Facing the Threat

Facing the Threat
Vol: 20 Issue: 21 Wednesday, May 21, 2003

The Department of Homeland Security announced the United States is now at a state of high alert for a major terror attack against the homeland. Federal officials refused to rule out the possibility of the use of a weapon of mass destruction.

And it was reported yesterday that a website is warning Muslims living in and around Boston, New York and Washington, DC to leave those areas within twenty-four hours. The FBI issued a law enforcement bulletin following the interception of two email messages.

The bulletin warns of “a possible devastating attack in the next 48 hours and urged all Muslims to leave all cities, especially Boston, New York and the commercial coastline.” The second email warned Muslims to get out of the beach cities of the East Coast.

Secretary Ridge said in a written statement that recent attacks overseas underscore terrorists’ desires to attack soft targets with methods such as suicide bombers or car bombs. “Weapons of mass destruction, including those containing chemical, biological or radiological agents or materials, cannot be discounted,” he said.

New York and Washington were targets of the September 11 attacks that originated from Boston s Logan Airport. And the Department of Homeland Security has identified America s vast coastlines as our most vulnerable areas to an offshore strike.

Also yesterday, Britain, the United States and Germany closed their embassies in the Saudi capital Riyadh due to a risk of attack in that country. While the attacks against the Riyadh complexes could not have been carried out without some cooperation from the top, not all the Saudi royal family was in the loop.

And not all of them would have approved. Some were genuinely shocked, and the attacks against their own country has got some of them telling the United States what they know.

And what was contained in the Saudi intelligence files was enough to convince the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and the Congressional Homeland Security Council to agree to formally raise the threat level from elevated to high .

Assessment:

On the other hand, it could be a disinformation campaign. That seems a valid argument on the surface. Forcing America to a high state of alert is almost as good as an actual attack, from a tactical point of view. This is the fourth alert since September 11.

For the average American, it is psychologically rattling, to say the least. Millions in Boston, New York and Washington are keeping up a brave front, but not one of them wouldn t secretly admit to being scared. And that is the object of terrorism. To terrify.

The second the alert status is raised, there is an immediate effect on the nation s 180,000 law enforcement professionals. Security is immediately raised at the nation s airports and border crossings. Days off are canceled, vacations are postponed, reserves are called up, and the adrenaline level shoots off the scale.

So simply scaring us into raising the alert level causes America significant economic and emotional damage.

Arguing against the disinformation theory is the intelligence gathered on al Qaeda since the September 11th attacks. Historically, al-Qaeda takes between eighteen months and two years from the time a plan for a major attack is concocted and its execution. It s been eighteen months since the Twin Towers went down.

The US has the historical record of al-Qaeda chatter leading up to September 11, as well as previous al-Qaeda attacks against the WTC and the USS Cole. US intelligence says there is a similar pattern of chatter, together with the increasing frequency of al-Qaeda attacks abroad.

The United States also has the additional intelligence advantages obtained as a consequence of the interrogation of captured al-Qaeda leaders and the benefit of the improved intelligence focus on the terror network since 9/11.

But al-Qaeda can only issue empty threats for so long before the desired effect of terror before those threats lose their punch. All that argues AGAINST this being another disinformation campaign.

There are a few things Americans can do to be prepared, just in case. According to Tom Ridge, the first thing on the preparedness list is to Take the time NOW to get informed.

Ridge specifically urged Americans to arrange a way for family members to contact each other such as through an out-of-town relative and designate a meeting place in case telephone service is knocked out by an attack.

If your area is targeted, make sure you and your family have identified two meeting places. Ideally, one should be near your home, with an alternate in case your home is inaccessible.

Some other recommendations from the Department of Homeland Security include:

Find out the emergency response plans of employers, school, daycare and other officials. To where would they evacuate workers and students? Write down the answers and keep a copy in your wallet.

Make sure you have sufficient fresh water, food and emergency supplies for between three days and a week.

Keep life, property, health and other insurance policies current, and know their terms. Store copies of these and other important documents identification, deeds, wills, a small amount of cash in a watertight container.

Have a plan for pets, since shelters do not allow them.

Assemble a “disaster supply kit” and keep it in a designated place where it is ready to “grab and go.” It should include bottled water, food and emergency supplies, perhaps kept in backpacks or duffel bags.

Store a supply of critical prescription drugs and an extra pair of prescription glasses.

The administration has made no secret of the fact that it considers a terrorist attack against the United States involving the use of weapons of mass destruction is not merely a possibility, but inevitability.

The Apostle Paul warned that in the last days, Perilous times shall come. It was only a decade ago that the United States Congress was tied up in knots trying to decide what to do with the peace dividend.

The peace dividend was the term coined by the Clinton administration for the money saved as a consequence of the end of the Cold War. During the 1990 s, closing bases overseas and domestically and downsizing the military and reducing the military budget was all the rage all thanks to the peace dividend .

Paul wrote in his first letter to the Thessalonians (5:3) that, For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But he went on to say, But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. (5:4)

Paul was speaking of the Day of the Lord, and of the Rapture that would precede it, but the pattern foretold for the days immediately preceding the Rapture is the pattern we see outlined before us in every conceivable configuration.

The world is on a state of high alert in fear of an attack coming from the extremist element of one of the world s largest religions.

Europe continues to coalesce into the final configuration foretold by Daniel for the last days.

The Israeli-Arab conflict is heating up again as a road map for peace developed jointly by the Europeans (revived Rome) the UN (global government) Russia (Gog-Magog) and overseen by the United States (Islamic terror s Number One target and conspicuously absent from the Bible s overview of the Big Picture during the final seven years of Tribulation).

The Europeans are being urged by the White House to become more engaged in the effort to impose a peace on the Israelis and create a Palestinian state.

The global economy is teetering on the verge of recession, with Europe being the most recession prone region.

We are living in the last days. That is clear. And as Tom Ridge pointed out, the first priority in an emergency is to be informed.

The Omega Letter exists for that specific purpose. To inform the Church of what is going on and to provide information useful in the great harvest at predicted by Jesus at the end of the Church Age.

There are many Christian newsletters and websites that focus all their attention on giving the Plan of Salvation. But in most instances, it is a case of preaching to the choir. Most Christian websites are visited by Christians.

The real work of evangelism in the last days isn t done by evangelists with big websites, big TV followings or high profile ministries.

The real work of evangelism is accomplished by the individual Christian who, hearing someone moan, What is this world coming to? is prepared with the answer and the evidence to back it up.

God gives ministries, great and small, according to the purposes He ordains for them. But the most important ministries are the individual ministries of the one-on-one evangelists that make up the army of God.

Scripture says of the ministry gifts, And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.

But then Paul explains WHY God gives them in the first place.

For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ . (Ephesians 4:11,12)

It is at times of great peril that God gives great grace. The aftermath of September 11th was that many who otherwise might not began to turn to the Scriptures for answers.

Many were looking for answers, and many more got those answers from Christians they otherwise would have mocked or rejected. That is why the Omega Letter exists. To prepare the Church for the work ahead.

The noted 17th century astronomer, Sir Isaac Newton, was also a well known student of Bible prophecy. His studies convinced him that, “About the time of the end, a body of men will be raised up, who will turn their attention to the prophecies, in the midst of much clamor and opposition.

While Newton wasn t a prophet, he was a student of prophecy, and it was from his understanding of Scripture that he made his bold prediction.

There are indeed many who have been raised up in these last days, who have turned their attention to Bible prophecy. And those who have indeed face much clamor and opposition .

The Enemy knows he hath but a short time and he is making the most of it.

The Omega Letter is an exceedingly small army, as such armies go, but I prefer to think of it as a commando unit, effective beyond its numbers as a consequence of intense training.

But even a commando unit can use reinforcements and resupply. Tell people about your Omega Letter. Support us as the Lord leads you to do so. Time is running out.

Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He would send forth labourers into His harvest. (Luke 10:2)

Road To Peace Bumpy Says Bush

Road To Peace Bumpy Says Bush
Vol: 20 Issue: 20 Tuesday, May 20, 2003

President Bush says he is confident the Israeli – Palestinian peace process can move forward, despite the recent series of Palestinian suicide bombings.

The president told reporters in Washington Monday, the so-called “road map” for peace still stands. In his words, “we are still on the road to peace. It is just going to be a bumpy road.”

Bush said people who care for peace — both in the Palestinian Authority and Israel — must work with the United States to fight terrorists. He also urged European and Arab nations to play a larger role. Bush is making the same mistake his predecessor did.

You can t force peace upon a people dedicated to the destruction of the other party. The terror attacks aren t bumps in the road. They re landmines.

There have been five suicide bombings against targets inside Israel within a forty-eight hour period. The attacks killed at least 12 Israelis and injured more than 30 others.

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said that Bush sees Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, as a ”reformer.” Some point out that Abu Mazen is a founding member of al Fatah and had a hand in the Munich Massacre as evidence that he is really still a terrorist.

That argument doesn t hold water. People change. The Munich Massacre was more than thirty years ago.

BUT in denouncing the recent wave of terrorist attacks, the great Palestinian reformer said simply that the terror attacks were not in the interests of the Palestinian authority.

THAT is evidence that Abu Mazen remains, at heart, an unrepentant terrorist. It is the same denunciation expressed by Arafat whenever he was cornered into speaking out against terror strikes.

It leaves open the possibility that, if it WERE in the interests of the Palestinians, terror strikes would be perfectly ok. That makes whether or not to strike a subjective judgment call. If the terrorist THINKS his particular attack IS in the Palestinian interests, then Abu Mazen s denunciation becomes an encouragement.

Although the White House has pledged to support Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, it refuses to work with Yasser Arafat.

The two policies are mutually exclusive, since all the power remains firmly in the hands of the father of all terrorists. Palestinian security forces do not report to Abbas or to new Interior Minister Mohammed Dahlan. They report to Arafat, and remain loyal to Arafat.

All five of the suicide bombings over the preceding 48 hours were jointly claimed by Hamas and elements of al Fatah. The Fatah party was founded by Arafat and is controlled by Arafat, although he denies having control of its militant wing and Western governments have a silent agreement to pretend to believe the denials.

Assessment:

The road map calls for a two-state solution, Israel and Palestine, and lists a number of steps to reach that destination. In the beginning, the Palestinians must clamp down on terror groups, and the Israelis must dismantle settlement outposts erected over the last 26 months and freeze all settlement activity.

But the plan does not provide details on how to settle contentious issues such as the future of Jerusalem, sharing water resources, and the return of Palestinian refugees.

In any case, the first steps on the road map are supposed to be taken by the Palestinians. Step One is a clampdown on terror groups, according to the terms outlined by the Quartet s plan.

The Quartet the US, EU, Russia and UN all signed off on the plan before it was presented as a take it or take it option to both sides. There have been, as we ve pointed out, five separate bombing attacks inside Israel within forty-eight hours.

The United Nations, one of the road map s sponsors, sent its envoy, Terje Roed-Larsen, to the region to prepare a report for the Security Council.

In his report, there was the usual blather about how the Palestinian Authority had tragically failed in its efforts to stop terrorism. Note the clever use of semantics. The poor Palestinians. They tried and failed. Tragic.

Then he turned his attention to Israel, whom Larsen criticized for the ‘CONTINUED’ killings of Palestinian civilians and destruction of their property.” The evil occupying Zionist Jews !!

The way the UN sees it, when Palestinian terrorists murder innocent women and children inside Israel, it is a tragedy for the Palestinian Authority. When Israel responds by tracking down and taking out the terrorists and their leadership, it is also a tragedy for the Palestinian people.

And, from the UN s perspective, justification for further terrorist operations against Israel. Larsen told the Security Council the terrorism will not stop , until the Israelis and the Palestinians take “reciprocal steps” toward ending the violence, as outlined in the road map to peace. Following this line of thinking, Israel should stop retaliating and hope that the Palestinians will afterwards stop attacking.

Larsen also blamed Israel in his report for what he called a serious humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. He says U.N. humanitarian workers have been unable to do their jobs because they have been barred from entering or leaving the Gaza Strip. Although some U.N. staff have now been told that they can leave, Larsen says, the policy violates the immunities of U.N. personnel and international law.

Larsen failed to cite the international law that gives the United Nations the right to dictate how a sovereign nation conducts internal security. In fact, the UN rejected the brutality of Saddam s internal security services as part of the US case for war, saying it had no jurisdiction in the internal affairs of a member state, as stipulated by Article 4, Paragraph 7 of the UN Charter.

But in Iraq s case, the UN was defending a principle of international sovereignty. The United Nations, like the Arab world, classifies Israel differently.

To the UN, Israeli sovereignty is really a temporary condition created by an accident of history. UN insistence upon the forced creation of a Palestinian state is an effort by the UN to quietly repair the damage caused by that historical accident.

The reasons the road map is doomed are legion; the status of Jerusalem is left deliberately vague, for example, while the road map calls for an eventual return to pre-1967 borders. Since that would return East Jerusalem to the Arab side by default, it is unlikely that Israel will accept that as a non-negotiable solution.

The road map makes no provisions for how the two states would share scarce water resources, makes no allowances for the status of the Palestinian refugees who still languish in Arab refugee concentration camps after more than fifty years, and would create a Jew-free Palestine while demanding full political rights for Arabs living in Israel.

Thousands of years before the fact, the Bible predicted the restoration of Israel, and said that restoration would take place in the last days. It predicted that, once restored, Israel would be a pariah nation, one so despised that all the world would eventually turn against the Jewish state.

Zechariah 12 says the whole world would gather against it over the question of Jerusalem. Zechariah said that Jerusalem itself would become a burdensome stone and that all who burdened themselves with it will be cut in pieces.

(This would be a good place to note that the terror against the US is always justified in terms of US support for Israel).

The Bible also predicted the involvement of both Russia and the European Union with the peace process between Israel and her enemies in the last days, (Ezekiel 38, Daniel 9) and John says this all takes place under the auspices of a global government that controls the global economic system and in partnership with a global religious leader hostile to both Jews and fundamentalist Christianity (Revelation 13).

And the Bible says that the generation that witnessed these events would not pass away, until ALL is fulfilled.

We ARE that generation. Take heart. The King is coming!

Why The Saudis Have Special Status

Why The Saudis Have Special Status
Vol: 20 Issue: 19 Monday, May 19, 2003

Although the Saudi government claimed the attack on Riyadh took the government completely by surprise, it only took a few days for Prince Nayef s security services to find out who the individuals were that were behind it.

The Saudis claim they have already rounded up four of the suspects behind the attacks. Pretty fast work, all things considered.

(Flashback to Saturday s OL: The attacks give the [Saudi] government an excuse to conduct a witch hunt, maybe purge a few problems. In the meantime, Washington clucks sympathetically and thanks them profusely for helping out with the war on terror. )

The arrests were announced the day after Saudi spokesman Adel al-Jubeir made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows to continue to trumpet Saudi solidarity with the US.

Al-Jubeir also scoffed at any religious links or connections between Saudi Islam and al-Qaeda. He also effectively evaded any discussion of Prince Nayef, who until now has steadfastly denied al-Qaeda had any presence in the kingdom and publicly blamed 9/11 on the Jews.

Nayef, al Jubeir and the entire Saudi family have steadfastly denied that the attacks on September 11 were prompted by Islam. The Saudis claim that Islam is a religion of peace and that the way it is practiced in Saudi Arabia is simply misunderstood by the West. A recent Congressional report indicates we understand it only too well.

According to the US Commission on Religious Freedom, the top religious rights violator in the world today is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The commission was formed by Congress in 1998 and remains the world’s only government-sanctioned entity to investigate and report religious-freedom violations.

“It’s time to apply the same standards to Saudi Arabia that are applied elsewhere,” commission Chairman Felice Gaer said.

Religious freedom is one of the bedrocks of American culture, and a recent poll of 350 evangelical Christian leaders found that 73 percent believed that stopping religious persecution should be a “top priority” in American foreign policy.

But freedom of religion does not exist in Saudi Arabia, the commission’s report said, except for those practicing an extreme form of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism.

The Commission criticized the kingdom for “harassment, detention, arrest, torture” and deportation of foreign Christians employed in the country. The commission also took the country to task for “offensive and discriminatory language” disparaging Jews, Christians and non-Wahhabi Muslims found in government-sponsored school textbooks, in Friday sermons preached in prominent mosques, and in state-controlled Saudi newspapers.

The Commission also criticized the US for being complicit in helping the Saudi religious persecution. It cited American acquiescence to Saudi demands, such as a recent U.S. Postal Service prohibition against mailing materials “contrary to the Islamic faith” to U.S. troops in the Middle East.

Additionally, the Commission cited U.S. businesses in Saudi Arabia that aid the government in cracking down on religious dissent. And as recently as March, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell failed to designate Saudi Arabia as a “country of particular concern (CPC),” the diplomatic term for the most severe violators of human rights.

“We don’t understand how one could not name Saudi Arabia as a CPC,” said one official. “Saudi Arabia has been explicitly left out of any [State Department] citations.”

Assessment:

I ve pretty much exhausted this topic, but the reason we ve spent so much time on it is because it is so important. Back in the 1970 s, US support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War resulted in Saudi Arabia leading OPEC into an embargo of oil imports. The effect on the US economy was immediate and far reaching.

In the immediate short term, prices at the pumps tripled and in many places, gasoline was rationed. Motorists waited for hours in long lines to buy the scarce gas at inflated prices. Since the price of fuel went up, so did the price of everything else.

During the mid-1970 s it wasn t uncommon to see items in groceries stores with five or six different price tickets on them as inflation reached double-digits as did mortgage interest rates and unemployment figures.

The Saudi-sponsored Oil Embargo of 1973 brought the American economy to its knees. In 1973, the United States relied on foreign oil supplies to meet one-third of its existing energy needs. Thirty years later, the United States dependency has INCREASED from one third in 1973 to more than HALF in 2003 (53% gross imports – 48% net imports)!

That s why the Saudis can do no wrong.

We discussed emerging technology that would allow Washington to erase US dependency on foreign oil in favor of a new process that can turn carbon-based refuse into high-quality petroleum products in a matter of hours.

But that would throw the entire global economy into a tailspin and turn the entire Middle East into an anti-American terrorist camp.

It becomes a choice between the lesser of two evils, and it is difficult to say exactly which is worse.

Spin Cycle Shifts to High Gear

Spin Cycle Shifts to High Gear
Vol: 20 Issue: 18 Sunday, May 18, 2003

I read a fascinating Newsweek piece today that examined exactly the same circumstances before and after the terrorist bombing of three compounds in Riyadh that we did over the last couple of days. What made the piece so fascinating were the conclusions reached by Newsweek s ordinarily brilliant Michael Isikoff.

Newsweek covered the story as if the Saudi theatrics delivered to US audiences were the gospel, saying that Saudi spokesman Adel al-Jubeir was genuinely rattled by the attacks, advancing the fiction that the Saudi government had just experienced its own September 11.

Frankly, the comparison of the attack in Riyadh to the attacks on Washington and New York is more than disingenuous, it is offensive. The attacks suffered by America were inflicted on America as a message to America. And the majority — 15 of 19 — of the attackers were Saudis.

The attacks on Riyadh were inflicted on Americans and Westerners from a half dozen countries. There were more Western than Saudi casualties. Even Newsweek recognizes the attacks were primarily a message aimed at America; Isikoff devotes much of his piece over to struggling to interpret what the message actually was.

The only valid comparison between Riyadh and September 11 is that in both cases, the majority of the attackers were Saudi. And if it is comparable to another Pearl Harbor or September 11th, the Saudis weren t the targets, just collateral damage.

Isikoff dances all around this, both acknowledging it as fact and then spinning it back around until he concludes the exact opposite to be the case.

The Newsweek piece acknowledges that the Saudi government had plenty of advance notice of the attack.

Isikoff writes that in the months before last week s attacks, there were indications that the group seemed to be shifting its focus away from the West, and was instead seeking out targets of opportunity in countries where security would be weak. U.S. intelligence agencies noticed a marked increase in communications traffic between suspected terrorists, indicating that a Qaeda strike in Saudi Arabia, East Africa or Southeast Asia was likely imminent. In hindsight, the information was eerily accurate.

One U.S. intelligence memo, obtained by NEWSWEEK, warned that Al Qaeda might launch a multi-pronged attack against the same target, allowing the terrorists to overcome high security installations.

The memo concluded, We must remember the group is highly dynamic and capable of developing novel methods of execution that may result in almost complete surprise.

Isikoff acknowledges that in the weeks before the Riyadh bombings, US officials virtually pleaded with the Saudis to take the threats seriously and toughen up security and that the requests were ignored.

He points out that a cache of explosives and weapons were found less than five hundred yards from a compound that housed mostly Americans, and that that was one of the compounds struck one week later.

And his piece acknowledges the hand of Prince Nayef, the Saudi minister in charge of state security. Nayef has steadfastly denied the presence of ANY al-Qaeda in the kingdom. Clearly, since Osama bin-Laden is popular enough to be elected to high office in the kingdom, according to the Saudi s own admission, Nayef wasn t simply na ve, he was lying.

Last December, Prince Nayef told an Arabic newspaper that he believed that the Jews were behind the September 11 attacks, not al-Qaeda.

But in the wake of the attacks, Isikoff’s conclusion that the Saudis, at last, are listening to US warnings, completely glossing over any Saudi malevolence and coming to the conclusion (unwarranted by any historical evidence) that the Saudi royal family was simply na ve.

Having assessed all the evidence than points to the existence of al-Qaeda sympathizers within the Saudi government, Isikoff simultaneously concludes that the Saudis were the intended victims, that the attacks will turn the Saudis against al-Qaeda, and that the attacks are a signal of an impending al-Qaeda attack against the US.

Assessment:

It takes considerable effort to arrive at the conclusions Isikoff does without significant torturing of both the facts at hand and the history of al-Qaeda and Saudi Arabia.

And it is doubly stunning when one considers that Isikoff knows better. The Saudi royal family is the patron of the militant Islamic ideology that directs the al-Qaeda movement. That s no secret. It is axiomatic that there are al-Qaeda sympathizers within the Saudi government, unless the entire Saudi theocracy is knowingly built on a lie.

Either the Saudis believe the tenets of Wahabism, or they don t. The al-Qaeda members who are killing themselves by the dozens in order to carry out these attacks against the West certainly do.

So by definition, either the Saudi government is in sympathy with the religious principles of jihad that it teaches and al-Qaeda practices, or the Saudi government doesn t believe in its own religion.

Isikoff s conclusions assume that both conditions exist simultaneously; that the Saudi royal family is sincere Islamists AND they are not sympathetic to the Islamist goals of al-Qaeda to destroy Western culture and replace it with an Islamic theocracy.

Try as I might, I can t see how he can get there from here.

But having concluded the Saudis were the intended victims, Isikoff then takes off on an exploration of how the same strike was also a message to America that we will soon be next.

He points out an FBI report that several suspected al-Qaeda scouts were sent to Texas to reconnoiter the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas as one indicator. He refers to a U.S. intelligence document that concludes that, the mission may constitute pre-operational activity.

But Isikoff inexplicably ignores the reason that the FBI believes the ranch was being cased by al-Qaeda operatives. Because the alleged scouts were SAUDI students with ties to other suspected SAUDI members of al-Qaeda. Seems like a pretty significant fact to be left out inadvertently, but maybe I m too conspiratorial.

Or maybe not. One of the missions of the Omega Letter is to point out the methods of deception employed by the globalists who control the mainstream media and use it to further their own agenda.

There is clearly an agenda that aims to maintain the fiction of a close US-Saudi alliance against terror and to hide any evidence of Saudi involvement with al-Qaeda, in part because if it were common knowledge, the Bush administration would be forced to do something about it.

Over the last couple of days, we began examining the agenda, and accurately forecast the spin that would facilitate it. I m not saying that to be self-congratulatory, but rather to point out that we aren t making things up to be interesting.

The Bible says that there will be certain alliances that will exist in the last days. So if these are the last days, certain trends will be predictable not because I am a prophet or claim some hidden knowledge directly from God but because the Bible IS prophetic and contains knowledge revealed directly BY God.

If these are NOT the last days, then I have no better than a fifty-fifty chance of being accurate in forecasting those trends.

The Omega Letter archives contain over 600 volumes of the Daily Intelligence Digest. I leave it to you to determine how accurate we ve been so far.

The reason isn t because I am an astute student of political trends or because I am a clairvoyant with an ability to see the future. Sometimes, I am wrong on specifics, but not the trends. Again, that isn t a tribute to me. It is evidence that we are indeed living in the days foretold by Scripture. The last days. Or we d be wrong more than we are right.

Unfolding events are inexorably shaping the face of the global politics to reflect the world as described by Scripture for the last days.

The proof is in the pudding.

Note:

Since the successful conclusion of the Gulf War, the Omega Letter has suffered a precipitous drop in trial subscriptions, which also means a drop in new subscriptions. We ve also lost a few subscribers, which didn t help, either.

That suggests to me that some people have concluded that maybe events are slowing down, or that they had misread the significance of the war in the first place.

But the end of the Gulf War doesn t mean that the stopwatch has stopped. If anything, the evidences are growing more dramatic every day.

We need to keep reminding the lost that time is running out, that today is the acceptable day of salvation , that the machinery of the last days is already in motion before its too late. The evidence is all around us.

We are the watchmen on the wall who are charged with sounding the alarm. It is an awesome responsibility; one not to be taken lightly.

But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand, writes Ezekiel (33:6).

It is an axiom of Scripture that when God really wants to make a point, he says it twice, just to make sure we get it.

When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. (Ezekiel 33:8)

We must be careful against growing complacent. And we must continue to study and show ourselves, approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth, Paul writes in his second Letter to Timothy (2:15).

The Omega Letter exists because we believe that these ARE the last days and that the work of the individual evangelist is both critical and facing obstacles unlike any in history. The Scripture says that in the last days, the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

Many of you have experienced that wrath when attempting to share Christ. The enemy is constantly engaged in battle with us at the Omega Letter.

That tells me that we re on the right track. And I know that we win in the end, but not because I am a prophet.

The Bible says so. Wherefore, comfort one another with these words.

(Isikoff’s Newsweek Article can be accessed at the following linke: http://www.msnbc.com/news/915101.asp?0cl=c1)

Special Report: al-Qaeda and the Politics of Oil Part Two

Special Report: al-Qaeda and the Politics of Oil Part Two
Vol: 20 Issue: 17 Saturday, May 17, 2003

It is fairly obvious that comparing the Riyadh attacks that killed 34 (mostly non-Saudi) victims with a Saudi 9/11 or a Saudi Pearl Harbor contains more than a whiff of hyperbole. Pearl Harbor killed almost three thousand American servicemen. The September 11th strike killed more than three thousand American civilians.

No matter how hard you torture the analogy, you just can t get there from here.

As we discussed in yesterday s OL, it s all an oily smokescreen.

Far from being a Saudi Pearl Harbor , the attacks were more like a gift to the Saudi royal family. Here’s they way I see it. The attack was allowed to proceed in order to boost US-Saudi relations by creating the illusion of solidarity.

There are just too many references to a Saudi ‘9/11’ and ‘Pearl Harbor’ already for it to be anything but propaganda. The House of Saud simply allowed al-Qaeda to serve as useful idiots.

Take, for example Adel al-Jubeir’s comments, looped and endlessly replayed all day on the cable news programs. al-Jubeir is the spokesman for the Saudi embassy in Washington. Saudi Arabia “has been a strong ally in the war against terrorism for a very simple reason: this terrorism is directed at us,” said al-Jubeir.

“We are convinced that the United States and Saudi Arabia are the two countries that are in the crosshairs of this murderous organization called al-Qaeda.”

Here s how THAT works. al-Qaeda hits Saudi royal-owned property, but the targets are non-Saudis. So there are no big domestic ramifications for the Saudi government. But Riyadh DID get a truckload of sympathy and solidarity from the US.

How convenient is it that the attack was conducted against properties that specifically belonged to the top royals, but the targets were the Westerners living in them?

Simply speaking, there is no downside to this attack — from the Saudi royal family s perspective

The attack gave them public relations benefits that the Saudis couldn’t have bought, even with all their money. The Saudis tried (and failed) to accomplish the same thing with an ad campaign in 2002, remember? This was LOTS cheaper.

The attacks give the government an excuse to conduct a witch hunt, maybe purge a few problems. In the meantime, Washington clucks sympathetically and thanks them profusely for helping out with the war on terror. Simply speaking, if al-Qaeda didn’t do it, the royals would have been fools not to have it done.

The Saudi royal family has been paying off al-Qaeda for years. And now, more than ever, Osama needs money.

Does it make sense that he would bite the only hand still feeding him — without tacit approval from the top?

Assessment:

It isn t like the thinkers in Washington are too stupid to figure this out for themselves but it is in America s best interests to pretend they can t. We discussed America s addiction to oil, and what it would mean to the economy if our supplier cut off our drug supply.

And why that dependence blinds us to the treacherous nature of the Saudi threat.

While we can clearly see the threat posed by the ideology of al-Qaeda, US administrations for decades have ignored the fact that the House of Saud is the principle purveyor of that same ideology, for fear the Saudis will cut off our drugs.

Imagine what it would mean if suddenly, every nation on earth could simply manufacture all the oil they needed? What would it mean to the Middle East if all the oil reserves on earth were suddenly worthless? Saudi Arabia, one of the world s richest nations, has two natural resources. Sand and oil. You can t build anything out of sand, and you can t eat oil.

Well, get ready for this. According to Discover Magazine, in an industrial park in Philadelphia sits a new machine that can change almost anything into oil. Really.

“This is a solution to three of the biggest problems facing mankind,” says Brian Appel, chairman and CEO of Changing World Technologies, the company that built this pilot plant and has just completed its first industrial-size installation in Missouri. “This process can deal with the world’s waste. It can supplement our dwindling supplies of oil. And it can slow down global warming.”

Appel has assembled a team of scientists, former government leaders, and deep-pocketed investors to develop and sell what he calls the thermal depolymerization process, or TDP.

The process is designed to handle almost any waste product imaginable, including turkey offal, tires, plastic bottles, harbor-dredged muck, old computers, municipal garbage, cornstalks, paper-pulp effluent, infectious medical waste, oil-refinery residues, even biological weapons such as anthrax spores.

According to Appel, waste goes in one end and comes out the other as three products, all valuable and environmentally benign: high-quality oil, clean-burning gas, and purified minerals that can be used as fuels, fertilizers, or specialty chemicals for manufacturing.

Unlike other solid-to-liquid-fuel processes such as cornstarch into ethanol, this one will accept almost any carbon-based feedstock.

If a 175-pound man fell into one end, he would come out the other end as 38 pounds of oil, 7 pounds of gas, and 7 pounds of minerals, as well as 123 pounds of sterilized water.

While no one plans to put people into a thermal depolymerization machine, “There is no reason why we can’t turn sewage, including human excrement, into a glorious oil,” says engineer Terry Adams, a project consultant. So the city of Philadelphia is in discussion with Changing World Technologies to begin doing exactly that.

“The potential is unbelievable,” says Michael Roberts, a senior chemical engineer for the Gas Technology Institute, an energy research group. “You’re not only cleaning up waste; you’re talking about distributed generation of oil all over the world.”

What it could mean is that a large chunk of the world’s agricultural, industrial, and municipal waste may someday go into thermal depolymerization machines scattered all over the globe.

If the process works as well as its creators claim, not only would most toxic waste problems become history, so would imported oil. Just converting all the U.S. agricultural waste into oil and gas would yield the energy equivalent of 4 billion barrels of oil annually.

In 2001 the United States imported 4.2 billion barrels of oil. Referring to U.S. dependence on oil from the volatile Middle East, R. James Woolsey, former CIA director and an adviser to Changing World Technologies, says, “This technology offers a beginning of a way away from this.”

Here s a description of how it works. At Philadelphia’s Naval Business Center, the experimental feedstock is a turkey processing-plant waste: feathers, bones, skin, blood, fat, guts.

A forklift dumps 1,400 pounds of the nasty stuff into the machine’s first stage, a 350-horsepower grinder that masticates it into gray brown slurry. From there it flows into a series of tanks and pipes, which hum and hiss as they heat, digest, and break down the mixture.

Two hours later, a white-jacketed technician turns a spigot. Out pours a honey-colored fluid that is pure, light hydrocarbon based oil, indistinguishable from the real thing, because it IS the real thing.

The technicians here have spent three years feeding different kinds of waste into their machinery to formulate recipes.

Put a computer or refrigerator into a grinder, and what comes out are little pellets of PVC, wood, fiberglass and metal. Dump them into the processor, and out the other end comes commercially viable crude oil.

“The only thing this process can’t handle is nuclear waste,” Appel says. “If it contains carbon, we can do it.”

According to Appel, the plant outside Philadelphia can produce ten tons of gas per day, that goes back into the system to make heat to power itself.

It will make 21,000 gallons of water, which will be clean enough to discharge into a municipal sewage system. Pathological vectors will be completely gone.

It will make 11 tons of minerals and 600 barrels of oil; High-quality stuff — the same specs as a number two heating oil, says Appel.

Appel says the process costs about fifteen dollars per barrel to make, but anticipates the cost dropping to less than ten dollars per barrel within three to five years.

First off, folks, this sounds like the real deal. Among the investors in the project are Howard Buffet, son of billionaire investor Warren Buffet.

Between Buffet and the others, the investors have put up billions of dollars of their own money. People don t GET billions of dollars by investing in crackpot schemes.

We already have the technology to replace our dependence on foreign oil, particularly Saudi oil. So why is this technology a secret? Or almost a secret did YOU hear about it on the news or read about it in the New York Times? Don t you suppose that news like this might be NEWS in capital letters?

Are the Big Oil companies sitting on it? Yes. Is the federal government sitting on it? Yes. What about the press? Obviously. So why the lid?

Suppose America DID become energy self-sufficient — overnight? The global economy, like the US domestic economy, runs on oil. The politics of oil colors international alliances, dictate the rules for foreign policy, and gives countries that have it disproportionate power over those that don t.

Without the politics oil, the economic power of the Arab bloc would be broken. International organizations like the United Nations would dry up and blow away. The once prosperous Arab states would be instantly impoverished. But instead of curing all our problems with international terror, our problems would just be beginning.

Without oil revenue, the Arab world would collapse. So would the global economy that depends on the complicated oil-based economic infrastructure.

Renewable oil supplies would make the United States utterly untouchable as the world s only global hyperpower. And would make us the target of choice for every newly impoverished Arab malcontent on the face of the earth.

The technology to turn garbage into oil does exist today and won t stay under wraps forever.

I have often wondered about Ezekiel s prophecy concerning the Gog-Magog invasion of Israel.

While it is not difficult to imagine the Arab world allying itself to destroy the Israelis (they ve tried five times already), it has always been unclear what sparks it and why.

The Arabs are the ones with the all the oil wealth, not the Israelis. But take away the Arab s oil wealth, and the shoe goes to the other foot. Israel would instantly become the richest state in the Middle East — by far.

And Ezekiel s scenario begins to sound more like headlines from tomorrow’s news than prophecies from the distant past.

Which is why Jesus warned the last generation that, “when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.”

Clearly, ‘these things’ have begun to come to pass. In spades.

Jesus also said, “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” (Luke 21:28,32)

Special Report: al-Qaeda and the Politics of Oil – Part One

Special Report: al-Qaeda and the Politics of Oil – Part One
Vol: 20 Issue: 16 Friday, May 16, 2003

US intelligence officials are warning of a possible new attack or series of attacks in the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah. The mainstream media is reporting that the Saudis have been shocked into taking action against al-Qaeda by the attacks.

The US warned the Saudis on at least five occasions of impending attacks on Riyadh in the weeks leading up to the destruction of three residential compounds.

U.S. Ambassador Robert Jordan described the carefully planned, almost simultaneous suicide attacks as “if not the Saudi Sept. 11, it was certainly the Saudis’ Pearl Harbor.”

Jordan said there was a “very clear suggestion that this attack was aimed at undermining the government as much as it was aimed at American interests.”

Two of the compounds housed employees of the Saudi National Guard, headed by Crown Prince Abdullah, and air force workers in the Defense Ministry, which is led by Prince Sultan. Both are brothers of King Fahd.

The third complex is owned by the deputy governor of Riyadh, second only to the governor, Prince Salman, also a brother of the king.

Late Thursday, U.S. officials warned Americans of possible attacks in Saudi Arabia’s busy Red Sea port of Jeddah.

“(We have) received an unconfirmed report that a possible terrorist attack in the Al Hamra district of Jeddah may occur in the near future,” the warning said. “U.S. citizens are encouraged to maintain a high level of vigilance.”

The warning also said diplomatic families living in that district have temporarily relocated.

An American official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said intelligence “indicated that there was going to be a stream of attacks, and so we have confidence that has begun.”

Assessment:

The argument that the attacks on Riyadh were really attacks on the Saudi royal family is flawed. While the properties may have belonged to the House of Saud, MOST of Riyadh belongs to the House of Saud.

The properties housed Westerners, including Americans. The final death toll includes at least seven Americans, and the majority of the dead were Westerners, not members of the Saudi royal family, or even Saudi citizens.

The White House is attempting to spin this as the Saudi Pearl Harbor in the hopes it will spur the Saudis to aid the US war on terror. But it isn t going to work because it isn t true. If it were an attack on the royal family, it would have been aimed at the royal family.

The attack took place in Saudi Arabia, but the target was the Western world. That isn t speculation, that is a conclusion based on the evidence. Most of the 34 dead were Americans or other westerners. Despite the best efforts of the West to spin this as an attack on either the Saudi government or the Saudi people, it is unlikely that al-Qaeda will lose much support among the Saudi population. The average Saudi doesn t feel threatened by terrorist attacks against Western targets. They favor them.

In a country where alcohol is banned, as are cinemas, nightclubs, cafes and other forms of amusements that allow young people to mingle, there is no space permitted for the young to spend their built-up energy — an energy that simply had to explode sometime, somewhere, somehow.

The only avenue left to many young Saudi men, especially those with an education, and often plenty of leisure time on their hands, was quite naturally, religion. The religion that the House of Saud has deliberately cultivated is the extremist Wahabi Islam of Osama bin Laden.

And this is where the Saudi experiment seems to have backfired. They calculated wrongly — that through their tough restrictive religious rules and cultural controls, they could continue to shape, mold and direct the thinking and actions of their youth.

“They are a monarchy without elected representative institutions or political parties. We embrace religious freedom. They rule through religious police. Economically, diplomatically and socially, the Saudi Arabian government has long promoted policies that challenge American beliefs and undermine the basic human rights of their own people,” said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif.

These words were said at a hearing on Capitol Hill in June 2002, but, nevertheless, still hold true today.

“If Saudi Arabia had been a more open society all along, the terrorism that now seems to emanate from there would have dissipated over the years,” said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., a member of the House Committee on International Relations, also in June 2002.

“In a free society, people have many different avenues to approach their frustrations; they don’t turn to religious fanaticism. In Saudi Arabia that is about all the avenues they left for people to deal with their frustrations,” Rohrabacher added.

Saudi Arabia is among the most repressive police states in the world. The fact that al-Qaeda chose targets within the Kingdom to strike out at the West means that at least some of the extremist Wahabi members of the Saudi government had to have turned a blind eye for it to be carried out.

In terms of ‘hard’ targets and ‘soft’ targets, an attack within Saudi Arabia is a very hard target, indeed, unless there is help from the top.

Whether the ‘Pearl Harbor’ thing is US propaganda or just wishful thinking depends on one s perspective. But the renewed al-Qaeda activity does not necessarily mean that the Saudis have experienced their own Pearl Harbor and will rise up like America did to carry the war to al-Qaeda.

The political House of Saud will do whatever it takes to remain in power. That includes paying off al-Qaeda, won t go far enough to include going to war with them. Politically, Osama bin-Laden is far more popular among Saudi citizens than Prince Abudullah is.

Then there is the Wahabi factor. The House of Saud doesn t just propagate the extremist Wahabi Islam; it also adheres to it and to its culture of jihad.

While the political House of Saud wants to remain in power, the ideological purpose FOR that power is primarily to spread the gospel of jihad.

For the House of Saud to genuinely turn against al-Qaeda would be an act of ideological cannibalism that would bring the House down around Abdullah s ears.

Successive US administrations have tried hard to represent the Saudi government as a close US ally and a friend. Clearly, they are neither, but nobody in Washington will say it out loud.

There are a couple of reasons for this.

First, there is the principle of the devil you know . Better to deal with the devil you know, than a new devil that could be much worse.

Secondly, there is the politics of oil. Thanks to years of domestic political stupidity that puts the welfare of Alaskan caribou above national security, America is more dependent on foreign oil today than it was during the 1970 s OPEC crisis that crippled our economy for a decade.

US-Saudi relations, far from being that of friends and allies, is more analogous to that of a drug addict and his supplier. No friend is more important to the addict than his drug dealer.

To the addict, who needs what his dealer controls just to make it through one day, the dealer is the Main Man. No insult is too grave, no slight too painful for the addict to break that relationship. The addict just pretends it didn t happen and rationalizes it away.

It is from that relationship that the useful idiots extrapolate that the present US administration is the pocket of Big Oil, and is therefore evil.

It isn t the government this is addicted to oil, it is you and me.

A government that broke the relationship with our suppliers would last just long enough to be impeached by the addicts who put them in office.

Politicians of any party are elected primarily to ensure the free flow of the drug that fuels our oil-dependent economy. All parties of all political stripes, from the Republicans to the Green Party, are equally addicted to oil. If they own a car, buy groceries, or travel further than they can ride a horse or a bike, they are all part of the oil addiction.

How would Americans react to paying fifteen bucks a gallon for gas at the pumps? What would that do to the price of a banana in Buffalo, NY?

The useful idiots that chanted, no blood for oil last month are this month chanting, it s the economy, stupid! proving that, while occasionally useful to America s enemies, they remain idiots.

Both Washington and Riyadh are victims of their own vices. Neither would survive long without the other.

In tomorrow’s OL, we’ll discuss a new technology that could mean the end of America’s addiction to Saudi oil.

And the beginning of a brand-new day for America’s relations with the Middle East.

Victimizing the French

Victimizing the French
Vol: 20 Issue: 15 Thursday, May 15, 2003

The government of France is reacting to charges that it was complicit with the regime of Saddam Hussein by claiming to be the victim of an organized campaign of disinformation launched by the Bush administration.

The French equipment left behind by fleeing Iraqi soldiers wasn t REALLY French. And the French briefing documents found in the rubble of the Iraqi Foreign Ministry must have been clever forgeries.

In a letter prepared for delivery today to administration officials and members of Congress, France details what it says are false news stories, with anonymous administration officials as sources, that appeared in the U.S. media over the past nine months. A two-page list attached to the letter includes reports of alleged French weapons sales to Iraq and culminates in a report last week that French officials in Syria issued French passports to escaping Iraqis being sought by the U.S. military.

The stories, all of which Paris has heatedly denied, are part of an “ugly campaign to destroy the image of France,” a French official said. Officials said they have no doubt that the stories were spread by factions in the administration itself — hard-line civilians within and close to the Pentagon are their primary suspects — and that there was no visible effort by the White House or other departments to discipline those involved or even find out who they are. Sacre bleu!

The French complain that Washington is getting even with them for opposing the war with Iraq, and that French efforts to kiss and make up have been rebuffed by the Bush administration.

Paris has a laundry list of alleged US lies that were made up about them. According to the French, the United States was lying when it allegedly leaked to the NY Times that the French and Germans were supplying Saddam with high-precision switches used in detonating nuclear weapons.

Paris said the REAL story goes like this: Iraq approached the French in 1998 and asked them for the switches as spare parts . The quick-thinking and honorable French IMMEDIATELY refused the sale and alerted the Germans that Saddam was pulling a fast one.

The French say the stories about French possession of smallpox virus are lies. In March, the Washington Times quoted a “U.S. intelligence source” as saying that two French companies had sold Iraq spare parts for airplanes and helicopters. The next day, the two companies named in the story, and the embassy, formally denied it.

Stories citing sales of chemical components for long-range missiles, armored vehicles, radar equipment and spare parts for fighter planes were reported, and denied, in April.

The French also hotly deny a story published in the Washington Times that alleges that Paris issued passports to fleeing Iraqi officials that allowed them to melt into the European Community. The paper cited unidentified intelligence officials as its source.

Assessment:

According to Paris, all these stories are US plants . The documents recovered from the files of the Iraqi government are either forgeries or have been misinterpreted . The French equipment was purchased by Iraq either before the sanctions were imposed, or was imported for civilian use . . . or something.

What the French don t explain in their furious denial is why . Why would the United States deliberately trash an ally? (At least, Washington THOUGHT the French were its allies).

The French explanation is because Paris opposed the US effort to liberate Iraq. But that is another why that goes begging. Why did Paris oppose the war so vehemently in the first place? It couldn t have been out of concern for the Iraqi people. It is clear that the French knew at least what we knew about Saddam s brutality. At the minimum, they can read.

(And we know that President Bush gave personal briefings to President Chirac about Iraq. The London Times found copies of the briefings in the rubble of the Iraqi Foreign Ministry).

For most of the period between the wars, the French joined the Russians and Germans in calling for a lifting of the sanctions, saying they were only hurting the Iraqi population.

The Oil-for-Food program was a direct result of French lobbying. The French couldn t get the sanctions lifted, but they were able to get them modified so the Iraqis could buy food, medicine and basic essentials — mostly from the French, Germans and Russians.

Essentials like Mercedes-Benz automobiles, big-screen plasma TV s and cartoon-making equipment for the Iraqi Information Ministry. If the Iraqis used the money to actually buy food or medicine, they must have used it all up before the coalition got there, because we couldn t find any.

Now that Saddam is gone, the French OPPOSE lifting the sanctions until after the UN certifies Iraq is weapons-free.

Making it more confusing is the fact that until the eve of the war, the French were loudly proclaiming there were never any weapons there in the first place. Now they want to keep the (formerly) crippling sanctions in place against a US-governed Iraq (and it s suffering people) until the UN certifies the weapons that weren t there before aren t there now. Does this make sense?

It makes sense if the allegations of French complicity with Saddam are true. It doesn t make sense if the French denials are true.

It is the French that are keeping up the pressure. It seems that Washington, although coldly furious, would prefer to put a lid on the whole affair in the interest of global harmony.

What makes this fascinating is its transparency. French conduct over the past twelve years regarding Iraq has no alternative explanation; the French know that, and they know that we know that.

The French denials are addressed to the United States, but that is only a formality. The intended audience is the international community. Paris is pandering to the international willingness to believe any charge leveled against Washington. The more ridiculous the better.

This is the principle of the Big Lie perfected some seventy years ago by another European leader. Adolf Hitler explained how it worked in Mein Kampf from the Murphy English translation, page 134.

“All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.

As we ve noted before, the real story of Gulf War Two isn t the war so much as what comes out of it. International geopolitics is undergoing a fundamental reorganization. What Donald Rumsfeld called Old Europe is dusting off some Old Tactics that threaten to split both the European Union and United Nations.

We know that nature abhors a vacuum, and so does politics. Whatever the French are up to, it is clear that continuing along the path we are on is impossible. It will inevitably result in a diplomatic catastrophe.

The Bible says that in the last days, a number of things will take place that will eventually lead to the ascendancy of the revived Roman Empire to the role of global government.

The UN is unlikely to survive the aftermath of the Iraq Debate. The European Union is anything but unified, with new Europe firmly allied with the United States and Old Europe about to declare war on Washington.

It seems that global events are spinning out of control . . .EXCEPT God said this is exactly what the last generation before the return of Christ would experience. So they are not OUT of control, but very much IN control.

The end times picture is one of escalating global chaos, wars, rumors of wars, nation rising against nation and kingdom against kingdom, global hatred of Israel, global hatred of the Cross, men s hearts failing them for fear, as the kings of the earth take council against the Lord and His anointed. A time when men shall cry ‘peace and safety,’ while sudden destruction looms just over the horizon (Matthew 24, Psalms 2, Zechariah 12-14, 1st Thessalonians 5).

What we are witnessing is the beginning of a snowball effect that has begun to build as a consequence of its own momentum. Unchecked, it has the potential to bring the world to the brink of an unthinkable war.

A perfect time for a European leader with a look more stout than his fellows and a mouth speaking great things to call the world back from the brink of destruction. (Daniel 7)

In 1957, Jacques Monet, the father of the modern European Union, reputedly lamented, What Europe needs is a leader that can bring together all the members of the European family. Show us such a leader, and, be he god or be he devil, we will follow him.

Monet died before he met that leader. It wasn t yet the appointed time. But Europe is still waiting for Monet s Fearless Leader.

But if we are reading the signs of the times correctly, it won t be long before their patience will be rewarded.

The Circus on the East River

The Circus on the East River
Vol: 20 Issue: 14 Wednesday, May 14, 2003

What was supposed to be a global UNITED Nations organization would be more aptly named the UNTIED Nations, since the ties that bind the nations of the world to the globalist body are rapidly unraveling. One could lay most of the world’s problems at the feet of the very organization that was created to prevent them.

It gives validity to zealots and petty bigots. It helps to keep tyrannical dictators in power. It provides money and aid to international terrorists.

And it sets itself up as the international economic and environmental standard that it expects the rest of the world to mirror.

The truth is, the United Nations is the root of international trouble, not the answer. Saddam Hussein was allowed to stay in power, able to threaten world peace for twelve years, thanks to the UN.

The United States allowed the United Nations to dictate the terms for the finish to the Gulf War. And then it stood by for a decade while the UN refused to enforce the terms it dictated.

Delay. Negotiate. Recommend. Study. Reconsider. Do nothing. This is the same game the UN has played in nearly every international crisis.

It is the reason North Korea is still at war with the rest of the world 50 years after the Korean War ended without an armistice.

It’s the reason that North Korea has nuclear weapons with which to threaten the region and the world.

It s the reason why Zimbabwe s murderous dictator, Robert Mugabe, was able to steal his election and then steal the land of white property owners and still have a voice at the UN s Sustainable Development Conference in South Africa.

It s the reason why the Communist Chinese are able to ignore any UN rules not to their liking while growing as an international military and economic threat.

It s the reason why a terrorist nation like Syria can be given a seat on the UN s Human Rights Council while the United States is removed. Libya chairs the Human Rights Council, while it continues to hammer out a settlement for the airliner that Libya blew out of the sky over Lockerbie, Scotland.

Had the United States NOT already made it clear it intended to remove Saddam Hussein, the Untied Nations would have seated IRAQ as the chair of the United Nations Disarmament Commission last March.

The United Nations main purpose is to provide voice and power to irrelevant or vicious nations to counter the United States. A case in point is France.

Without its veto at the UN Security Council, France would be just another xenophobic socialist state with delusions of grandeur like Germany or Canada.

France’s actual status as dictator of global affairs is best summed up in the pre-Gulf War observation that, “going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion.”

But it is America’s fault because it allows the Theater of the Absurd on the East River to exist in the first place.

Apart from the money it is looting from the Iraqi oil for food program, the UN’s budget relies on the dues it collects from US taxpayers.

UN headquarters was given to the UN by the Rockefeller family. The hope was that it would become the headquarters for a global government.

Instead, they provided a place where pouting and jealous bureaucrats and self-inflated international diplomats can pretend to matter, while they consider ways in which to obstruct and frustrate their hosts.

The UN’s most vocal membership stands in opposition of the American values of controlled representative government, justice, free enterprise, privacy of individuals and private property rights.

Most of the UN s membership comes from nations controlled either by communist regimes, kingdoms or mad dictators where American values are either unknown or viewed as a threat.

Those same nations are working furiously to advance their goal of a global government that can dictate terms to the dangerous hyper-power that is responsible for its creation and finances and hosts its existence.

The UN s International Criminal Court is in place. The UN recently held an international meeting to discuss the possibilities and methods of implementing global taxes. More plans are under consideration to establish a UN global army or police force.

Most member states participating in these planning sessions are from brutal dictatorships like China and Cuba and a number of brutal fundamental Islamic states like Syria and Iran.

Most Americans don’t believe the UN is a genuine threat, because they don’t believe America would voluntarily surrender its sovereignty to the center.

But America has already surrendered sovereignty in increments, in the form of well-meaning and innocent-sounding treaties.

NATFA was billed as was sold as a way for American producers to broaden their markets to the international level. Instead, many have found that details of the treaty dictate rules and regulations, particularly of the environmental kind, that tilt the playing field to other nations.

As a result, American markets are flooded with foreign goods as American businesses and jobs head out of the country.

The European Union was originally sold as another NAFTA through which nations could join together to compete with the United States on the international market.

But instead, a country like France could issue passports to fleeing Iraqi officials that didn’t merely offer them asylum in France. In point of fact, France also opened the doors to 11 other European countries that have no say in the matter. They surrendered the right to say who can live in their country over to the center via treaty. Any European passport must be accepted by the other signatory states, so a French passport is as valid to enter Italy as it is to enter France.

Now there is discussion of an African Union, a South American Union and a North American Union in which the United States would meld its borders with Canada and Mexico. The move will be easy since NAFTA has already set the precedent.

It will be even easier to complete after all of these nations have been through the process of letting go of their national identity.

Canada’s thirty-year old experiment with multiculturalism demonstrates what can happen when a nation lets go of its national identity in favor of embracing ‘diversity.’ Most Canadians see the UN as savior, rather than as a threat.

And the United Nations is already putting the pieces together with its World Court, global tax schemes and military planning. Imagine a world run by the justice of China, with the economics of Cuba and the military might of the United States.

Such is the world of the future under the United Nations. The United States holds all of the cards, but it has only one vote in the UN’s socialist cesspool.

We witnessed the President of the United States begging the United Nations for permission to defend itself against murderers, only to have that permission refused.

About half the country believed that without UN permission, going to war with Iraq was a violation of international law. Because about half the country, according to most polls, really believes that America is ALREADY subordinate to the UN.

The war in Iraq proved that we don t need the United Nations to grant us permission to protect our national interests.

The United States proved it can fight its own war on terrorism. It can and will organize its own coalition of allies, use its own money, its own weapons and its own troops to defeat any enemy who threatens it.

Assessment:

The United Nations is irrelevant as a body to deliver world peace. But it is US participation in propping up the circus on the East River that makes the UN so dangerous.

Congressman Ron Paul plans to reintroduce House Resolution 1146, entitled “the American Sovereignty Restoration Act.” The resolution seeks to have the US withdraw from the UN and boot the UN out of New York.

H.R. 1146 would relieve the United States from participating in UNESCO and UN environmental policies that endanger our economy and property rights. It would end U.S. participation in UN peace keeping missions, meaning we would no longer be helping to prop up criminal governments and enemies who seek our demise.

About half the country still thinks the UN is relevant and necessary, but that percentage is shrinking rapidly. Whether or not HR 1146 passes the 108th Congress or not, the UN’s days are numbered — at least in its present form.

Should the US pull out of the UN and order it out of the country, where do you suppose it will go?

Where else could a global government be set up where it would have any international legitimacy? Buenos Aires? No. Too Spanish, too unimportant and too far away.

Russia? No. Nobody would buy Moscow as the seat of global government. Africa? Not likely. China? The Middle East? Japan? Australia?

Hey . . . what about the EU? Perfect! They already have the necessary infrastructures in place. But it wouldn’t do for the global government to seat itself in Brussels. Then the rest of the world would fear the global government was really an arm of the European government.

But the fact remains that the EU is the only place where such a global system could exist and expect to be extended any international legitimacy.

Chirac would be glad to host the global government in Paris, but that would encounter heavy resistance from the other EU states who fear France has too loud a voice in European affairs already.

A global government would have to be headquartered in Europe to be legitimate, but where? There is only one city in Europe with the necessary gravitas to be accepted as the world’s capital city.

Rome.

The Return of al-Qaeda

The Return of al-Qaeda
Vol: 20 Issue: 13 Tuesday, May 13, 2003

Ten Americans were killed in terrorist attacks on four residential compounds in the Saudi Arabian capital overnight, according to initial reports. The attackers shot their way into the housing compounds in the Saudi capital and then set off suicide car bombs. It is believed that as many as seven car bombs were detonated in the attack.

Secretary of State Colin Powell said the attack had all the earmarks of an al-Qaeda strike. al-Qaeda built its reputation on suicide bombings and coordinated actions such as the Sept. 11 attacks and the 1998 simultaneous car bombings outside American embassies in Kenya and neighboring Tanzania that killed some 230 people.

A US official speaking anonymously told the Associated Press that overall casualties appear to be in the hundreds and that several members of the Saudi National Guard died in the attacks.

The AP also reported that British, German, French, Australian and other Arab citizens were among the dead and wounded. At least forty bodies were reportedly taken to Saudi hospitals so far.

Other officials said at least 160 people were wounded, including 40 Americans.

There had been warnings of new attacks on Westerners in the kingdom. al Qaeda claims it bombing attacks are to force their demands that non-Muslim American troops leave Saudi soil.

Assessment:

There is a chilling element to this story that isn’t getting much circulaton through the mainstream. The Saudis and Americans KNEW an attack was coming, and issued warnings on May 1. More than that, they also issued wanted posters for the 19 people they believed were associated with al-Qaeda and planning the attack. The authorities had their names, their pictures, and even some idea of the target.

This is the chilling part. It didn’t matter. The attack went off as planned.

Last week, ministers of the G8 countries met in Paris to discuss the al-Qaeda threat and concluded it remains a serious threat, with sleeper cells and agents who “are always ready to act,” said officials in a joint statement.

One week later, with the combined efforts of global anti-terrorist forces turning over every leaf for them, the terrorists drove up to their targets and detonated their car bombs.

According to some terrorism experts, al-Qaeda is regrouping and the attacks in Saudi Arabia are just an appetizer for what is to come.

Several experts interviewed by the Washington Post say they believe the next terrorist attack in America will occur in a mundane and unspectacular setting.

It will be far removed, they say, from the conspicuous, symbolic landmarks that terrorist networks such as al Qaeda have targeted in the past.

It will, in effect, “take terror off television and into the real America,” says Leo Palumbo, a former New York police detective whose consulting firm manages security for major events.

“If these characters went into Boise, St. Louis, Kansas City, they’d have us reeling,” Palumbo says. The terrorists could “go into the heartland and bounce around, and the whole country would bounce around, too.” The Washington snipers, he says, inflicted similar terror on a smaller area.

Thabet bin Qais, al-Qaeda’s new spokesman, told a Saudi paper last week that al-Qaeda is planning a new attack on the United States on a similar scale to that of September 11.

He said al-Qaeda had adopted a new and improved operational structure which is “impenetrable to US intelligence,” al-Qaeda has “carried out changes in its leadership and sidelined the September 11, 2001 team”, the paper quotes bin Qais as saying.

“Future missions have been entrusted to the new team, which is well protected against the US intelligence services. The old leadership does not know the names of any of its members,” blah, blah, blah. We’ve heard all this before.

But the threats were only issued last week. This week, seven car bombs blew up a gated (and well-guarded) neighborhood in Rihyadh that was home to mostly Western foreigners — on the day Colin Powell was paying the city a visit and security was at its highest level.

In spite of the fact authorities were on the lookout for the perpetrators, they managed to carry out their mission, seemingly effortlessly.

Until now, al-Qaeda has claimed its war aim was to force the US from the holy soil of Saudi Arabia. The US is relocating its forces to Qatar but the attacks have resumed anyway.

For al-Qaeda, it doesn’t have anything to do with US troops desecrated Saudi soil anymore, if it ever really did.

The war with al-Qaeda is a religious war. Osama bin-Laden declared his war was against the ‘Christian Crusaders’ and the ‘Zionists’. Islam vs. the Christians and the Jews.

Despite the lull, it appears that war isn’t over yet.

‘Speaking Expressly . . .Lies in Hypocrisy’

‘Speaking Expressly . . .Lies in Hypocrisy’
Vol: 20 Issue: 12 Monday, May 12, 2003

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

That is the way the the Apostle Paul described the world as it would be in the last days. Note that Paul makes two immediate points.

The first is that Paul attributes the prophecy directly to the Holy Spirit. And secondly, that it takes place in the ‘latter times’.

Paul notes that ‘some shall depart from the faith’. While the United States appears to be much less uncomfortable with its role as the world’s only ‘Christian’ nation post 9/11, the rest of the world, especially Europe, continues to distance itself from any appearance of Christianity.

It is indeed a fascinating departure from the faith that defined Europe for almost 2,000 years. At the point in history in which the United States was born, most of Europe was governed by the Church. The French revolution in 1789 was at least in part aimed at getting the Church out of politics.

Europe fought hundreds of wars under the banner of the Cross, from Constantine to the Crusades to the 100 Years’ War. The Victorian era of the 19th century was the Golden Age of European Christianity.

The Bible says Europe’s destiny is to host the government of antichrist. Europe is prominently featured in Scripture during the last days. The United States, the world’s only Christian nation (by acclamation), is not mentioned, as if it wasn’t there.

And as the United States continues to swing back toward Christ, the Europeans continue to swing away.

Assessment:

Paul describes those who depart the faith as ‘speaking lies in hypocrisy’ and of ‘having their conscience seared with a hot iron’.

The war in Iraq is an object lesson in post-modern European apostasy leading to hypocritical, conscienceless lies. For most of the period between the Gulf Wars, the French, Russians and Germans have been pressuring the US and the Security Council to lift the sanctions against Saddam Hussein, arguing that the sanctions were responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children.

“Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction,” they argued. Back then, they said the lifting of sanctions should not be tied to a UN certification that Iraq is weapons-free.

We’ve since learned that France, Russia, Germany all had their own reasons for wanting the sanctions lifted against Saddam. They all had made lucrative deals with Saddam — bribes, you might say — that would collapse when Saddam did. If they could keep Saddam’s regime in power AND get the economic sanctions lifted, there were billions and billions of dollars to be made.

The UN had its own reasons for KEEPING the sanctions in place, without removing Saddam. The billions of Iraqi oil dollars from the ‘oil for food’ program is administered ‘in-house’ under the personal supervision of Kofi Annan. The $12 billion now sitting in escrow pays millions of dollars a day in interest — and the UN takes a big chunk off the top for ‘administrative’ costs.

The two agendas were in conflict until the fall of Saddam. Now it is in everybody’s interests (except those of the Iraqi people and the White House) to maintain the sanctions regime on Iraq as long as possible.

As long as the UN is involved in Iraqi reconstruction, France and Russia can use their influence (and veto) at the Security Council to ensure they get a share of the reconstruction. Plus some control over the billions they claim Iraq owes them from deals made by Saddam.

So the sanctions they wanted LIFTED in the name of the suffering Iraqis BEFORE Saddam fell, they now want to KEEP in place. Knowing the hardship they impose on the Iraqi population. For how long? Until they have completely exploited whatever looting opportunities remaining.

All the while claiming they just want to help the poor, suffering Iraqis.

Lies, hypocrisy, and absolutely no conscience.

I am not arguing that Paul’s letter to Timothy specifically referred to Iraq; clearly, Paul is highlighting the spiritual conditions as they will devolve in the last days.

But as I’ve argued previously, the war with Iraq has served to accelerate the whole process of national alignment, as the world continues to remake itself in the image foretold by Bible prophecy.

Paul’s letter to Timothy describes a general trend for the last days. But the breathtaking hypocrisy, the bodyguard of lies and the total disregard for the victims of Saddam’s regime being displayed by the UN and Europe is a letter-perfect example of the truth of the Scripture and the reality that these truly ARE the last days.

“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. . . evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of. knowing of whom thou hast learned them.”(2 Timothy 3:1,14-15)