Previous Update: November

Updates Index

December 1 - 6, 2008

Globama's New World

December 1

Obama has chosen Susan Rice to be the UN ambassador. Under the prediction that the False Prophet will work with the UN in reaching the world with the skincode, Rice may prove to be instrumental along these lines. I am not yet announcing that Obama is the False Prophet, but tentatively assuming it to be the case for various reasons...the number of which keep climbing. Interestingly, Susan's father was a bank man, and in fact a governor of America's central bank: the Federal Reserve. If that's not enough, she has a Rhodes Scholarship too! Obama will make Hillary the Secretary of State, and she happens to be married to a Rhodes Scholar!!

In other words, Susan Rice is globalism material of the British-Illuminati sort. And she attended Stanford University (California), what a Stanford elite admitted to be an organization founded by 19th-century British Illuminatists. Amazingly, these British Illuminatists, some of whom were Christian Satanists (e.g. Brook Westcott and Fenton Hort), were based in Oxford University (UK), and so we read at Wikipedia that Susan Rice also attended New College, Oxford (part of Oxford University).

I have in the recent past written about the dragon-cult Veres, who (e.g. Nicholas de Vere von Drakenberg) claim to be modern overseers of a dragon cult stemming back to the dragon cult of Sumeria...that I myself have traced at length and mentioned here. It so happens that I traced a main vein of the Frank Illuminati back to the noble Veres of the past 1,000 years. Some of the most "distinguished" Veres were earls of Oxford (non-stop for centuries), and as such Veres practically ruled England as co-rulers with royalty (especially the Stewart royals).

The point here is that the Oxford area of England is expected to have been foundational in providing genuine Freemasonic-based Illuminatists. But I would like to add that, while investigating the noble Veres of Anjou and Oxford, I came to conclude that the False Prophet would be associated with their Illuminati circle.

I should add one more thing in passing, that the dragon-cult Veres claim to have stemmed from the Merovingian Franks (who supposedly claimed to be offspring of Jesus and Mary Magdalene), whom I was able to trace (without a doubt in my mind) to Hebrews in Merowe (also "Meroe") of what is now Sudan (and then Ethiopia). This was the region of Punt that faced Yemen, and it was in Yemen that some Joktanite Hebrews lived, whom I assumed named Occitania (= Languedoc) in southern France, just north of the Ebro-river mouth that I think was named after Joktan's father, the Biblical Eber (Genesis 10), patriarch of the Hebrews.

I also discovered that Joktanites founded the Sepharvites and their dark Moloch cult, explaining why Merovingians claimed to stem from a bull god (the Quinotaur), since Moloch was fashioned as a bull-shaped furnace...when infants/children were sacrificed to it, yes, in fire). These wicked Hebrews were NOT Israelites, but were the Ishtar-based Hebrews of Chaldea, Cutha(h), and Assyria that formed the proto-Zeus cult, explaining why Zeus was depicted in Greek myth as a Taurus/bull. The Merovingian bloodline passed from northern Africa ("Ethiopia" at the time, namely myth code "Merops, mythical king of Ethiopia) to Sparta, the latter being what I consider to be a variation of "Subartu," which itself was likely named after Sephar (yes the Mesopotamian region that named the Sepharvites). If you missed it, compare "Merops" to "Merowe," knowing that a 'w' modified commonly to a 'v', and a 'v' commonly to a 'b'.

I have been expecting high-tech Stanford Research Institute (an extension of Stanford University) to have much to do with the mechanics of the skincode system, as well as the False Prophet's fire from the sky (see some details in my chapter, Aquarian Mind Control). Rice has a slew of foreign-policy posts under her belt, but the Wikipedia statement that really catches my eye is this: "In 2002, she joined the Brookings Institution as senior fellow in the Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development program" (italics mine).

It seems sensible that Satanic globalists will not usher the skincode system worldwide until all nations are ready for it, and perhaps the least-prepared regions are in Africa. It might just be Susan Rice's job to get much of Africa skincode ready, since after all she was formerly the State Department's Assistant Secretary for African Affairs. But these ideas are (at this early stage in Obama's rule) theoretical things to watch out for.

For the National Security Advisor, Obama has chosen James Jones, chairman of the Atlantic Council of the United States; Susan Rice is herself on the board of this Council. Otherwise known as Atlanticism, the term may have been created due to its similarity with the Rosicrucian term, "Atlantis." After all, Atlanticism is very much the same concept as the rising of Atlantis, the latter being a global concept otherwise known to Rosicrucian Illuminatists as the (utopian) Golden Dawn. Atlanticism is defined as the modern effort to unite, first Europe with North America, and then with that the "Jewish" Illuminati can rule over it all.

Hmm, could it be that Jones was chosen to head a major department because, "On November 28, 2007, the Secretary of State appointed Jones as a special envoy for Middle East Security. He works with Israelis and Palestinians to strengthen security for both sides." There can be little doubt that Obama will himself work with both Israelis and Palestinians to effect some sort of solution, for the American president that finally succeeds might bask in great glory. But what will that solution be if any should arise? On whose side will it fall best? Let's see if we start to see signs of a Palestinian bias, which even the Israelis themselves half-expect from Obama. If the question then is -- will Obama betray the "Jewish" Illuminati by showing bias for Palestinians -- God might not have it any other way.,2933,436481,00.html

After writing the above on Jones, I went searching for other online writers who are of the opinion that Obama's globalist picks are Freemasonic, and I quickly found some. Recall my mention of Obama's pick for Treasury Secretary: Timothy Geithner, past president of the Federal Reserve bank (keeping in mind that Susan Rice's father was governor of the Federal Reserve). Then read this:

Timothy Geithner...will likely push the New World Order agenda decided at the 2008 Bilberberg [sic] Meeting of a one world currency and global control of financial systems. Geithner wrote an article in the Financial Times calling for a global regulatory banking framework, and called for the Federal Reserve to have an instrumental role in this new framework.

Geithner wrote this piece right after the Bilderberg Meeting where some of the most powerful figures in the world of central banking attended. Not only did Geithner attend, but the attendee list included Ben Bernanke the Federal Reserve Chairman, Henry Paulson the U.S. Treasury Secretary, Jean-Claude Trichet the president of the European Central Bank, Robert Zoellick the president of the World Bank and other high profile bankers. With the who’s who of central banking attending the Bilderberg Meeting, it is highly unlikely that what Geithner is proposing in his Financial Times article was not discussed at the Bilderberg Meeting. It is no secret that the true objective of the Bilderberg Meeting is to steer the world into accepting a global government. By establishing a new global regulatory banking framework, this will inch the planet ever closer to a one world currency operating in a cashless society where microchips are used to facilitate transactions. Make no mistake about it, this system will not be good, because it will be controlled by a bunch of criminal psychopaths like the one’s who attended the 2008 Bilderberg Meeting."

The above clip was found abundantly online, and perhaps it belongs originally to the (non-Christian) website, "The Atlantean Conspiracy, Exposing the Illuminati from Atlantis to 2012". This website connects the founding of the Federal Reserve to the Atlantean Conspiracy. Please don't get the impression that I follow conspiracy theories blindly. In fact, I don't spend much time at all reading up on them. If they confirm my findings/ideas, I'll quote them, but in any case the idea of a globalist order is not merely the conspiracy talk of one having an over-rich imagination; it's the reality.

Why is the great tribulation coming upon Israel? Just read what a Jew is taught to believe:

"The following sins of Jesus are recorded in the 'New Testament':
1. Jesus repudiated the laws of kosher food (Mark 7:18-19). [Compare this to the prophet Daniel's strict adherence to kashrus, in Daniel chapter 1.]
2. He repudiated the laws of honoring one's parents, and called on his followers to hate their parents; he also dishonored his own mother (Matthew 10:34-36; Matthew 12:46-50; Luke 14:26).
3. He violated the Sabbath by picking grain, and incited his disciples to do the same (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-26).
4. 4) He again violated the Sabbath by healing a man's arm, which was not a matter of saving a life, and he openly defied the rabbis in his total repudiation of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-13; Mark 3:1-5). [Compare this to G-d's view of violating the Sabbath, in Numbers 15:32-36, Nehemiah 10:30-32, and dozens of other places throughout the Bible.]
5. Jesus brazenly defied and disobeyed the rabbis of the Sanhedrin, repudiating their authority (This is recorded in many places throughout the New Testament, but look especially at Matthew 23:13-39 and John 8:44-45).

The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of 'Jesus the Nazarene':

1. He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).
2. He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a).
3. He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh—which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).

The false, rebellious message of Jesus has been thoroughly rejected by the vast majority of the Jewish people, as G-d commanded. Unfortunately, however, this same message has brought a terrible darkness upon the world...

December 2

The International Herald Tribune says that Obama wants "to work more closely with the United Nations after the tensions of President George W. Bush's tenure [wherefore] Obama plans to restore the ambassador's post (of Susan Rice) to cabinet rank, as it was under President Bill Clinton..." Is it clear to anyone that the Clintonites are already leading Obama by a ring in his nose? Would Obama personally have chosen Hillary to the fourth top spot in federal politics if it were otherwise? Obama realizes that if he doesn't give the Clintonites a big piece of the pie, much of his Party will seem like a cold, black hole.

During Bill Clinton's first term, I suggested (in my False Prophet chapter) that he would make an excellent False Prophet. During his second term, when it seemed certain that the 70th Week (i.e "tribulation period") would arrive after his eight years, I still held out the possibility of his becoming the False Prophet by securing some globalist post, for example to the United Nations. I had all but given up on that theory with the rising of the Obama star, but now that Obama has chosen Hillary to become the Secretary of State (which is essentially the department of Foreign Affairs), Bill could quite possibly secure a globalist post...perhaps by some means apart from Obama's choice.

One must wonder two things: why Obama didn't choose Bill instead of Hillary, and whether Bill is fuming for that decision. Will the Clintonites push on his behalf for a decent position? Will Bill take it if it's too insignificant for an ex-prez?

December 3

Last time I wrote on the topic of Iraq's provincial elections, the date was up in the air. I've now read that they will be held at the end of next month, and that some sharp violence should accompany it, both before and after, and especially in northern Iraq. Last time I wrote on the topic, I wondered if Gog would worm his way into Iraqi affairs through the events of these elections. The critical election issue is how much power the dominating Kurds (of the northern provinces) will gain over the Arabs in their midst, and what will the Arabs do about it? Remember, I'm looking for Gog to join the Sunni Arabs...which makes me think that he'll oppose the Kurds, even as Iran opposes them.

Obama spoke on Iraq recently, and didn't sound very passionate about pulling the troops, as he did when he was using the issue to become popular. He said: "I believe that 16 months is the right time frame...But as I have said consistently, I will listen to the recommendations of my commanders."

Essentially, he went on to say that if the Iraqi situation warrants it, the troops will have to remain. That is, if violence flares up sufficiently, for example to levels in the first few years of the war, the troops will have to stay.

How is this position any different than Bush's? It is not the message spoken by Obama when wanting to become the president. At that time he was saying that the greater the terrorist violence, the quicker the troops need to be pulled put. Or, the troops in Iraq were the reason for the violence, so let's get them out. Or, why should our young boys die for Iraq's problems?

Unfortunately, I cannot gauge, neither by his attitude, nor by the leanings of the Iraqi people (who are divided on the issue), how long the American military will remain in Iraq. However, the situation has changed drastically enough over the last year to allow Gog to rise. One thing that comes to mind is that Gog, or at least his allies in Iraq, will try to convince the Iraqi voters that the Americans must go immediately (i.e. not in 2011 as the recent political deal stipulates).

Well, now, the Democrats will need to face realities rather than shoot their endless darts at the Republicans. The latter tried to do something about the nuclear threat of terrorists, but the Democrats would not let their counterparts have their way. Now (in yesterday's Associated Press) we read:

"The United States can expect a terrorist attack using nuclear or more likely biological weapons before 2013, reports a bipartisan commission in a study being briefed Tuesday to Vice President-elect Joe Biden."

The report goes on to say that the lack of time before something dreadful befalls the Unites States again should be treated as "urgent." But I'm wondering why 2013 was the year used in the report. It suggests that something will happen during Obama's presidency.

Do the creators of this report feel that al-Qaeda has become bolder by the ousting of the "hard-line" Republicans? Do the creators feel that Obama is a pushover in the eyes of al-Qaeda or at best one who has his hands tied by his anti-war Democrats? Obama knows he must send out the message that he is not restrained (by his Democrats) from using military force, but I think he'll use force (probably in retaliation) in a grand way that has the world marvelling.

As I'm looking for the False Prophet to come to his Revelation mission beginning in 2013, the picture developing in my mind is Obama's retaliation to a terrorist attack at about that time, giving him the reason to utilize America's missile systems. But I also detect some trigger-happiness for the purpose of achieving glory, for I see in Obama one seeking glory for his personal accomplishments.

Iran is now conducting a huge naval and air exercise in the tanker-infested seas off its shores, suggesting that it's showing muscle to frighten any Israelis who might be planning an air strike. Iran, like others, may be expecting a strike between now and January 20th.

To well-express the depravity of terrorists in Mosul, yesterday saw a bombing (nine dead, and counting) at a primary school in Sunni-Arab territory, deliberately targeting children (three dead so far). I doubt that the blast was the work of Kurds in their war with the Sunni, but smacks more of al-Qaeda seeking revenge on the Sunni who have betrayed them.

This blast was accompanied by another bombing west of Mosul (five dead), and the two followed a bombing in Mosul the day before (16 dead). The point is, Mosul is still rife with a darkly-determined terrorism that aims to fight on even in the face of overwhelming defeat. This is what I predicted years ago, that the "broken" terrorists would not cease, but would eventually arise to great success with Gog. The point here is not to boast, but to highlight the apparent fact that Iraq is in the midst of undergoing the fulfillment of Daniel 11:21-24. The Mosul-news website below may be a good place to keep tabs on Mosul.

I would think that most Iraq watchers assumed some years ago that the terrorists would soon cease their losing battle, but here we are nearly in 2009, and they have not ceased, but are active in a determined way in the very city that Gog is predicted (by Nahum 1:11) to arise. Just today, an Associated Press writer (Denis D. Gray) has called Mosul "Iraq's deadliest city." When I first realized that Mosul would be his launching pad, just after the start of Bush's invasion, the city was insignificant, and yet today it is exactly what we would expect (i.e. the last hold-out) if Gog is to arise there and save the day for the insurgents.

I'd be crazy to predict the rise of Gog in Mosul at this time, to give the terrorists victory, if all I had to go on was the daily news reports. There is no indication whatsoever that Gog even exists in Iraq, and the terrorists appear to be on their last legs. Yet you see that I am quite confident of his coming soon, and their rising to become a great force. This confidence is due to the things that have come to pass over the past five years, which have surprised me due to their fulfilling my expectations solidly.

What will prophecy-watching benefit us if we don't have God on our side? For those weak in faith, call on Jesus from the heart of hearts: Jesus, please, please, be my God. Seek to please him in the ways that you know you're failing him, for he must be sick and tired of the millions who call on him one minute, and then live apart from him for days, weeks, or months. If you call on him for help, for a stronger faith, a healthier attitude, then continue to talk to him with a will to remain in him. If you remain in him, you will find that he answers you from time to time, and it will bring gladness and strength in the midst of your troubles. If you excel at remaining in Him, you may even hear His voice from time to time. Consider it an honor to hear His voice. It is no small thing when he makes it heard. Life is how we feel, not what we own. A good life is feeling good in the many ways that one can feel good, and God makes people experience good feelings, and good days, when they have earned it, by being good. Start by being good toward God. Jesus, please, please, help me to be good.

If you don't think he hears you because he doesn't seem to be responding, I assure you that, for anyone who takes the effort to make Jesus their God, it will be heard. Try again and again, for this is what it means to seek him and to find him; you will start to notice changes in your life (as though things were "clicking" for a change) in accordance with your devotion, for he speaks in many ways. Talk to him about your failures, and how you might change them. He really likes that. If you bless His heart, he'll bless yours; it's as simple as that.

December 4

A few months ago, al-Qaeda in northern Iraq, when losing the Mosul battle badly, started to concentrate on the Israeli border. I looked for signs of a developing large-scale build up of al-Qaeda on that border because I figured that, where Gog is slated to ally himself with al-Qaeda in Iraq, it makes sense for God to cause it. However, I did not find evidence of a large-scale build up, neither in Lebanon nor in Gaza. It seemed that on both Israeli borders al-Qaeda was meager at best, and so I watched month by month expecting something substantial in time for the first strike on Israel by Gog...which on my (tentative) prophetic calendar is in the spring of 2010.

Then yesterday there appeared the Jerusalem-Post article below, explaining that al-Qaeda-like elements (of the Salafism sect) have come to be in charge of the Hamas army (called Izzadin Kassam Brigades), and that they are in touch with an al-Qaeda group not far north of Jerusalem, in Ramallah:

"Izzadin Kassam commander Muhammad Deif was badly wounded by an IDF missile strike and subsequently left the Gaza Strip for a long period of recuperation. His replacement at the helm of the Brigades was Ahmad al-Ja'abari, who carried out his tasks in close cooperation with two allies, Ali Jundiyeh and Nizar Rayyan. All three of these men are known supporters of Salafism... ...One level below, the majority of the five brigade commanders of Izzadin Kassam are also Salafis...

The Salafis remain firmly entrenched within Izzadin Kassam at all levels.

While Hamas has been agreeable to a ceasefire between it and Israel, the jihadist Salaf elements in Hamas have not been, even as Osama bin Laden has been outspokenly opposed to it. Therefore, Hamas, being the Palestinian faction most-expected to invade Israel (unlike the Palestinian government on the West Bank), seems firmly controlled by elements even more extreme than itself, elements that are certain to join Gog. Quite possibly the names quoted above will play a leading role in causing Israel's great tribulation.

Here's my main point: while Hamas and Hezbolah alone are too weak to cause Israel's fall because they are too politically insignificant to secure the help of other Muslims, the brute determination and world-class "fame" of al-Qaeda elements in Hamas and/or Hezbolah will allow, with surprising success, a calling out for more warriors from all quarters of the Muslim kingdom. For that's what prophecy says is going to happen, that Israel's enemies will join a pact (Daniel 9:27's covenant), and that there will be a "ruler of the covenant" -- not Gog, but Osama bin Laden.

In other words, if I'm correct to peg Osama as the ruler of the covenant (that Gog reinforces), we'd expect al-Qaeda to spearhead and direct the recruiting of warriors against Israel. It seems more reasonable to expect al-Qaeda to call for killers on Israel border when it itself is on Israel's border, but in any case I'd be very surprised if al-Qaeda did not operate as a priority on that border from here on in.

The Post also has an article on the Iran question, but it's the same old, telling that top Israeli military are planning the method of striking Iran, but doing so without U.S. support.

Now if I were an Israeli war planner with a serious intent of bombing Iranian facilities by surprise, I wouldn't be yapping about it to the press in any way...unless I wanted to confuse or mislead Iran and/or the rest of the world. So, let's say that Bush and Israel are planning the strike together; Bush would want the world to believe that he is removed completely from the plan, and he would ask Israel's top military men to make it very clear by "leaking" it to the world.

Iran must be guessing at this point whether the above scenario is the reality, or whether Israel is telling the truth about not having U.S. support. Assuming that the latter is true, then Iran, like myself, must be wondering why Israeli war officials are presently leaking a report expressing such thoughts as: "It is always better to coordinate [with the U.S.]...But we are also preparing options that do not include coordination...There are a wide range of risks one takes when embarking on such an operation."

This is not what I would expect Israeli officials to say if a strike were truly imminent, but then maybe that's exactly what they want Iran to believe, because a strike is very imminent. The article ends by saying that Iran is yawning at the same-old-same-old Israeli threat, which is exactly what Israel would want Iran to be doing.

Have you noticed that, now that the Democrats have regained the White House, we don't see the non-stop scenes of bloody Iraqi? Where has all the Democrat whining gone that was based on that American blood? Was the whining for one purpose and one purpose only, not because most Democrats truly care for the lives of American soldiers, but because most Democrats were using the death toll to regain the White House?

Today, the Herald Tribune, in an article on the latest Obama plotting on Iraq (where Obama is being painted as half a hypocrite), we read: "To date, there has been no significant criticism from the anti-war left of the Democratic Party of the prospect that Obama will keep tens of thousands of troops in Iraq for at least several years."

That's because the whining has effected its purpose and is therefore being considered for the trash as a political tool. Yet there remains a pressing obligation for both Obama and the whiners to hold to their particular anti-war positions, for it's what the Obama-crazed world expects of the Obama team.

The article mentions that Obama promised to bring back only the combat troops, and that all he needs to do, therefore, to put the best light on his deceptiveness, is to re-assign the soldiers to non-combat status, such as military trainers. That way, he might be able to leave up to 70,000 "residual" soldiers in Iraq, for years, without a squeak from his anti-war side.

With such an outlook, I've got to re-emphasize and enlarge on something, that Gog, in order to rise to power in Iraq, does not need the American presence to evacuate, if the False Prophet joins Gog in an Iraqi mission. Take for example the fact that U.S. commanders in Iraq have, in the past year or two, made strong alliances with the very Sunni Arabs that I expect Gog-in-Iraq to empower himself with. Since Obama is claiming to leave the military choices to these commanders, we can expect the U.S.-Sunni alliance to continue, especially as it was the very reason for substantial success over the anti-American Sunni terrorists.

In other words, what if the False Prophet and Gog cooperate, using those same Sunni to effect an anti-terrorist plan? It would allow Gog to step a foot into Iraqi the very time that the Iraqi government is weakening American control over terrorist situations. Gog can then act deceptively, as prophesied (in Daniel 11:21-24), to rise to numero-uno power, using various Sunni support bases, including the anti-American Sunni.

December 5

Israel Today, an Israeli-Christian news media, shows why even the Christians of Israel are headed for trouble. IN an article of last August we read:

"Since the Antichrist will claim to be Christ he will attempt to stand in His place and create world peace. We should not expect the Antichrist to appear as a monster, as was thought during the Middle Ages. Instead, he will be a deceiver."

Gog is the anti-Christ, without a doubt, and he will not come to Israel proclaiming to be the Jewish messiah. That's the first erroneous teaching being spread by Israeli Christians. Yes he will be a deceiver, but yes he will also be a monster toward Israel, from first to last.

When Gog comes against Israel, will Messianic Christians recognize him as the anti-Christ and the cause of Israel's great tribulation? Will those Christians flee Judea as Jesus directed in Matthew 24? Maybe not, for if they are convinced that the anti-Christ must come as a peaceful Christ-like individual, they will reject Gog's invasion as the time to flee.

Never do I read in prophecy, or anywhere else in the Bible, that the anti-Christ proclaims himself to be Christ. Yet this teaching is widespread in Christianity. Jesus said that when Christians in Israel see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, the time to flee as quickly as possible will have arrived (Luke 21). In Matthew 24:15, Jesus calls the anti-Christ the "abomination," which is hardly a term evoking a Christ-like figure. Rather, an "abomination that causes desolation" is a monster indeed. Jesus uses this fearful phrase in conjunction with the time for Christians to flee Judea.

What is the hurry with the completion of Iran's nuclear reactor?

"DEBKAfile's Iranian and Moscow sources report that Atomstroiexport, the Russian firm under contract to build and activate Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr, is offering nuclear engineers and technicians top salaries to leave for Iran at short notice. The Kremlin has promised Tehran to have the reactor up and running by mid-2009."

Is Iran running out of oil so that it needs electricity el-prompto? No. Who is it that most wants the reactor finished by the middle of next year, Russia or Iran? Why is Russia bending over backward to get the reactor completed so soon? The article continues: "Our sources add that the Bushehr plant will make it possible for Iran to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons."

What an ambitious Gog needs the most right now is a fiendish crackpot Iranian leader on his side. Once Iran has both the bomb and the leader who looks as though he would use it, the West can be made to bite its fingernails to the knuckles in a scenario where Gog arises to take over where Bush left off. In such a situation, Obama may deem it wiser to make an alliance with Gog rather than to confront him militarily.

Does Russia want the reactor finished by the time (June 30, 2009) that the American troops are required to exit all Iraqi cities, including the Green Zone? Sounds reasonable if Russia has an eye to control the Iraqi agenda as soon as possible. The article goes on to say that "[Sergei] Kiriyenko, former Russian prime minister and personal emissary of the incumbent prime minister Vladimir Putin, again assured the Iranians that the reactor would be ready to go within a few months."

One can easily see why Russia would want to curb Israel's plan to strike Iran's reactors, and so we must conclude that the muscle that Russia is in the midst or showing off is just for the reason of frightening Israel. I'm referring to the Bulava missiles that Russia is in the midst of testing. "The missile is capable of carrying up to ten individually guided nuclear blocks and striking targets within a radius of up to 8,000 kilometers. The missile is designed for Borei class nuclear submarines, which will be outfitted with 16 missiles each."

Pravda (in other articles) claims that this weapon system is being re-advanced at this time in response to Bush's missile system on Russia's European border. The article above says that the missile is to enter service in 2009. The outspoken Pravda features a headline on it's front page: "USA will not be able to strike nuclear blow on Russia without response." There is something going on behind the scenes that is causing a little cold-war fever. I think Putin is gearing up for some Russian expansionism, and plans to do something that the United States won't like. Russian military remains stationed in both Abkhazia and South Ossetia to this day.

There is an Associated-Press article in the Jerusalem Post today that excellently spells out the reasons for Gog's invasion of Egypt in conjunction with his invasion of Israel. While it now appears that Hamas (controlling the Gaza-Egyptian border) will be the Palestinian faction in support of Gog, thus allowing Gog to use Gaza to invade Egypt, we find Egypt at this time spouting off against Hamas in a way that Hamas must vehemently reject:

"In a clear sign of Egypt's increasing frustration with the Hamas leadership, Egypt's Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit is blaming the Islamic movement for the breakdown in reconciliation talks with Fatah [= the peace-seeking Palestinians of the West Bank]...

'Egypt will not accept the establishment of an Islamic emirate along the eastern border,' said Mustafa el-Fiqi, who heads Egypt's Parliament's foreign relations committee...

...Egypt, a secular state, has great difficulty dealing with an Islamic state or entity, particularly on its borders...

...Egypt, a secular state, has great difficulty dealing with an Islamic state or entity, particularly on its borders...

If it's not enough for Egypt to reject the Islamic religion of Hamas and its Salafist elements, we then read (according to a political scientist in Egypt): "Like it did with Sudan, Egypt is trying to change the situation in Gaza by dialogue and by attempting to bring the Palestinian Authority back into Gaza." That is, Egypt, while sponsoring official peace agreements between the Hamas and Fatah Palestinians, is heavily in favor of the latter, which of course must be angering Hamas to the point of murder.

But there's more in the article to indicate a coming invasion of Egypt by Gog's forces, in particular the fact that Egypt's anti-secular terrorists built a haven for themselves in the Sudan, and that Libya is at this time angry with both Egypt and Israel because both countries are at this time in non-support of a Libyan ship (supposedly carrying humanitarian aid) attempting to enter Gaza. Libya and Sudan are two of Gog's allies in the invasion of Israel (for new readers, see "Put" and "Cush" in Ezekiel 38).

Lebanon's Daily Star has a write up on the Libyan ship story, with some background information on Israel's blockade of Gaza. We learn that Libya has complained, without success, to the UN. Apparently, the UN is giving Israel thumbs-up for rejecting ships into Gaza, due to the possibility of their carrying military aid to Hamas.

The question that many are waiting to hear answered is whether the Obama administration will honor the American-Iraqi pact to the point of leaving troops until 2011. For your information at this time, not even the Bush administration seems to know: "'I haven't heard anything different, but of course I can't speak for [the Obama people],"' [Dana] Perino said, when asked whether Obama's team had indicated it would honor the accord."

Possibly in response to Russia's advancement of the Bulava missile system, "The U.S. military is set to run a 'realistic' test Friday [today] of a system built to knock out long-range missiles that could be fired by North Korea or Iran, the Pentagon said." Or by Russia.

This is the evolution of Reagan's so-called Star-Wars program, and I now learn (from article above) that "President George W. Bush has been spending roughly $10 billion a year on all aspects of missile defense, the Pentagon's costliest annual outlay for an arms development program." As to whether Obama will continue the missile programs, we read: "President-elect Barack Obama, on his transition website, says he supports missile defense, but will avoid drawing resources from other national security priorities 'until we are positive the technology will protect the American public.'"

As "there have been 36 intercepts in 46 tries," Obama must consider it a great success already. Great fire from the sky, here we come.

What can we make of this statement out today: "Obama is moving more quickly to fill his administration's top ranks than any newly elected president in modern times. The president-elect has named virtually the entire top echelon of his White House staff and nearly half of his cabinet."

My take is that Obama had his picks ready, and therefore his plans, even before the election, for even "Obama's advisers are acutely aware that moving too quickly can cause mistakes." In other words, Obama is not moving as quickly as it appears, for he, or people on his team, chose his top spots before he became the President-elect. This is a man/team on a global mission.

December 6


"The Pentagon conducted a successful test Friday of a missile shield system...The test, which has been delayed several times, comes at a crucial time for the $100 billion system, as President-elect Barack Obama is about to take office.

The article goes on to say that the defensive missile can hit a dot on an incoming missile, but the point is, Obama must now financially support the missile system if he wants to hold to his promise to support a "successful" system. I would caution against feeling proud, for Jesus said, in effect, that whoever fights with the missile will die by the missile. And, there won't be any missiles in the Kingdom of God. Do not be like the Russians, or fascists, who are proud of their military capabilities/advancements.

There is a good possibility that Bush is locating missile-related systems on the Russian border specifically because he knows for a certainty that Russia is supporting Iran's effort to secure a nuclear weapon. Bush therefore tells Russia openly that the systems are to protect Europe against Iranian missiles, but Russia gets the point loud and clear that if she is going to support Iran, she will be viewed as the United States views Iran: the enemy. The frightening thing is, Russia is not backing down, and is advancing its own missile systems as retaliatory measures, and meanwhile racing to get Iran the bomb as well as making military alliances the world over as best it can.

The way in which Obama will deal with this issue is critical, for if he starts a friendship with Iran and moreover backs down on the missile systems on Russia's border, he will give America's enemies a significant goal in their quests to take the Middle East. Obama's other option is to be hard as steel toward Russia and Iran, but then he will be just like the Bush that he criticized to no end. For the time being, the confidence of Russia and Iran is slated to decrease with the decreasing oil prices (since both nations make much money on oil sales).

The Interfax line, 16:32, for December 5th, reads: "Russia hails pact on U.S. troop pullout from Iraq." No other details given...or needed.

I had been waiting to see signs of Obama's bias toward the Palestinians, and the first one comes from Israel Today:

"More cause for concern came from the Arab press. The Lebanese newspaper al-A[k]hbar reported that Obama told Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in secret that he supports a Palestinian state and Arab 'rights to East Jerusalem.' The sources said Abbas and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad 'heard the best things they ever heard from an American president.'"

I'm not saying that Obama is definitely the False Prophet, but whereas a few months ago I gave it a 50-50 chance, I'm raising them now to a 65 percent possibility, not only due to his since becoming the president, but due to his globalist picks as well as his showing signs of being a war president. This number will go up drastically if he either associates himself with someone who fits the description of Gog, or with the electronic cashless society.

George Bush is toying with the idea that, perhaps, he should not have invaded Iraq based on the Intelligence reports of the existence of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. But I say that Mr. Bush is being hasty, for there is a lot of dirt/sand in Iraq underwhich to bury weapons quickly. Just today 250 kilograms of TNT, and some anti-aircraft missiles, were discovered by Egyptians buried in the Sinai peninsula (south of Gaza and no doubt to be used by Gaza's terrorists against Israel). This cache is likely a mere sample of what more is buried elsewhere.

The Washington Times has a story today about Obama's breaking a record (since 1988) for most positive press reports, which article also shares that Bush had the most "hostile press coverage." The idea that Democrats will (gladly) get from this is that Obama is an angel while Bush was a fiend. But the truth is quite different, that the media is by-and-large pro-Democrat and anti-Christian. Therefore, since Bush had the leanings to support Christians openly (what he did for Christians behind the scenes is lamentable, however), the media and the humanist/liberal world smeared him endlessly. Since Obama is one of their own, they will love him. This is a warning of things to come for Christians; we will be smeared in the worst possible light. Remember that Jesus said: if we are of the world, the world will love us. By "humanist" I am referring to those anti-Christians who strive for godliness/humanitarianism but deny God's existence.


Updates Index

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