May 24, 2008
The traffic at this webpage and all other Iraq-related chapters is dissapointing to me at this time. There are several possible reasons for the lack of readership. The most-damaging reason might be that many/most prophecy writers, especially pre-tribulationists, view Daniel 11:21-35 as depicting Antiochus IV and not at all the end-time anti-Christ, wherefore they see no Biblical evidence that Gog or the anti-Christ will arise in Iraq. It is my very purpose to prove these writers wrong, and unless someone does, The First We'll See of Anti-Christ (and related chapters) will not be taken seriously enough to be shared around. It is my firm hope that I will prove them wrong as soon as Gog arises in Iraq, and yet an irony exists in that this man might not be accepted by popular prophecy writers either as Gog or the anti-Christ.
I hope to prove them wrong in these Iraq Update chapters. It is my firm belief that when a northern ruler in the Iraqi theater overcomes the Iraqi government, and soon-after invades Egypt successfully, these Iraq-related chapters will spread around very quickly, giving many people of God the needed time to prepare. I am banking on Christians to spread this message around when Gog is visible in Iraq. If I prove to be wrong, I'll confess it and re-consider a new approach in light of the error.
There are other reasons for the dismal readership at this time. Most Christians are not prophecy readers, for starters. Most prophecy readers do not share the view that Gog is the Antichrist, and for that reason may think little of the Iraqi chapters. Many prophecy readers oppose the post-tribulation-rapture position and therefore may not value any part of this book. Moreover, I do not at present pay online organizations to keep my website topped up in the search engines. I will probably do so when Gog becomes visible.
Another benefit of these Iraq Updates is to serve as evidence, for those weak in Faith, that Biblical prophecy is inspired by God, and that He therefore does exist, and will send his Son again to give precious life to those who would otherwise die forever. By all means, save/print these Iraq updates now so as to have proof later that I am not writing the predictions, like a dishonest writer might, after the events have occurred. "My" predictions are not purely from my head, and I do not claim to be clairvoyant or a prophet of that nature. "My" predictions stem fundamentally from Biblical prophecy, and from my deductive reasoning based on those prophecies.
June 10, 2008
Reasoning caused me to predict something else not predicted by any mainstream writer (or anyone that I know): that the False Prophet will be an American president (I wonder how many readers leave Part 2 on that one). But I'm sticking to it until I realize otherwise. The idea is that an American president will be such a Christian as to carry a liberal/modernistic morality to the nation, and will therefore attract the goats. In a David Limbaugh article today on Obama, we read this:
"McCain may think he can take 'values voters' [i.e. the Christian right] for granted because he is a Republican, but their support isn't mindless or free. Many already feel his lack of love toward them, which could feed into the Democrats' cynical semantic ploy to win over Christian voters by restating their message in moral language at the suggestion of linguist George Lakoff. Cloaking their positions on poverty, global warming and AIDS in the garb of Christian language could yield abundant electoral fruit for Democrats.
Don't forget that McCain finished last among the nine candidates in the 'Values Voters' summit straw poll last year or that the revered James Dobson announced in February that he couldn't support McCain. Also don't forget that the press repeatedly reminds us that Obama is a committed Christian who is 'very comfortable talking about his faith.'
Granted, Obama's stunning statement (for a self-proclaimed Christian) disputing the uniqueness of Christianity – ' I believe there are many paths to the same place' – and his association with a church promoting black liberation theology ought to be disqualifying with Christian conservatives. But Obama can overcome these disadvantages with press coverage, his superficial appeal to Christian peace, harmony, unity and bipartisanship, and McCain's gift of offending this constituency."
In short, McCain is lackluster in his appeal to Biblical Christians, wherefore a frenzy should develop in the Obama camp in attempts to steal away Christian votes. The drive for Democrats to feign Biblical moralism has not been greater during this era in which Satanic principles have gained overwhelming social and political victories. Most anti-Christians of this era migrated or dug deeper into the Democratic Party, and although there was a time when no one expected them to promote Christian principles, yet for the sheer political need at this critical moment, they will do so. As this tendency is exactly as envisioned a decade ago when I described the False Prophet (in The Westernization of Anti-Christ), it simply floors me that, right on schedule (for 2012), a liberal Christian appears poised to become the tribulation President.
If Obama is the False Prophet, I await to see by what sort of Christianity he pollutes Biblical doctrine, and who his partner will be in fulfilling the "two horns like a lamb" (Revelation 13). I also await to see how many black Christian voters fail to stand against him. If that sounds like a warning to black believers who might be reading here, it is. If the color of a man's skin means more to you than the purity of the Biblical calling, then you will not be welcome into the kingdom of God.
One of the grossest sins of Israel for which God is sending a rabid anti-Christ is the formation of alliances with foreign nations rather than seeking His protections and blessings. This coming Monday, Israel will meet with the EU due to Israel's request for a stronger relationship. In my eyes, this amounts to Israel getting warmer in bed with the Dragon of Revelation 12, the fourth beast of Daniel 7, and the prince of Daniel 9:26 whom in the last days will work through the desolator of verse 27.
"'We expect the EU to approve Israel's request for an upgrade in the relationship,' Foreign Ministry spokesman Aryeh Mekel told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday...On Wednesday, Reuters reported that the EU was likely to reject a wide-range upgrade at this time [due to Palestinian pressure]...European Commission spokesman Amadeu Altafaj said 'it was a little bit premature' for Reuters to report that the EU planned to deny Israel's request. There is a debate now among member states on this issue, he said...At the end of the process, Altafaj said, 'It is mainly the members states' who would decide whether to boost ties with Israel."
Also featured in the Jerusalem Post today, an article sharing the claim of some Israelis that Israel's top-level leaders are pressuring George Bush to invade Iran. Iranian officials meanwhile mock Bush by saying such things as he doesn't have enough time left to launch an invasion; others must be thinking that he doesn't have the soul or the guts to launch anything. One Israeli minister (Shaul Mofaz), earlier this month, publicly stated that Isreal will invade Iran itself if Iran doesn't cease it's nuclear weapons program. I suppose it's possible that this sort of talk, or better yet an actual invasion, could set the wheels in motion for an Iranian military response on Israel i.e. the fulfillment of the first half of the Week.
These sudden developments come across as desperation on Israel's part due to the prospects of Obama becoming the next president. Consider the new wave among American Jewry:
"'I was raised to be a Democrat, and to believe that the Democratic Party was the party that the Jews had to support,' [Alan Bergstein] explains. 'That they were inseparable'...
Yet for the first time in his 73 years, this fall the former junior high principal will be voting for a Republican: John McCain.
'I'm convinced now that (Barack) Obama is going to be a disaster not only for the American people, but especially for the Jewish people and Israel. I think that he will sell Israel down the river,' charges Bergstein, citing, among other issues, Obama's ties to his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright - who has attacked Israel and honored Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan - and the candidate's willingness to meet with leaders of Iran who threaten Israel with destruction."
This sentiment cannot be absent in Israel itself. Obama, though strongly coming out as pro-Israel in recent weeks (since the Rev. Wright controversy broke out), is simply not trusted by many.
Europe agreed to "upgrade" it's relationship with Israel today. Ultimately, this "success story" for Israel is due only to its public admission (it's a lie, of course) that it wishes to grant Palestinians their own state in what is now Israeli territory. Israel does not have the permission from its God for taking this position, and it has committed itself to this course merely to appease the West. In other words, Israel has placed it's economic interests (i.e. trade with Europe) before its God and His great plans for the nation. Therefore, this Israel will never receive from Him what great things He intends only for His chosen Israelites. There is talk on this point that the end-game is to get Israel into EU membership. Think it will ever happen?
Yesterday, "former [Israeli] deputy defense minister Ephraim Sneh said he believed Israel would, in the end, need to attack Iran." The same article goes on to say:
"The concern in the [Israeli] defense establishment is based on talks Iran has been holding with Russia in recent years to purchase S-300 air defense missile systems. Israel believes that while Iran has not yet obtained the system, Iranian soldiers are already studying and training with it in Russia. Israel has been working diplomatically to prevent the sale and delivery of the systems.
The S-300 is one of the best multi-target anti-aircraft missile systems in the world today and has a reported ability to track up to 100 targets simultaneously while engaging up to 12 at the same time. Iran recently received SA-15 air defense systems from Russia."
What do you think is going on between Russia and Iran? Are they plotting an Israeli destruction together?
At this time, the EU is opposed to Iran and reportedly ready, starting immediately, to act tough with sanctions, especially because Javier Solana (= EU foreign affairs) failed in his Iranian mission (to get president Ahmadinejad to comply) this past weekend. Gog's invasion as per Daniel 11 tells that Europe will be opposed even to Gog's invasion of Israel, sending ships to oppose him just after the Week begins. With such developments, I find it a great difficulty to see how Gog will manage to invade, first Iraqi domains, then Egypt, and finally Israel. But surely, the ire of Ahmadinejad has been aroused, not to mention the ire of all anti-Israelis due to the EU deal made with Israel today. Anti-Israelis have been waiting patiently for years (and probably reducing their violence in the meantime) for the EU to side with Palestinians and to throw Israel an irreversible rebuke. Their hopes have been dashed today, and violence may therefore increase now.
World Net Daily reported today that a former Minister of Electricity in the US-backed Iraqi government, who supports the Insurgency, lived in exile in Chicago (Obama's city) under Saddam's era, and recently contributed to the Obama campaign the maximum amount of dollars allowed. When he (Ayham al-Samurai) was jailed by the US-supported Iraqi government, strangely enough it was the US military which assured his escape, and then managed to get him successfully out of Iraq. Amazingly, this man had business dealings with Tony Rezko, Obama's criminal friend who, with money from an Iraqi billionaire in London, scandalously bought Obama's house. What is going on here??? Has Obama been in contact with certain high-level Iraqi forces? True, just because Ayham al-Samurai supports Obama does not mean that Obama knows him. The fact is, in any case, a pro-Insurgent Iraqi is attempting to get Obama elected.
The Jerusalem Post has an ad for a movie entitled, "The God Who Wasn't There. " The ad shares a Newsweek blurb: "Inadvertently lays out the case that Jesus Christ never existed." This message goes out to Jews of Israel, and will be gladly accepted by most Jews. The purpose of the film is to deceive Christians as well, claiming that Jesus was part of the mystery cults of paganism, mythology, etc. To the contrary, the mystery cults were the makings of Freemasonry, Rosicrucianism, and the "Jewish" Illuminati, which Biblical/fundamentalist Christians have historically opposed. God is sending the anti-Christ to Israel to cut out the branches of Illuminati influence. I use "Illuminati" here as that group of Zionist Hebrews from Germany and the Netherlands who first created and to-date control the Israeli state.
On Brian Flemming (the creator of this 2005 movie), Wikipedia says: "In late 2006, Flemming and the Rational Response Squad started the Blasphemy Challenge, which called on participants to upload videos to YouTube in which they 'damn themselves to hell' by making their own statement which must include the phrase: 'I deny the Holy Spirit'..." It's perhaps relevant that in my work to uncover the Hebrew Illuminati and the related cults of Templarism and Rosicrucianism, I traced it to the Fleming surname (of Templar Flanders). There are online rebuttals of the movie, of course.
The world is about to be inundated with Illuminati "secrets," probably as never before. Stick to the testimony of prophecy, for Revelation itself tells us that the testimony of Jesus is prophecy...working best for us in the last days when the signs of His return are coming to pass.
On the topic of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, developments are occurring now. George Bush is attempting to make a deal with Iraq, for to allow U.S. troops not only to remain in Iraq after his term is up, but to have the ability to arrest any Iraqi, or invade any neighbor from Iraqi soil. The question now is, whether the Iraqi government will accept his wishes. Fox News reports:
"In a letter to [U.S.] Congress, more than 30 Iraqi Parliament members, many of whom are allied to anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and Iran, rejected any agreement that is not 'linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying America military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq, in accordance with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters.'"
Condoleezza Rice is at this very time attempting to acquire hundreds of new diplomats for Iraq 2009. This issue is raising a critical need for Iran to put on a very friendly face toward the Iraqi government, in efforts to block Bush's plans for 2009. I repeat my belief that Daniel 11:21-23 predicts the entry of Gog into Iraq on a diplomatic basis. Do you think it's possible that Iran is trying to get Iraq to accept the stepping in of Russian officials to fill the void created by the closure of Bush's administration?
News came out just days ago (in the New York Times) about several dozen Israeli fighter jets flying, in late May or early June, 900 miles over the sea as far as Greece, as practice for strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities (also about 900 miles from Israel). The Times claimed that anonymous high-level Pentagon officials leaked the occurance of the flights and their intent against Iran's facilities. I wondered why Russia was remaining silent in the day or two following this story, but then on June 20th Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, spoke out on Iran's behalf. His claim is simply that Iran is not intent on producing a nuclear weapon. Today, the Jerusalem Post has the following addition to the story:
"The same day that the New York Times broke a story about what it claimed was a massive Israeli air force drill meant to simulate an attack against nuclear installations in Iran, [Israeli] Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with Colonel (res.) Aviam Sela, who is said to have been the architect behind Israel's attack against Iraq's nuclear reactor...
...while [U.S.] government officials confirmed to the paper that Sela and Olmert met on Friday at the prime minister's residence in Jerusalem...'"
The way I see it, the Pentagon should not have leaked these things if Israel was serious about a strike on Iran. In other words, this development could merely be concerted US-Israeli saber rattling in conjunction with EU tightening of the economic noose on Iran. However, if these tactics don't work, an air strike on Iran could become the reality, thereby putting into motion the invasion on Israel that ends this present world. It's also possible that Israel is very serious at this time, but that the Pentegon official(s) who made the leaks are privately anti-Israelis. If it's true what Israeli officials have recently claimed, that Iran will be nuclear by 2009, it does seem absolutely necessary for Israel to strike their nuclear facilities before then.
Israel does not shrink back from such operations, and Iran, though remaining defiant and promising to hit Israel back, fears a U.S. invasion. Bush fears a backlash on Republican chances of winning the next Presidential election, and therefore is expected not to strike Iran, although Bush may urge Israel to be the face of the invasion...which may then explain why Pentegon officials leaked the story: to appear separated from the Israeli strike. Conveniently, Bush could support an Israeli strike after the U.S. election, and he would have much more impetus to do so if Obama beats McCain at that time.
I view this situation as some building evidence on behalf of the prediction that a Russian "loose cannon" will act militarily against Israel; I'm suggesting the spring of 2010; = about 220 days into the Week. Israel may decide(d) that the time to attack Iran's nuclear facilities is before Ahmadinejad is up for re-election in 2009. Perhaps the West's threats at this time are meant to convince more Iranians not to vote for him at that time.
At this point, I am looking to see how the Russian's invasion of Egypt (I'm suggesting 2009) can develop. I expect to see Egypt entering the issue on a very vocal level, making itself a despised target of the anti-Israelis. In order for Egypt's leader to become so vocal as to invite a crushing military response, something drastic must take place in comparison to the situation now. A logical expectation is that Egypt becomes very outspoken against Gog when he begins to seize Iraq. This war against Egypt (that is not at all apparent now) is key to convincing my readers that Daniel 11:21-31 pertains to the first half of the Week.
Polls now show Obama opening a significant lead on McCain (Newsweek claims an overblown 15 point lead). This may indicate that the majority of Americans would like to pull out of Iraq cleanly, as soon as possible.
Two days ago (June 20), there was a special report on Mosul made by Stephen Farrell of The Times (UK). He writes that the city is yet an Insurgent stronghold: "In Mosul the omnipresent danger from Sunni insurgents means it is all but impossible to report from the city without embedding with American or Iraqi soldiers...such is the volatility of an area still fraught with Sunni-Kurdish tensions." As he goes on to say, "In the eastern part of the city, mostly populated by Kurds and Christians, the mood seemed lighter...", I would venture to expect the anti-Christ to rise up and set up some form of base in the western part of the city.
It is quite amazing for the Insurgency, fading away recently in all parts of Iraq, to remain strongest in Mosul, for my understanding that the anti-Christ would stem from Mosul was very late in my prophetic studies. The reader who is a doubter of this Gog-in-Iraq view needs to consider seriously that I knew absolutely nothing about Mosul when I realized (a few years ago) that Nahum 1:11 referred to that city as Gog's launching pad in Iraq. Is it a coincidence that Mosul is now the Insugency's last stand? A BBC article of June 2 said: "No group has claimed responsibility for the attack [that killed nine] but Mosul is the last major urban stronghold of al-Qaeda in Iraq."
The first verse of Nahum 1 tells that the prophet is prophesying the future of Nineveh (now Mosul). Verse 4 introduces the Armageddon scenario in northern Israel. Verses 5 and 6 use typical Armageddon terminology: "The mountauins quake from Him, and the hills melt; and the earth is lifted up from before Him, even the world and all who dwell in it. Who can stand before His fury? And who can rise before the heat of His anger? His wrath is poured out like fire, and the rocks are broken down because of Him."
Then verse 7 asks Nineveh this question: "What are you plotting against YHWH? He will make an utter end; distress shall not rise up a second time." Then verse 11: "One who devises evil against YHWH has come forth from you, one counseling worthlessnesss." Verse 12 then shows this fool to be of the very end time, for as a result of his defeat, an undeserving Israel is restored forever (in fact, it's the same theme as the Ezekiel 38-39 prophecy): "Though secure, and so many, yet they will be cut off, and will vanish. And though I have afflicted you [= Israel], I will not afflict you any more. And now I will break his yoke from on you..." The "many" here in Nahum are no doubt the "many" of Ezekiel 38:16. Six verses earlier, Ezekiel says of Gog: "you shall devise an evil plan," which the following verses reveal as the invasion of Israel for her wealth.
Now you know why I view the Nahum prophecy as the anti-Christ in the end times, and although for most of the time spent in prophecy I had no evidence, outside of Daniel 11, that he would be in Iraq, the Nahum prophecy verified to me that I was correct, for Nineveh is now Mosul, Iraq. Again, is it a coincidence that Mosul is now the last stand of those whom I claimed are the two broken entities of Daniel 11:22 (= Sadam's loyalists and al Qaida)? It's quite amazing that Mosul is a Sunni stronghold while both entities are Sunni. In my mind, verse 23 has always meant that Gog rescues the two entities when they are desperate enough to take his help: "After they join him, he will practice deceit. For he will come and be strong with a few people." You see, the Insurgents are now few, and yet with Gog's help they will become re-energized, and finally strong and many.
Unexpectedly, France's new President has become very pro-Israel. The Times (UK) put it this way:
"Nicolas Sarkozy today overturned more than a dozen years of icy relations between France and Israel when he became the first French President to visit the Jewish State for 12 years, pledging to 'block' Iran from developing nuclear weapons...'I ask you to trust us because we want to help you… France is ready to provide its guarantee, ready to mobilise its diplomatic service, its resources, its soldiers. You can trust France,' he said...'A nuclear Iran is intolerable. Anyone trying to destroy Israel will find France blocking the way.'...
Since taking office a year ago, Mr Sarkozy has repeatedly described himself a 'friend of Israel,' breaking rank with previous French presidents who aligned themselves more closely with Israel’s Arab neighbours."
Famous last words? Or does Sarkozy, a Hungarian by background, got some Hebrew blood in him??? (When I checked, it turned out his mother was Greco-Hebrew, and there are online reports that he worked as an Israeli spy). Israel's "upgrade" with the EU last week comes just as it's becoming France's turn, as of July 1st, to take the rotating (every six months) EU presidency. With Sarkozy as the French and EU leader simultaneously, what the anti-Israelis were hoping for, a West coming to their side, seems to be slipping away. When the diplomatic table starts to turn away from the Arabic anti-Israelis, their response is predictably increased violence.
How will Russia feel about a pro-Israeli, anti-Iranian France? Will this last beyond 2012/13?
I should re-mention here a theory, that the 42 month-rule of the anti-Christ (as per Revelation 13) could be a tangible leadership position (i.e. visible to us) over a political entity, not merely defined generally as a span of time over which he acts successfully on Jerusalem. My theory, due to Daniel 7 foretelling his leadership over the end-time Roman empire, is that he may be elevated to the helm of Europe for 42 months. I have therefore been waiting for a change in European policy, from the six-month rotating system to one that calls for 42-month presidencies. I just learned that, as of January 1st, 2009, the European Council (= leadership body of the European Union) will no longer abide by the six-month rotating system, but will elect a president that does not simultaneously lead another nation...for which reason a longer term will be doled out. Wikipedia puts it this way:
"The treaty [of Lisbon] would make the European Council a formal institution, separate from the Council of the European Union (now the Council of Ministers). While the Council of Ministers would continue with the rotating presidency, the European Council would have a single, fixed, President of the European Council with a renewable two-and-a-half year mandate...
There has been speculation on who would be the first (full time) President of the European Council, being dubbed as the President of the European Union. Currently the most common name is former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair. This was backed up further when, in June 2007, French president Nicolas Sarkozy was the first leader to propose that Blair be the first president."
Apparently, a pro-Israeli Europe seems first on the list for 2009. Could this then allow, out of fairness, for a pro-Palestinian president two and half years later, or five years later? Might the two and half year term change somehow to a longer span? The Treaty of Lisbon has yet to be ratified, and in fact I just learned that it might not see its first president in 2009: "[The Treaty of Lisbon] was planned to have been ratified in all member states by the end of 2008, so it could come into effect before the 2009 European elections. However, the rejection of the Treaty on 12 June 2008 by the Irish electorate has created uncertainty in this regard." That rejection was just 11 days ago, and 2009 is upon us soon. Fifty-three percent of the Irish citizenry rejected the Treaty by vote. There may be no telling how long it will be before the required majority votes in favor.
There are other nations that have not yet ratified the Treaty, and herein is a fine example of Daniel 2 proving true, where the prophet predicted an end-time Roman empire that was strong as iron but mixed with brittle clay...the clay signifying, according to the prophecy, division between the peoples of the empire. IIron mixed with clay is an excellent definition of democracy, for such a system stifles/slows the political agenda, no matter how much it's required at any given historical moment. The Irish problem will not be dealt with until the EU's next meeting, this coming October.
Another possibility is that the anti-Christ will become the EU High Representative, for this position can be held for many years by one man. Javier Solana has held it since 1999, and is slated to hold it as per the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon.
The relevant updates are starting to snowball, and this is becoming a very interesting topic all around. I could end up being wrong about the timing (2009 to 2016) and some of the details, but thus far I'm feeling at least 75 percent chance of accuracy in most of the things I'm saying. The biggest problem I have with the timing of the "mark of the beast" in 2013 is the speed at which such a compulsory system must be implemented, just five years to go (I'd feel more comfortable with ten years to go). I feel at least a 50 percent chance of accuracy for the claim that Obama will be the False Prophet, in which case he is to enforce the mark of the beast.
As expected, Obama is reaching out to evangelicals. His request to meet with James Dobson has hit a brick wall, however. Here's an article out today by Eric Gorski:
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) - As Barack Obama broadens his outreach to evangelical voters, one of the movement's biggest names, James Dobson, accuses the likely Democratic presidential nominee of distorting the Bible and pushing a 'fruitcake interpretation' of the Constitution.
...[Dobson's] conservative Christian group provided The Associated Press with an advance copy of the pre-taped radio segment, which runs 18 minutes and highlights excerpts of a speech Obama gave in June 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal. Obama mentions Dobson in the speech.
'Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?' Obama said. 'Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?' referring to the civil rights leader.
...Obama recently met in Chicago with religious leaders, including conservative evangelicals. His campaign also plans thousands of 'American Values House Parties,' where participants discuss Obama and religion, as well as a presence on Christian radio and blogs."
This development, perfectly evident in Obama's statement above, is exactly as I envisioned the divisive role of the False Prophet: a catering to liberal Christianity that, like Obama, is pro-abortion, etc., and consequently creating a subtle assault on Biblical Christianity even while he seeks its votes. I don't equate politico-Conservative Christianity with Biblical Christianity, by the way, and tend to feel that the Biblical phrase, "speaks like a dragon," which is said of the False Prophet (Revelation 13), refers to the typical political involvement of the day (there are good reasons that most Americans do not like their modern politicians, and one of the main reasons is their unreliable and two-faced speech, and downright lies).
I envision a greater Christian facade, than Obama's current tactics, when the False Prophet becomes the President, for that very title, and his draconian characteristic, couldn't have been Assigned to him merely for his speech in the time period where he's reaching out to Biblical Christians during an election. That is, his Christian position should become emphasized beyond the election...so as to set draconian national (and perhaps international) policies in a false-Christian format. He may have plenty of help from his fellow ecstatic Democrats. Persecution of Biblical Christianiy should eventually result, perhaps mostly in his second term when he no longer needs voters of any kind.
The president of Iraq is coming to Washington tomorrow to discuss, with the Bush administration, the role of U.S. troops in Iraq after the UN mandate ends at the end of 2008. The article below paints a picture in which Iraq prefers to deal with the United States rather than the UN. However, if Obama becomes the next American president, and especially if he has a Democratic majority in Congress, what Iraq and Bush now agree to will be subject to change in 2009.
A few months ago, George Bush claimed that Israel will come to a peace agreement with the Palestinians before the end of 2008. When I first heard Bush make this statement, it came across as a done-deal already agreed to, though secretly, by the Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert. I also imagined a little arm-twisting on the part of Bush, or perhaps a political pay-off (= bribery), to get Olmmert to concede. Then, earlier this week, as if to verify the done-deal, Olmert came out with a statement that by year's end he will sign a peace deal with the Palestinians, even if the deal cannot be implemented until after 2008. "'If we act decisively together, we and the Palestinians, there is a chance for us to reach real achievements, maybe even before the end of President Bush's term,' [Olmert] said in a speech at the Saban Forum think-tank in Jerusalem."
This can only mean that Olmert had decided, as long ago as the Bush announcement, that he is willing to give the Palestinians their own country inside Israel (this attitude should explain the successful EU Upgrade), and of course Palestinians won't make any agreement without East Jerusalem acting as their capital...meaning that Olmert appears agreeable even to granting this. The problem is, Olmert is now confronted with a corruption scandal promising to end his government before 2008 is out. In such a reality, the Bush-sponsored peace deal won't likely happen. Praise God for that.
Bush has been a hard-headed ignoramous on this issue, hoping to bask in glory for facilitating a peace deal, finally. The God of Israel does not wish to give Palestinians any part of Jerusaslem, ever, not even for the sake of peace between the two peoples (besides, any peace not now existing is clearly the fault of certain terrorist Palestinians). God had temporarily removed Israelites from the land, and Muslims moved in during the interum, but now it's time for Palestinians to put on a mature, righteous act, giving to God the right to effect His Israeli-based agenda, which he planned from the foundation of the world. Modern Hitlers can lament all they want, the EU can kick up all the fuss it can, but the survivors of Israel wil rule the world, soon. Selah!
If the next Israeli government rebels against the current peace-deal initiative (which by the way is still patterned after the Oslo Accords), the UN, and the EU, might punish Israel, even allowing the False Prophet and the anti-Christ to punish the nation.
Olmert's government could have been brought down this week, but it now seems concrete that he, at least, will go down this September. This Associated Press article came out today:
JERUSALEM - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert staved off a key coalition partner's threat to bring down the government, giving him at least a few more months to pursue peace agreements with the Palestinians and Syria. But the last-minute deal could bring his political demise later this year.
In a pre-dawn agreement reached early Wednesday, Olmert's Kadima Party told the Labor Party that it will hold primary elections by Sept. 25. The primary is likely to oust Olmert as Kadima leader.
"Likely," because of his scandal wherein he received a large sum of money he shouldn't have.
The article goes on to give two names that are "likely" to succeed him: "Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni or Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz. Livni, the chief peace negotiator with the Palestinians, is expected to push forward with U.S.-backed efforts to reach a final peace deal before President Bush leaves office next January. The more hawkish Mofaz, a former military chief, would most likely slow down or break off the talks with both the Palestinians and Syria." Israeli voters will need to choose this September between for or against the peace process. Any predictions?
Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, gave Reuters "his first interview with a Western media outlet since taking office in May." He claimed that while his tone and approach may differ with Putin's, he will not alter Putin's policies. He fears losing his job, for Putin, though now the (inferior) Prime Minister, yet has the political strings to set about Medvedev's demise.
I do not yet know whether Gog will sieze Iraq with the eye-wink and/or political support of the Russian Presidency, or rather under his own initiative while empowered only by Muslim Insurgents. I seek clues, but Russian leaders are low-key on Middle-East issues. The good news is, there is an online Pravda translated into English (the Pravda newspaper, in Russian, is not the same organization). I'll keep tabs to see how Russian leaders react, and report back. Today's Pravda page, which still lists articles of the recent past, has not even an article on Iran.
I theorized that the official Russian leadership would feign UN positions even while it supports the anti-Christ secretly. Consider the feign apparent in the following Moscow quote by RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov 9dated May 13, 2008):
"Vladimir Putin's last minute decision to fulfill UN Security Council Resolution 1803 on Iran before handing over power to Dmitry Medvedev surprised many. Has Russia decided to join the UN sanctions? Will the new president shift Russia's policy regarding Iran to the West?
According to one version, in an attempt to try to convince Putin to join sanctions against Iran, the White House signed the Russian-American agreement on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, the longtime dream of Russian nuclear fuel exporters..."
Under another version, Putin decided to spare Medvedev from making the unpleasant but necessary decision.
...Before signing the order shortly before Medvedev's inauguration, Putin had instructed Valentin Sobolev, acting secretary of the Russian Security Council, to tell President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his visit to Tehran that Russia would remain committed to the principles of its relations with Iran, and that its policy does not depend on the man in power."
In other words, Putin said to Iran: I didn't really mean it when I joined the UN in sanctions against you; I just had to do it because Russia must keep on the good side of the UN membership. We can expect this double-take on Russia's part to continue longer through the Iran crisis, and ask what the official Russian position will be when the UN demands that Gog cease his invasion of Egypt?
As per Gog receiving a leadership position in the EU, I have been expecting, over the post-Soviet years, the development of good Russia-Europe relations. This very day, an article came out on the topic, from Aljazeera online, and we find President Medvedev very agreeable to a partnership with Europe:
"'Russia wants to negotiate a 'serious' pact governing its relationship with the European Union but not one overburdened with detail...'
Medvedev said Russia saw itself as 'a major European state ... which defines itself as part of Europe'...
Although he described the EU as a 'comfortable' partner for Russia, Medvedev said that its guiding principle of solidarity could 'at times create problems for the functioning of EU mechanisms'.
In other words, Medvedev, using a bold approach, is criticising Europe, essentially saying that the EU has got too many clay pieces that, under disagreement, stifle political advancements. Frankly, Medvedev doesn't like to wait for EU members to come to agreements. According to the EU Observer, Medvedev, on June 5th in Berlin:
"called for a new EU-US-Russia security treaty in a conciliatory speech...The agreement would be negotiated at a European summit including Russia, the EU, all of Europe's non-EU states, the US and Canada in order to embrace 'the whole Euro-Atlantic space from Vancouver to Vladivostok.'
'It would clarify, finally, the meaning of the power factor in relations within the Euro-Atlantic community,' Mr Medvedev said, calling for 'truly equal cooperation between Russia, the European Union and North America.'
I re-iterate: the Putin team wants a partnership with American Democrats, not the Republicans, but, zowie, if the U.S.-Europe-Russia partnership isn't the global "beast" that I had foreseen in 1997, that no one can make war against (Revelation 13:4). And don't I know it that Babylon the Great Mother of all Tarts will willingly become a bed partner even to Gog's global agenda, eventually (as per Revelation 17). While the two will disagree on MIddle East policy, yet they will go to bed and fornicate the entire coming Night, until Gog kills her in a nightmarish, scathing rape...fool that she was! Her depiction as a prostitute refers to her political pacts with many nations.
Russia's Mid-East policy is clearly to act ignorant outwardly, but secretly advance, what the West sees as a dire threat: "Russia has supplied nuclear technology [and nuclear fuel] to Iran and advanced military equipment to Syria and Iran, and has advocated a policy of engagement with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas." The mainline West does none of the above.
How in the world the West will come to embrace Gog (and ride on his back), in light of what he is predicted to do (much worse than Ruissia is doing now), is currently beyond me, and yet we do see the EU in bed with Russia as we speak...so that an EU partnership with the anti-Christ has at least a chance of taking place at this time. I'll bet you the two faces of Obama that Democrats will also go to bed with Gog and Europa. Plus, Medvedev is meeting the British Prime Minister next month in Japan...for to warm up the Russian-British relationship. Will Britain be swept off her feet? Britain is a major player in "Atlanticism," a term evoking the New-Atlantis concept of Rosicrucianism.
Today a gay-pride parade unashamedly passed through Jerusalem streets, overseen by 2,000 policemen. What does this have to do with the anti-Christ rising up in Iraq? Everything. This is why God is sending the beast with rabid Muslims unwilling to show mercy, for the leaders of Israel, for the sake merely of democracy, allow abominable lifestyles to spread through the dough...that even the Pharisees would have shunned. Jesus said it will go better for Sodom, on the day of Judgment, than for the Israeli town of Capernaum. How much worse will it be for the democratizers of modern Israel? Do we need to ask God whether democracy at the expense of His laws might please Him? Can we understand that democracy gives Satan equality, and more than a foothold on the type of society we must live in?
When someone tells you that democracy is the best we've got, it could be the devil himself trying to convince you. The best form of gevernment by far is one where the leaders rule genuinely based on God's laws. The Vatican failed to do it genuinely, and moreover introduced human traditions, superstitions and false doctrines in place of God's laws. Canada and the United States can't do it because its evangelicals vote Conservative rather than for the Christian candidate, in order to deafeat the Liberals, while Catholics vote Liberal. Israel can't do it because its Orthodox block rebels against the Son of God, breaking God's Law in the worst way. Obama can't do it because he must serve his Liberal voters, who by and large are anti-Christian, atheist, secular, agnostic, hypocritical sinful liberal "Christians," or those who consider their skin color as having more importance than upholding God's laws. Here's another reason that my Iraq chapters may fail to get readership: my criticism on what some hold dear.
By the way, readership is up on the Iraq updates more than 10 times from the time that I started this chapter. A couple of days ago, there were 46 visits tracked (over a two-day period) to this June Update, up from the roughly 25 (over a two-day period) a week earlier. This morning there are 56 visits registered for June 25 and 26. Thank you, all who are keeping watch on these Updates and planning to share this message when someone resembling Gog arises in Iraq/Mosul. By the way, another way to predict the rising of the anti-Christ in Iraq is Isaiah 13, where the end-time devil is called "king of Babylon." Yet, few prophecy writers insist that the anti-Christ will be the king of Iraq, for this picture seems to contradict what they believe about the anti-Christ, either that he will be a Jew, a Westerner, or a Pope.
In the New York Post today, Obama is painted as a flip-flopper for recently taking positions traditionally held by the right wing. The question is, will this media criticim cause him to flip-flop once again to the left? And, how will he snag voters on the right if he keeps too far to the left? Expect a centralist.
There's an interesting artcile in the Jerusalem Post today, telling that Israelis favored McCain over Obama by 23 points in late May, but only by 9 points now. Apparently, less Israelis are viewing Obama as a threat with each passing day. The article tells that American Hebrews favored Obama by 29 points in May, the reversal of the May situation in Israel. I suppose that American Hebrews want to remain faithful to the Democrat Party above all, while Israelis want national security above all. Still, for there to be only a 29-point lead for American Hebrews favoring Obama shows that many American Hebrews fear Obama's possible pro-Palestinian (if not downright anti-Isreali) side. The article also tells that young Israeli voters under 24 favor Obama, and since escalating young voters in America also favor Obama, he is likely to become the President due to their votes putting him over the top. The key point of the article, relevant here, is this:
Jonathan Rynhold, a senior fellow specializing in US-Israeli ties at the BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University, said a poll like this showing Obama gaining acceptance among Israeli voters could to some extent legitimize him for American Jews who want to vote for Obama but may have been skeptical for reasons connected to his polices on Israel and the Middle East. Now, he said, they could point to the poll and say that 'there are quite a lot of Israelis who think that he is okay.'"
It's relevant here because I'm expecting Obama to win the election even if he's secretly anti-Israeli / anti-Hebrew. What the polls show is that Hebrews have believing Obama when recently assuring them that he's pro-Israel. I don't have a personal position either way, yet, but am very suspicious, and believe there is a good chance, for his being anti-Israeli. This is due only to what I've read concerning his "friends," business partners, and pastor, and is therefore an opinion made aside from my expecting a false-Christian, anti-Israeli American President, as of the 2012 election, to fill the suit of the False Prophet. These things in conjunction explain why I treat Obama as a very interesting prospect at this time.
The magnifying glass is on Obama right now, and McCain seems boring by comparison. To assist in Obama's survival in the next few months, both Clintons, hypocritically of course, are backing him...as though they had never said a mean word against him. The Obama campiagn is even granting the Clinton campaign some 10 million dollars to help it pay it's (or her) election debt, and of course to buy their allegience. We're waiting to see who Obama will choose as his Vice. Mrs. Clinton would make a great vice, one that clamps down on Christians and causes them great pains. Waiting to see.
I should mention the sudden and unexpected change in North Korea's nuclear-arsenal program, occuring right now, and whether the nation is shutting it down only after the harm has been done, by selling (or even giving) weapons to Iran, hoping that Iran will do it's dirty work against America. Some have claimed that North Korea had sold nuclear weapons/technology to Iran.
North Korea is suddenly dismantling it's nuclear-weapons cababilty, suggesting that the West's arm-twisting has finally worked. Or has it? Apparently, George Bush is the most responsible party.
Credit might be due more to the Iran crisis than to Bush. The smirk on the Iranian president's face does not seem like one hoping frantically to finnish building a nuclear weapon in time for an Israeli and/or US strike, but one that already has such a weapon. The talk from Iran continues to be confident to this day, promising to act immediately with world-critical measures (including the crude-oil card) should Israel strike it's facilities.
Now North Korea is the big bad boy, or the ghost in the closet ready to jump out and eat the nightmarish child in his bed. How can we explain the sudden turn-around? Knowing already that Korea provided nuclear technology to Syria, the world would be naive to think the same has not occurred with Iran. Therefore, I think Korea knows that it's on the verge of getting caught providing nuclear technology, or even weapons, to Iran, and that if Iran uses the weapons against Israel, the American rain will come falling down on Korea. Seeing that there is now a real possibilty of an Israeli strike on Iran, which then opens the door for Iran's use of Korea's technology in retaliation, Kim Yong-Il (president of North Korea) has decided to become the good boy, the ghost without teeth, so as to minimize the damage to himself should Iran use his weapons. I can't think of a better explanation given the timing of the about-face.
Israel has a major decision to make. In order to make it, it needs to know whether Korea sold Iran the weapon, and for this purpose George Bush would need to crank up the arm-twisting pain to Kim Yong-Il. Although Korea has bent to some major demands, it has yet refused to give up all the information. In a Pravda article of a few days ago, entitled "George Bush uses North Korea’s nuclear declaration to crown his eight years of presidency," we read:
"All of a sudden North Korea has unveiled its nuclear programs that used to trouble the whole world just a couple of years ago. Spokesmen for the North Korean administration submitted the report of the nation’s nuclear activities to China.
...The contents of the NKorean declaration are not known yet. The document supposedly enumerates nuclear programs and materials. However, it has been reported that the declaration does not contain the description of experiments with uranium and the information on N.Korea’s nuclear cooperation with Syria."
As expected if the scenario I've painted above is correct, Korea will give up some things but not go so far as to reveal business details with Syria. He probably feels that being caught doing business with Syria will get him caught doing business with Iran...and then the mud will hit the fan. "Look it, " Bush may have said to Kim Yong-Il, "if Iran uses your weapon to act against U.S. interests, I'll have the international community's nod to make you burnt toast!" However Bush phrased it, it had a large impact, for
"North Korea destroyed the most visible symbol of its nuclear weapons program Friday [June 27], according to news reports, a sign of its commitment to stop making plutonium for atomic bombs.
The reported demolition of the 60-foot (20-meter) -tall cooling tower at the North's main reactor complex is a response to U.S. concessions after the North delivered a declaration Thursday of its nuclear programs to be later dismantled.
China's Xinhua News Agency reported that the tower had been blown up at 5:05 p.m. local time (0805 GMT), citing its correspondent who was there. U.S. broadcaster CNN also reported the explosion had occurred. Japan's Kyodo News agency said a 'North Korean source' confirmed the reactor had been destroyed, but gave no further information."http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/27-06-2008/105611-tower-0
Although the Korean leader is giving in, Bush wants to see the Syrian details, for within them there ought to be large clues as to what Iran might have at present. Perhaps Bush has already seen the details; perhaps he even has Korean admission of sales to Iran. In this second scenario, Bush might have said to the effect of, "Look it, Kim, if you spill the whole beans, I'll take you off the terrorist list, ease up on some sanctions, and not make you burnt toast even if Iran uses your weapon against my Middle-East war."
I'm awaiting Russia's official response to this huge story. The American Democrats are of course saying, "See? We told you that talks and sanctions work against terrorist regimes." Unfortunately, how nations behave under various stresses is not as predictable as the law of gravity.
The Associated Press announced about two weeks ago that Obama has scheduled appearances in Iraq and Afghanistan before the U.S. election. Today it's reported that "Barack Obama plans to visit Europe and the Middle East this summer. Obama's presidential campaign tells The Associated Press that likely Democratic nominee will visit Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and the United Kingdom."
Just politics, but we can soon get an idea of what Obama is all about on a global level.
Another high-level Israeli has come out for an air strike on Iran: "A former head of Mossad [= the Israeli "CIA"] has warned that Israel has 12 months in which to destroy Iran's nuclear programme or risk coming under nuclear attack itself. He also hinted that Israel might have to act sooner if Barack Obama wins the US presidential election." If not for American Democrats, Iran would have been subdued years ago by George Bush. Iran speaks with conceit thanks to American Democrats and Russians. Obama promises to hold smiley talks with Iran in the coming years, just what Iran needs in the coming years, and what Russia would welcome, with a smiley face. Democrats think that if Bush had been more smiley with Iran that Iran would have fallen in love with Israel, and that the world would then have gone forward with sugar and spice and everything nice. I try not to mock, but in this case I can't help myself: Democrat leaders deserve the darkest pits of hell for what they're doing in the name of power. If Bush says blue, Democrats say red. If Bush says red, Dems say blue. It's the nature of Democrats to be divisive, one of the worst sins that humanity can unleash.
Ironically, many anti-Bushers have been American Hebrews. As I speak, the Hebrew journalist, Seymour Hersh, has come out with a story that Bush is now involved with covert activity inside Iran for to topple the current Iranian government. Never mind that Iran poses a critical threat to Israel, Herch is more interested in publicizing, and therefore destroying, anything that Bush might be doing to eradicate the Iranian cancer. It's as if American Hebrew Democrats have been blind to the fact that part of Bush's rationale for invading Iraq was to get an opportunistic position for destroying the source of the problem: Iran. Now that Democrats have successfully made Bush impotent, Iran will rise and be a major player in destoying Israel, the end result of which is Armageddon...and the end of America itself.
It turns out that the budding Europe-Russia relations were spurred by Europe some time ago (i.e. not vice-versa), when she approached Russia to request a business relationship. The lowly Russia (still acting like the big boy on the block) was charmed and has accepted the proposition, wherefore:
"The first round of talks to conclude a new wide-range cooperation deal between Russia and the European Union will take place in Brussels on July 4, the joint statement of the Russia-EU summit said...It has been reported that the new agreement will be built on international commitments binding Russia and the European Union.
Medvedev also offers to outline possible dates and certain measures that will bring Russia and the European Union to visa-free entries...
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso hailed a 'sincere and open' atmosphere at the talks and said that the new agreement should 'open a new chapter in our relations.'
This is still far from a situation in which a Russian could become an EU leader, but it's in the right direction. There is yet the possibility that Gog could be made a leader of the UN, as Russia is one of the original founders of that organization.
It's a good thing that June is about over, for this chapter has become long. I wonder what July will see. I've already started the July chapter with some rarely-heard material from my own online investigations of the ancient dragon cult. I came to conclude that the Biblical dragon linked to a group of Trojo-Lydian peoples using the dragon as their symbol, and the whole thing made much sense, even more so because the cult led to the Varangian-Rus Vikings, the co-founders of Moscow.
NEXT IRAQ UPDATE
The 2016 prediction for Armageddon (from my human intellect and therefore subject to retraction) is explained here.
If you've come to this book beginning at this webpage, see the rest of the Gog-Iraq story in PART 2, accessed from the
Table of Contents