the ones who say that ‘if somebody wants to stamp a ‘666’ on my forehead, then I’ll believe’ before they walk away snickering about Christians who check their brains at the door.

People have asked me what 2 Thessalonians 2:11 means when it says “for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.”

Does it mean God will lie to them Himself to delude them?

Consider for the moment, these well-meaning but sincerely deluded airheads marching for peace under the war cry “Freedom for Palestine”. They simply believe what they WANT to believe.

“I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.” (Isaiah 66:4)

Iraq: A Country, But Not a Nation

Iraq: A Country, But Not a Nation
Vol: 17 Issue: 14 Friday, February 14, 2003

The Security Council is scheduled to meet Friday morning to hear another update from the leaders of the inspection teams, Hans Blix and Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei. In advance of that presentation, President Bush spoke yesterday to thousands of sailors at the Mayport Naval Station near Jacksonville, Fla.

He challenged the United Nations to enforce Iraqi compliance with 17 resolutions the Security Council has passed regarding it since the end of the Persian Gulf war.

“The decision is this for the United Nations: When you say something does it mean anything?” Mr. Bush said, standing in front of the aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy and alongside a Navy cruiser that launched some of the first Tomahawk missiles into Afghanistan. Mr. Bush said he was still “optimistic” that the Security Council would show “backbone” and confront Iraq.

President Bush then dropped a bombshell on the UN Security Council of his own.

“I believe when it’s all said and done, free nations will not allow the United Nations to fade into history as an ineffective, irrelevant debating society.” It was a not too thinly veiled reminder of what happened to the League of Nations and its deeper meaning was not missed by the members of that global debating society.

(See Abbysinnia, UN).

Saddam’s days are clearly numbered. Unlike many, I don’t anticipate a long war, nor a particularly brutal one. Most of Saddam’s army will surrender as soon as they can do so without being shot by their own commanders.

For the most part, the ordinary Iraqi will greet the ‘invaders’ in a manner similar to that received from the Kuwaitis in 1991. But that will quickly fade after the initial joy at Saddam’s overthrow. Then what?

Secretary of State Colin Powell outlined his vision of a post-Saddam Iraq. It sounds a lot like the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Germany and Japan following the Second World War. Except Iraq isn’t Germany or Japan and the revised Marshall Plan has a number of fatal flaws.

To begin with, the United States will be taking the lead in public, (as well as paying all the costs) but the infrastructure will be developed and run by the United Nations.

The United States has so far committed $18 million to planning, much of it in the form of donations to U.N. agencies such as the World Food Program. U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte said on Thursday Washington would provide another $40 million for such planning.

The bulk of Iraq’s food supply is already managed by the United Nations under the U.N. oil-for-food program, put in place in 1996 to ease the impact of sanctions imposed on Iraq after its 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

So any post Saddam period of reconstruction would mean constant bickering among the victors about how best to administer the spoils. And that is how it will look to the Iraqis living under occupation.

Powell said that reconstructing Iraq will be less difficult than the reconstruction effort in Afghanistan, because Iraq has a more advanced social structure, and that is true.

But the Iraqi social structure is not built on a sense of nationalism. Saddam holds it together at gunpoint.

Like most of the Middle East (including the alleged state of Palestine) there were no national borders during the 400 years of Ottoman rule. As recently as 1915, Jerusalem, Damascus and Baghdad were all cities in the Ottoman province of Greater Syria. (See “Who Really Owns the Land?”)

Modern Iraq was invented in 1921 by the victors of World War I. Iraq consists of Arab Sunnis, Arab Shiites, Kurds, Turkmen, Armenians and a host of other groups claiming different languages, cultures, histories and religions.

Iraq is a state — but not a nation.

Freed from the weight of Saddam’s heel and under the authority of the sort of benevolent occupation envisioned by Secretary of State Colin Powell, ‘national’ Iraq is certain to disintegrate into factions.

The lack of Iraqi identity poses profound risks for a post-Saddam era, risks more dangerous to the US than it will face in invading the Iraqi state, as group will challenge group for the right to define the new state in its own particular vision.


If this sounds sort of anti-war and defeatist, I want to point out that any thinking person is anti-war. But when war is the only option, then personal preferences have to take a back seat to things like duty, honor and country.

Unlike Iraq, America isn’t merely a political state, it is a nation. That’s a big difference. Abraham Lincoln established the importance of that fact by quoting Scripture, reminding us from history that “a house divided cannot stand”.

The time for standing united as a nation has arrived.

Far from being a defeatist, I am merely a realist about what lies ahead, if Saddam does force an American invasion, and it seems certain that he will.

That aside, it is clear that Saddam Hussein’s legacy will last long after he himself has been personally introduced to Allah.

He has managed to fracture both the United Nations and NATO. The crack in Europe’s facade exposed the deep French and German involvement with Iraq and also with the other Arab dictatorships of the Middle East.

Both governments have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo they have with these powers, and are therefore only marginal allies in the war on terror. There is little doubt that the Germans, French and Belgians are stalling US action against Iraq until their agents there are finished shredding documents.

The United States isn’t quite out on a limb, we still have plenty of friends. But the polarization of the world into four competing camps continues exactly as Scripture foretold for the last days.

And it appears likely we will soon take a quantum leap forward as the final pieces begin to fall into place and the Big Picture grows more clear.

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28)

“Is It Gettin’ Hot In Here?”

“Is It Gettin’ Hot In Here?”
Vol: 17 Issue: 13 Thursday, February 13, 2003

A panel of experts convened by UNMOVIC confirmed that Iraq developed and possessed a missile design that exceeded the range limits set by the UN Security Council. The extended-range prohibited missiles have already been given to the Iraqi armed forces

That is prima facie evidence of an Iraqi violation of every single provision of Resolution 1441 beginning with failing to disclose its existence in the first place.

Germany, France and Russia surprised the United States today by laying plans for an open meeting of Council foreign ministers on Friday to hear the report of the chief weapons inspectors, Hans Blix and Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei.

In Washington, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said the Council was “reaching a moment of truth” with the meeting on Friday and confirmed that he would attend.

“Nobody wants war, but sometimes it’s necessary when you need it to maintain international order,” he said.

But here’s the rub. Resolution 1441, the Council measure that set up the inspections, does not spell out what should be done if the inspectors find active illegal weapons. Just that it is a ‘smoking gun’ violation, even if France, Germany and Russia refuse to recognize it.

They argue that the conclusion on the missiles is proof that the inspections are working and should be allowed to continue.

“An exceeding of the range was declared,” said Yuri V. Fedotov, a Russian disarmament specialist who attended a meeting here today with Mr. Blix. It should be taken “precisely as an example of cooperation” by Iraq, he said. (Yes, I’m sober)

The ‘Axis of Weasels’ as the New York Post dubbed them, demanded an open forum for the Blix report so that their diplomats could pontificate about the need to give inspections more time.

Meanwhile, the United States and Great Britain are preparing to submit a resolution declaring Iraq in ‘material breach’.

That means war. The Pentagon officials’ account of events unfolding in Iraq supported predictions by top American intelligence officials this week.

“If hostilities begin, Saddam is likely to employ a `scorched earth’ strategy, destroying food, transportation, energy and other infrastructure, attempting to create a humanitarian disaster significant enough to stop a military advance,” Vice Adm. Lowell E. Jacoby, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said in testimony prepared for the Senate Armed Services Committee today.


For the UN, tomorrow is also a kind of D-Day. In the mid 1930’s, as Nazi Germany defied one provision after another of the Versailles Treaty, the League of Nations first issued stern warnings.

As the threat of a real war with an increasingly powerful enemy grew, the League of Nations sputtering and fuming gave way to acquiescience and appeasement. History is being replayed before our eyes.

Saddam can claim credit for the unprecedented split in the NATO Alliance. What the USSR and the Warsaw Pact couldn’t accomplish in forty years, Saddam accomplished in four.

France, Germany and Belgium blocked an initiative, supported by the organization’s other 16 members, to begin military contingency planning to defend Turkey in case it was attacked during military operations against neighboring Iraq.

After the blocking move, Turkey took the unusual step of invoking Article IV of the NATO agreement, which requires all members to consult if any one of them feels threatened.

Secretary of State Powell, speaking at a Congressional hearing in Washington, accused France, Germany and Belgium of playing politics with the alliance, using their position on Turkey to “signal their disagreement with the approach that we need, to bring this to a resolution with Iraq in the very near future at the U.N.”

“This is the time for the alliance to say to a fellow alliance member, we agree with you, and if you are concerned, we are concerned,” he said. “That’s what alliances are all about.”

But the NATO dissidents, all of whom have urged more time for United Nations inspections in Iraq, continue to maintain that to begin military planning would “send the wrong signal” even before the inspectors delivered their scheduled report to the United Nations on Friday.

“We assume that there is still space for diplomacy and we should use this space, and we don’t see any reason NATO should enforce a policy not in line with what we are trying to achieve,” Beno t D’Aboville, the French ambassador to NATO, said after the dispute had become public.

So to the French, an alliance and a treaty are conditional. To the Germans, the alliance appears to only be one-sided. There’s really no other way to interpret it. And that is precisely the way the United States is interpreting it now.

The crisis over Iraq has already spilled over into a crisis in Europe. The UN is simultaneously taking North Korea’s material breach of signed agreements issue to the Security Council.

Pyongyang says that if it does, the North Koreans will consider it an ‘act of war’.

George Tenet told the Senate yesterday that North Korea could strike the West Coast of the United States with a nuclear tipped Taepong Dong 2 missile.

The United States is on high alert against attacks at home.

The world is on the brink of global war.

But it won’t come to that.

The Bible says Israel survives intact to enter the Tribulation. Russia is mentioned, as is a 200,000 million man army that China would be unlikely to have after being hit by a US nuclear broadside.

The Bible says that there will be an overarching global power consisting of ten nations of the old Roman empire headquartered in Rome.

They are all there.

I’d like to report that I can find America’s role in the Tribulation period mentioned somewhere in Scripture. But I can’t.

Where is America? Well, to my surprise, it turns out that it is the most religious country in the world, according to a PEWS global research poll. And the overwhelming majority, some 70% of them, claim to be Christian. Of that number, there are many millions who are born-again Blood-bought Christians.

Where is America? There are two credible explanations, one terrifying, the other hopeful.

The first is that Osama bin-Laden, together with his cohorts and Middle East allies, will launch such a successful attack against America using weapons of mass destruction that during the Tribulation, we will be so diminished as to not rate mention in the prophetic outline.

The second, more hopeful explanation, is that of a pre-Tribulation Rapture of the Church, which would also so diminish America that its role in any subsequent global conflagration would be negligible.

What does the Bible say?

“For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17)

“Wherefore comfort one another with these words.” (1 Thessalonians 4:18)

Spill Their Blood and Take Their Property

Spill Their Blood and Take Their Property
Vol: 17 Issue: 12 Wednesday, February 12, 2003

In an audio tape that is believed to be authentic, Osama bin-Laden urged all Muslims world-wide to defend Iraq, even though he claims Iraqi’s government is socialist and he therefore calls them infidels.

Hours before the bin-Laden tape was released by al-Jazeera, CIA Director George Tenet gave a chilling assessment of the threat facing the United States in the coming days.

Tenet told the Senate Intelligence Committee in a briefing that information pointing at those targets led to last week’s raising of the national terror alert level to “orange,” the second highest level of five. The information came from “multiple sources with strong Al Qaeda ties,” Tenet said, without providing details.

“The intelligence is not idle chatter on the part of terrorists and their associates,” Tenet said Tuesday. “It is the most specific we have seen, and it is consistent with both our knowledge of Al Qaeda’s doctrine and our knowledge of plots this network — and particularly its senior leadership — has been working on for years.”

The information pointing to imminent attacks was gathered in the United States and overseas, said FBI Director Robert Mueller, who joined Tenet and other intelligence chiefs to brief the committee in an annual public session on threats to national security.

The CIA director said the information suggests the attack may involve a “dirty bomb” — a weapon that spreads radioactive material over a wide area — or chemical or poison weapons.

Officials last week worried the attack could be timed to coincide with the hajj, a Muslim holy period this week.

Even more disturbing, the FBI says that most of the hidden sleeper cells in the United States have been in place since BEFORE the September 11 2001 attacks.

“The enemies we face are resourceful, merciless and fanatically committed to inflicting massive damage on our homeland, which they regard as a bastion of evil,” Mueller said.


If the US was looking for a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden is the one who provided it. Whether Osama had harsh words for Saddam’s secular regime is irrelevant.

Osama is invoking the principle of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” which makes the two allies in fact, if not ideological allies.

The Japanese had no shared ideology with the Nazis — but that didn’t mean that they weren’t allies who worked actively together in their effort to defeat America.

And that gives Washington the smoking gun it has been seeking. Here’s why. The war against terror is not about punishment — although the punishment meted out to terrorists is severe — but rather, it is about prevention.

The fact that Osama bin Laden has declared solidarity with Iraq means that Saddam’s arsenal of weapons of mass destruction could find themselves in the hands of Osama’s terrorists.

Saddam’s arsenal is formidable, but, to this point, he has had no delivery system capable of bringing his instruments of death to America’s shores.

Osama, on the other hand, has a very effective delivery system. That effectiveness was demonstrated when 19 terrorists armed with box knives killed more than three thousand people.

The Bush administration has just been dealt a stronger hand in the war against Iraq. Osama’s invocation of the ‘enemy of my enemy is my friend’ clause cuts both ways. The Bush Doctrine basically says that the “friend of our enemy is our enemy”.

That paints a bullseye on Saddam’s forehead under the terms set forth by Congress in its declaration of war authorizing the White House to attack any country that is proved to be linked with Osama bin Laden.

Osama’s exhortation to global Islam declared fighting on the side of Iraq to be an Islamic religious obligation. “You know that such a crusade war concerns the Muslim nation mainly, regardless of whether the socialist party and Saddam remain or go. So Muslims in general and Iraq in particular must pull up your pant legs for jihad against this unjust campaign. You should also keep the ammunitions and weapons, as it is an obligatory mission.”

While Osama and his guys are pulling up their pant legs in Iraq, American soldiers in the Gulf region are rolling up their sleeves.

While the rest of the planet debates the more effective dress code in the Security Council, the thinking world has already noted that bin-Laden’s latest tape threatens every Arab state EXCEPT that of Saddam Hussein, a secular state he claims to despise, but intends to defend to the last drop of his follower’s blood.

This is the way Osama explains his theology, drawing on the Koran’s religion of peace and love.

“God says: “O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. . . It is permissible to spill their blood and take their property.”

Here we find the difference between the Islam of our enemies and the Christianity of the ‘Crusaders’, as summed up by Attorney General John Ashcroft.

“Islam is a religion in which God expects you to send your sons to die for him,” noted the AG. “Christianity is a religion in which God senT His Son to die for You.”

The arguments in the Security Council and the food-fight taking place at NATO miss the point. There are no points of common agreement. We have no choice but to take the war to our enemy, or wait for him to bring it to our shores.

It is a simple equation, one well understood in the Islamic world, Americanized by the Bush Doctrine, and completely over the heads of the global liberals who continue to debate whether or not war is necessary.

‘The friend of my enemy is my enemy’.

Case closed.

Having Ten Heads and Seven Horns

Having Ten Heads and Seven Horns
Vol: 17 Issue: 11 Tuesday, February 11, 2003

If Turkey ever wondered if it would ever gain membership in the EU by overcoming French and German objections to its joining, it probably isn’t wondering anymore. Not only is it obvious that the Turks will always be 2nd class citizens of Europe, but membership in NATO isn’t looking so hot, either.

Alliance officials proposed a plan involving deploying Patriot anti-missile batteries and surveillance planes to help defend Turkey from a possible military response from Iraq.

Turkey has been a long standing member of the alliance and the ONLY Islamic majority state in the organization.

The major attraction to membership is NATO is Article Five of the NATO Charter. Under the terms of Article Five, an attack on any member state of NATO is deemed to be an attack on them all.

America was attacked on September 11, 2001. On September 12, Secretary General of NATO Lord Robertson convened an emergency Article 5 meeting — the first such meeting in the Alliance’s 52-year history.

A NATO source said Robertson had called for the invoking Article Five for two reasons — political solidarity with the U.S. and sending a message to terrorists that “we are prepared to face you collectively.”

Chapter Five says “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack on all.”

It requires each ally to assist the country attacked “by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with other parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

So successful was the NATO alliance that September 11, 2001 marked first time that a military attack had taken place on the soil of a NATO member in fifty-two years.

It may have also been the last time NATO (as it currently exists) will ever invoke Chapter 5.

Because when Turkey invoked the same Charter provision, saying it feared an attack from Iraq, NATO turned them down.

By vetoeing the request, the Financial Times reported that “France, Belgium and Germany yesterday (Monday) plunged NATO into one of the most serious crises in its 54-year history.”

The United States formally asked NATO on January 15 to lend various kinds of backing to Turkey.

It included deploying Patriot anti-missile batteries, AWACS surveillance planes and chemical-biological protection units to protect Turkey from an Iraqi counter-attack. The Turks backed the US request under the terms of Chapter 5.

A Polish diplomat, quoted by the Financial Times, blamed France for effectively “signing the death warrant of NATO and the transatlantic relationship.”

An unspecified NATO ambassador quoted in the paper said: “It is easy to apportion blame. That hardly matters now. NATO is marginalized.”

“Even when we (NATO) give the security guarantees to Turkey, it will be too late. The US is unlikely to forgive or forget,” the ambassador added.

For the right-wing Daily Mail, the vetoes by Paris and Brussels — backed by Berlin — were a huge slap in the face for Washington and therefore for London, its chief ally over Iraq.

“Monstrous ingratitude,” stormed the tabloid’s headline.

“The alliance that has kept Europe at peace for half a century was tearing itself apart over Iraq last night,” the paper said.

“135,576 US servicemen died liberating Europe in World War Two — America spent 15,000 billion dollars fighting the Cold War — even now it spends 10 billion dollars a year backing NATO,” it said.

The London Independent said of NATO’s refusal, “it is beginning to look as if the argument over Iraq is now threatening the worst rupture in transatlantic relations since the Second World War.”


There are a lot more Europes than at first meet the eye. There is the European Union. The EU is made up of fifteen member states at present, and could swell to twenty-five member states by next year. Ooops. Make that twenty-FOUR. Turkey has been trying to join the alliance for ten years and has been rebuffed at every turn.

Then there is the European Commission – (with its own president), the European Parliament (with its own president), the European Community (with its own president) NATO (with its own Secretary-General) and the Western European Alliance (with its own government AND military force).

None of these entities are directly answerable to any of the others. But the senior ‘Europe’, if such there be, would be the Alliance of the Western European Union.

The WEU has its origins in the Brussels Treaty of Economic, Social and Cultural Collaboration and Collective Self-Defence of 1948, signed by Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

The WEU is made up of Foreign and Defence Ministers of the member countries that adopted a “Platform on European Security Interests” designed to ‘strengthen’ NATO. What it became was a second Europe, run by the French and Germans.

It is a closed membership that includes 10 European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom.

It has a Council and Secretariat formerly located in London and based in Brussels since January 1993, and a Parliamentary Assembly in Paris.

But it is France and Germany that call the shots for the WEU, issuing its decrees out of Brussels, Belgium.

The prophet Daniel had a vision that corresponded to four successive world empires, identified as Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. Of the four, Rome was the only one not be be conquered and replaced by its conqueror.

Daniel’s fourth world empire “was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had TEN horns.” (Daniel 7:7)

Daniel’s vision now leaps across time to the last days. Daniel says of the ten horns, “I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. (Daniel 7:8)

The eleventh horn was the antichrist. Daniel says that before him, three of those little horns were plucked up by the roots. Ten horns (Daniel also calls them ‘kings’) from which three are removed.

The Apostle John describes the antichrist and his government in Revelation 13:1, saying the beast rises “up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.”

When the European Union was born, all eyes turned to it as the possible government of antichrist. In 1980, the EU expanded to ten members. But then it kept on going, to 11, then 12, then 15 and soon to be 25. But the ten nation Western European Alliance is a closed circle. Nobody else can join.

I am not saying that the WEU is about to morph into the 7 heads and ten horns of Revelation. I don’t know. Many said that the EU was the antichrists government, and are now looking for another explanation. And those who went on record as saying ‘this is it’ are still eating their words.

I don’t know if this is ‘it’. Neither does anybody else.

Here’s what I DO know. I know that Daniel penned his description of four world empires before they existed and was so exactly right in his description that some now claim Daniel is a forgery penned in 163 BC, which would make his record of Babylon, Persia and Greece history, while Rome was already assuming its role on the world stage.

Some Christians buy that argument, too. But Jesus said that Daniel was a prophet (Matthew 24:15) — not a forger– so adopting that argument makes Jesus either a liar or woefully uninformed.

Both Daniel (certified a prophet by Jesus) and John, (selected as an Apostle by Jesus) tell us that the final form of the antichrist’s government will arise from the ashes of the old Roman Empire. It will be a ten-nation confederation out of whom three will be removed.

It will exist at the same time as a place called ‘Israel’ that will be at war with her neighbors (Daniel 9:24-27), at a time when all eyes are on Jerusalem. (Zechariah 12:2-3).

Jesus said that the generation that saw the rebirth of the fig tree (Israel – Matthew 24:34) would not pass until ALL was fulfilled.

Israel was reborn in 1948. The WEU was born in 1948. Both are moving to the forefront of history as we watch. At the heart of the controversy is the Islamic effort to wipe out Israel and three European states unwillingness to face down the Islamic states, (especially Babylon, who also has an unfulfilled destiny for the last days (see http://www.omegaletter.com/articles.asp?ArticleID=586 for more) and it is all unfolding before our eyes.

Is this it? Maybe. Maybe not. The Scriptures say that, “this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and THEN shall the end come.” (Matthew:24:14)

But thanks to the internet, that is also something that we are eyewitnessing.

For example, some of you are reading your Omega Letter in South Africa, like my friend Anton. Still others are reading these words in Australia, the UK, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Italy, France, Mexico, South America and even one brave soul in Bahrain.

Those are subscribers — but anyone with a computer and an internet connection, anywhere on earth, can stumble on our website, view the evidence presented therein, read the Plan of Salvation, and then this Gospel of the Kingdom will have been preached somewhere else among the nations.

Now, tie it all together. Remember that we are only ONE generation out of hundreds that watched faithfully for the signs given the Church by Jesus of his soon return.

And of all those generations, across all those centuries, find another that fits the bill.

Is the war in Iraq the catalyst that sets off the Final Conflict? I don’t know. Jesus said that no man would know the day or the hour.

But Jesus DID say “‘when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till ALL these things be fulfilled.” (Matthew 24:33-34)

I won’t set a date. God drew a veil around that specific date and I have no desire to peek behind it.

But I can read the writing on the wall as well as you can.

Musing Right Along . . .

I don’t want to bore you with personal drivel, but so many of you emailed me to encourage and reassure me about my recent diagnosis of glaucoma that I couldn’t answer them all personally.

Part of the reason is because I got my first pair of prescription glasses in my life yesterday and I can’t see a THING!

(I’m told that is temporary, but it is also pretty weird.)

In any case, I was able to read them all, but those I did answer probably got a lot of words like ‘diid’ and ‘felllow’. Sorry.

It’s much clearer today (although still weird) and I am encouraged. Preliminary results suggest I am responding well to the medication.

I confess it scared the pants off me — (I fear I’d be a sad excuse as a martyr, although I’d love to convince myself I’d out-Stephen Stephen) but it really made me think about the God ‘in Whose Hands all my breath is, and Whose are all my ways’ (Daniel 5:23) — and in that context.

How my God could, in an instant, shut down any vital system. And it made me marvel that He has not. And it made me love Him more.

Daniel finishes the verse, “hast thou not glorified.”


The lesson I come away from this with is one most of us know in our heads, but seldom take time to realize in our hearts.

Daniel’s complete thought runs like this. “the God in whose hand thy breath is, and whose are all thy ways, hast thou not glorified:”

I write you as friends and fellow laborers. We share a common burden for the lost who don’t know Christ. Each of us glorifies God by bearing fruit.

The OL is YOUR OL because it isn’t addressed to the lost. They wouldn’t follow it.

I could write inspirational salvation messages and post them on the web, but they would only attract those few already interested out of the bulk who are already saved.

But each of you has a circle of people you interact with every day. We dig out the evidence, you present it — each one tell one — and we can reach into circles of friends in South Africa, Nigeria, New Zealand . . you get the idea. In many cases, in languages I cannot speak. (Think about that for a minute)

Our ministry starts, not with somebody surfing the web, but with somebody in a coffee shop sighing, “I don’t know what this world is coming to.”

We do. And Who is coming to IT.

Each one, tell one.

“And THEN shall the end come” (Matthew:24:14)


Vol: 17 Issue: 10 Monday, February 10, 2003

They made their announcement breathlessly. Watching, it put me in mind of someone announcing he had discovered a cure for cancer, or maybe two lottery winners discussing how they’ll spend the money. But although Hans Blix and Mohammed ElBaradei couldn’t contain their excitement, they were just about the only ones on the planet that shared it.

It’s understandable. After months of complete frustration by Iraqi refusal to cooperate with his inspection team, with this last visit to Baghdad, the Iraqis seemed at last to be willing to negotiate.

Blix was beside himself with joy! The Iraqis want to TALK! Nothing brings the red to the cheeks of a diplomat like the opportunity for negotiation, and these two apple-cheeked officials were flushed with victory.

Blix said he had received ‘assurances’ that Iraq would expand a commission to search for weapons and weapons programs and relevant documents nationwide.

I HOPE I have seen a beginning of taking these remaining disarmament issues seriously, Blix told reporters excitedly.

No wonder they were crushed when a US official reminded them that UNMOVIC’s mission was not to negotiate the terms of 1441 all over again, but rather to enforce its provisions.


And they had neogtiated so MUCH, too. After only two days, Blix got Iraq to agree to turn over some documents that were part of the December 8 ‘last chance’ deadline that Security Council Resolution 1441 demanded.

The Blix negotiation team was modest — “I wouldn’t call this a breakthrough,” the ever cautious Blix told the reporters. But his excitement was palpable. Not a ‘breakthrough’ exactly, but, to UNMOVIC’s top dog, it was ‘progress.’ Breakthrough is a strong word for what we are seeing.

But Iraq didn’t go so far as to authorize the UN mandated U-2 spy plane overflights. Instead, Iraq said it would get back to UNMOVIC on that score on Friday. (UNMOVIC’s inspectors are due to pull out on Friday while Blix reports back to the UN — handy, no?)

According to Lt. Gen. Amer Al-Saadi, Iraq had looked at the problem of U-2 surveillance flights in a constructive way. Iraq had refused to allow U-2 flights unless the United States and Britain suspended patrols in the no-fly zones.

He said Iraq was studying ways to comply with the surveillance issue and we hope it could be resolved in the coming days before Blix and ElBaradei make their report to the Security Council on Friday. And ElBaradei said he expected the U.N. Security Council to give the inspectors more time as long as we are registering good progress.

But ElBaradei added: I would say I m seeing the beginning of a change of heart for Iraq.


It sounds like the right thing to do — giving Iraq one last chance. But Iraq’s last chance came with the passage of 1441 — all the ‘last chances’ that have followed were spurned in any case.

Saddam is using the Mohammed Ali ‘Rope-a-Dope’ method — wear your opponent down first, while not actually opening yourself up to any damage. And Blix and ElBaradei are the perfect dopes to be roped. You’d think that guys like Blix and ElBaradei would be pretty smart guys (ElBaradei really IS a rocket scientist) — they have the credentials that SAY they’re pretty smart guys.

How is is possible that they can be so easily fooled? It is clearly willing ignorance. It isn’t possible that either man actually believes the Iraqis.

They made that clear when Blix last issued his report to the UN. (It makes you wonder what they are thinking).

It was clear that the French and the Germans weren’t thinking at all when they announced their own, ‘last chance’ chance for Iraq over the weekend as well.

It was a move of desperation, aimed more at giving themselves a last chance than it was for Iraq. There are still a lot of documents relating to THEIR complicity in Saddam’s WMD programs yet to be shredded. These things take time.

“Hey, here’s an idea! Let’s send in peacekeepers to enforce inspections,” proposed Jacques Chirac. “That’s a great idea!” says Germany. “Why, I like it, too!” say the Russians. “Let’s announce it at a joint press conference right now!”

It was all glad-handing and big smiles, until Colin Powell asked what the peacekeepers would do support the inspectors. Shoot their way in to the compounds?


Powell said on Fox News Sunday that it was “inexcusable” for France, Germany and Belgium to block the request, coming as it did from a fellow NATO member.

The NATO charter requires the alliance to come to the defense of any member attacked, which Turkey fears it would be in the event of a war since it shares a border with Iraq.

The NATO alliance is to decide the issue today, but there was no sign Sunday that France, Germany or Belgium was wavering. The three countries say that without a Security Council resolution authorizing war, it is premature to start supplying Turkey with weaponry including Patriot missiles and Awacs surveillance aircraft.

“For three NATO nations to say, with respect to a fourth NATO nation, ‘We won’t even consider that at this time because of a dispute, really, we’re having within the United Nations Security Council about what follows next,’ I think is inexcusable on the part of those countries,” Powell said.

Europe is undergoing a major shift in thinking — one that bears watching. The mighty EU may be heading for a split — with the ten nation Western European Alliance going one way and the greater European Union going another. Old Europe, and new Europe, Rumsfeld called it.

Tomorrow’s OL will try and connect the dots between what the Bible says is Europe’s destiny and what the Europeans have planned for themselves.

You won’t want to miss it.

Musing Right Along . . .

I promised to keep you abreast of everything of note that takes place behind the scenes at your Omega Letter. Here’s what’s up.

I found out the other day I have glaucoma — explains a lot about typos, doesn’t it?

Its kinda scary — the prospect of losing one’s vision is something you can’t quite grasp until it is presented to you. Pray that the Lord uses this for good — that somehow it will work together with other things and bring many into the Kingdom.

And pray for me. I’m not real pleased at the news. I am trying to be spiritual about it.

All I can say is that the enemy must really HATE the Omega Letter, which suggests to me that we’re hitting a nerve. He’s been pounding away at it almost from the day it was launched. C’est le guerre.

We’ll keep pounding back — in the dark, if that’s the way it’s gotta be.

I tell you this because loads are lighter when they are shared among friends. And to make a point. It’s ok. It really is.

“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” (Romans 8:28)

That’s the wonderful thing about being a Christian. Even when the news is bad, it’s good.

Praise the Lord.

“Beware, The Ides of March”

“Beware, The Ides of March”
Vol: 17 Issue: 9 Sunday, February 9, 2003

In Shakespeare’s play, “Julius Ceasar”, a soothsayer confronts Caesar on his way to the Senate and tells him, “Beware, the Ides of March,” prophesying his murder on that day. Ceasar replies, “He is a dreamer, let us leave him. Pass.”

Later that day, March 15, BC 44, Ceasar is assassinated in the Pompey Theater where the Roman Senate was meeting that day in the temple of Venus.

The Ides of March are upon us. America is under stresses unlike those in living memory. The Department of Homeland Security has just raised the terror threat to High.

It worked. Most people I’ve spoken with are more terrified than they were before. (I don’t know if I’d call them ‘highly terrified, but their level went up with the pastel color scheme).

The Shuttle came down, the threat level went up, the Dow dropped, deficits rose. We plan our attack on Iraq. Iraq plans its response. al-Qaeda sits out there, somewhere, just out of sight. So does our military, on aircraft carriers and dusty desert forward deployment areas Somewhere in the Persian Gulf.

On the other side of the world, North Korea threatens us with a pre-emptive nuclear strike, only hours after most of us found out that they actually COULD, if they really wanted to. And we still aren’t even sure WHY they want to.

Europe is dividing, like a cell in a microscope, as we watch in amazement. There are now two Europes. The big, rich, ‘Old Europe’ of France and Germany is now the Europe that stands in opposition to all things American.

(Sixty years ago, both countries were in rubble and in danger of becoming part of the socialist worker’s paradise of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, but we rebuilt them and protected them until we spent the Soviets out of existence).

Then there is the ‘New’ Europe, (the ones we DIDN’T make into the biggest and richest countries on the Continent). That Europe is largely made up out of the old Soviet Europe. They are the ones who starved and scraped their way through the last half of the 20th century under the heel of the Soviet conqueror.

Until we rescued them. Unlike the French and Germans, they haven’t had time to convince themselves that they did it on their own.

When America asked for their aid, they remembered the world as it was before the Americans. They looked around at the world AFTER they met the Americans.

They remembered how they were treated at the hands of the French and Germans as they sought admission into the European Goodfellas Club.

Virtually all of New Europe remembered what it meant live under a dictatorship.

And unlike old Europe’s Germany and France, they aren’t demanding more time for ‘inspections’ (mainly because THEIR people aren’t in Baghdad helping to shred all the French and German documents associated with Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction programs).

In the Middle East, Ariel Sharon is attempting to build a new roadmap to ‘peace’ while his countrymen practice putting on chemical suits or gas masks in the event of an Iraqi counter-attack.

His ‘peace partners’ — who carry Saddam’s picture in the streets, prepare to claim the spoils of war in the hoped-for eventuality of Israel’s destruction by avenging Iraqi Scud missiles tipped with chemical or biological weapons. (They evidently think Arab nerve gas only kills Jews)


One gets the sense that Something Big is in the offing. Not that war with Iraq is something small, but this is more like the first game of the playoffs than it is the days leading up to the Super Bowl.

Sixty years ago, America learned it was Number One. That was reconfirmed on Christmas Day, 1991, when the Soviet Union announced its dissolution.

Today, being Number One conjures up more of a sense of shame than pride.

For reasons unclear to me, those to whom America has given the most, like the Hollywood actors who live like uncrowned royalty and the liberals who believe America owes them a living, (paid for by the rich, as long as it isn’t THEM — they all have tax accountants — ever wonder why?) — the truly blessed among the blessed, are the most vitriolic enemies of the system that made them what they are.

And the people of that system who paid their way FOR them with their money and their blood.

To this crowd of hypocrites, the real heroes are the ‘freedom fighters’ who make war against freedom. To them, the villains are George Bush and Ariel Sharon. They prefer the anti-heroes, like Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin-Laden. The ones who make war against America’s ‘evil’ system.

They see Israel’s democracy as a threat to Middle East peace, while they embrace the dictators who threaten it. They view America’s liberation of an Iraqi people under the thumb of Saddam Hussein as an aggression, claiming that keeping the Iraqis in bondage is done out of ‘love for the Iraqi people’ — and nobody questions their thinking.

They are content to put America’s security in the hands of an unelected United Nations and say they are doing so in the name of ‘democracy’.

It’s like logic is turned upside down.

Like Ceasar, they see the threat in reverse, fearing the dreamer more than the dream.

In our hour of need, we find our friends have become our enemies, as the Germans and French work actively to keep NATO from coming to our aid, while our former enemies of the Warsaw Pact have become our staunchest allies.

(“And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” — Matthew 10:36)

It’s like waking up on the other side of Alice’s Looking Glass.

This is still the America that crushed the Nazis and pushed Japan all the way back from Midway to the home island of Honshu.

The America who stood for fifty years against the mighty power of the Soviet Union now cowers in fear of a handful of terrorists and two nations that together couldn’t defeat New York State, let alone the United States of America.

Not because we are afraid we’ll lose. Rather, because we are afraid we might HURT somebody in a war in which America is characterized by the rest of the world as an aggressor with colonial designs.

(What other nation on earth has ever hesitated in war because it feared it might hurt somebody in the process? And was universally despised as a ‘bully’ for it?)

Nobody can quite nail down that Something Big that everybody senses but can’t quite articulate.

Because nothing quite adds up.

Disassembled into its component parts, one can mount an argument against a war with Iraq (not a good one, but the arguments are there), or an argument in favor of supporting a Palestinian state (same qualifiers) or even an argument that explains why al-Qaeda wants to kill us (because we support Israel).

The North Korean problem is our fault because we failed to save them from the famine brought on by their refusal to accept our aid. It is like a collective insanity (or maybe just a bi-polar illness).

In any case, the American picnic is clearly short a couple of jars of pickles.

The Something Big in the offing is a world war unlike any other. It is being conducted in the name of peace and the villains in the whole thing are the only two countries in the whole mess who truly want peace for the sake of peace — America, and Israel.

The world has turned that love of peace into an instrument of war. (“and by peace shall destroy many” – Daniel 8:25)

France and Germany oppose war with Iraq because it is unprofitable. China and Russia oppose war with North Korea because they share in the profits of North Korea’s proliferation, since they are supplying the technology and spare parts.

Hollywood stars oppose the war because they are stupid and think everybody lives in the same world of make-believe that they do.

(As examples, I offer Martin Sheen as a spokesman for the homeless or Liz Taylor as spokeswoman for AIDS — what next? Michael Jackson as spokesperson for child abuse? On what level does this make sense?)

It seems unnatural. That’s because it is. It is supernatural. We are living in the last days.

The prophecies of Scripture that foretold the restoration of Israel, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Gog Magog War, the rise of the revived Roman Empire of antichrist, the development of the global economic, religious and political systems of the last days — these things are supernaturally divined, and therefore, supernaturally designed.

They follow no logical, earthly pattern, because they are part of a supernatural, unearthly Plan. That fact alone establishes their authorship.

The Bible says that in the last days, “Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.” (Rev 12:12)

We also know from Scripture that “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace” (1 Cor 14:33).

We ARE living in the last days. What part of the following sounds like it doesn’t apply? What part of the following applies to any previous generation that you can pinpoint?

“And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”(Luke 21-25-67)

So why would anybody doubt the following verse?

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh”. (Luke 21:28)

The King IS coming. No kidding.