Lori0218

Maybe it's time to close our door to foreign imports. We can support ourselves without their goods.

Does anyone know the source of this article? I recieved it in the the mail this morning. Subject: FW: WEU Recommendation 666 created by Assembly by the ten-nation Brussels Treaty! Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 10:39:23 -0600 A failed 7 year 'land for peace' deal, the position of 'prince' in a revived Roman Empire, (created by Assembly Recommendation 666 which is dominated by the ten-nation Brussels Treaty signatories.) If you turn on the broadcast news, or read the headlines, you come away with the impression that peace and safety is about (once more) to break out throughout the Middle East. It seems that now, the same folks who were complaining when Arafat was sidelined by President Bush as an 'obstacle to peace' agree that now Arafat is dead, there is a 'real chance' for peace -- but don't expect any of them to ever openly admit that Arafat was the problem all along. It is another clever example of America's and Israel's critics taking both sides of a contradictory position simultaneously. When Arafat died, most countries ordered the flags flown at half-staff. The United Nations ordered ALL its flags be lowered to honor the man they now tacitly admit was an unrepentant murderer and terrorist whose policies are responsible for the deaths of 2500 of his own people, the destruction of their social infrastructure and the author of their misery. Indeed, when Secretary of State Rice visited with Mahmoud Abbas this week, she made headlines because she did NOT stop at Arafat's graveside to honor him as she passed it on her way to meet with the Palestinian leader -- like everybody else did. Consider the complete picture: There isn't a diplomat or a news reporter who won't readily admit that the reason for the renewed hope for peace is the removal of Yasser Arafat from the equation. Mahmoud Abbas was Prime Minister of the PA for two years and was supposed to be the 'go-to' guy for peace -- he was appointed to that role after the US refused to deal further with Arafat. America's decision to sideline Arafat was criticized as unhelpful by the UN, EU, Arab governments, the news media and America's lunatic left who seized it as a chance to 'pile on' the administration. But to listen to them now, the PA and Israel have reached a 'landmark' because the PA agreed to a 'ceasefire'. Why? There've been dozens of 'ceasefires' in the past - not one of them held. Mahmoud Abbas was the PA's Prime Minister and the responsible party in the Quartet's road map to peace during previous ceasefires. What makes this one different? Ask anybody and they'll tell you it's because Arafat is dead. But ask them if Arafat was really the obstacle to peace all along, and, depending on whom you ask, you'll either get a glare, stony silence or an argument. Even the Pope supported Arafat in life and issued great swelling words of mourning at his death, fer cryin' out loud. But now that he is dead, the working assumption is that the peace process can move forward and that there is reason for new hope that didn't exist when Arafat was still alive. Here's how that looks boiled down into one sentence. "Israel is a terrorist state that was the obstacle to peace, and Arafat was a 'pioneer' for peace worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize and other international honors -- but now that Arafat is dead, peace is now possible." We ran a poll on Oracle asking the question, "Do you believe Abbas and Sharon can work out a lasting peace?" Admittedly, the Oracle poll is hardly a scientific one that queries a representative cross-section -- Oracle readers are generally less biased against Israel -- but 78% of those who responded chose the answer, "I don't believe it is remotely possible." Part of the reason is because Oracle (and Omega Letter) readers know things about the history of the peace 'process' that the average person doesn't. First, although the PA has agreed to a ceasefire, Hamas has not and will not. Hamas' isn't a political party seeking political accommodation. It is an Islamic party seeking Israel's annihilation. For Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist, it would have to abandon its interpretation of Islam that says the Holy Land belongs to Islam. We've talked about the Koran and the two 'zones' of Islam, the Dar al Islam (zone already under Islam) and the Dar al Haran (area yet to be conquered for Allah -- or 'zone of war') in the past. Israel was under Islamic control for 1,200 years. Hamas can never recognize that it is not now part of Dar al Islam without denying its interpretation of Islamic scriptures and admitting it conducted a holy war and lost. Recognizing Israel's right to exist means surrendering despite Allah's promise of ultimate victory. Let's put it in terms we can understand from our own perspective. It would be as if the only way Israel could have peace would be if you agreed to renounce your belief that Jesus is the only way to heaven. That the Scriptures were wrong about Israel, and that the New Testament contradicts the Old, instead of its being a continuation of unfolding revelation. That is what it means to an Islamic fundamentalist to recognize Israel's right to exist. It is an admission that the Old Testament deed to the Holy Land is valid and that the Koran's reassignment of Jerusalem to Islam is not -- in essence, invalidating Islam's core doctrine. There is no way that Islam can countenance Israeli possession of the holy places without admitting the Koran is in error. That is why we began with a discussion of Arafat. The whole world agrees that his death increased the chances for peace, yet they continue to honor him officially as a 'peacemaker'. To openly acknowledge Arafat's true nature is to admit that the UN, the Vatican, the Europeans, and, until the first Bush administration, most of the rest of the world, backed a terrorist government fighting to destroy the only working democracy in the Middle East. That would be an embarrassment. But for Hamas or the Islamic world to recognize Israel's right to exist means the end of Islam. The process ongoing may well lead to a period of temporary peace and safety for Israel -- but the operative word is 'temporary'. The Bible also foresees a period of temporary peace and safety for Israel in the last days. (Even as I type these words, I am stricken with renewed awe at the thought that the Bible could even foresee Israel's EXISTENCE at this point in history, let alone describe its exact political situation in detail. It is equally important to remember that the Jewish State has existed for only fifty-eight of the last 2000 years) Ezekiel speaks to a period of time when Israel will be 'a land of unwalled villages' (Israel is currently building a wall), describing Israel as a people, "at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates," (Ezekiel 38:11) at the time of the Gog Magog invasion. Daniel's prophecy is even more breathtaking, describing a seven-year covenant that will be 'confirmed' by the antichrist for one 'week' (seven years) but that the confirmed covenant will be broken halfway through. (Daniel 9:27) Daniel described the covenant as one in which he "shall divide the land for gain." (Daniel 11:39) The failed Oslo Agreement signed in 1993 (that spawned what Israel calls the 'Oslo War') was due to have reached its goal by September, 2000 and was based on the formula of 'land for peace'. Just think of it! In order for the antichrist to 'confirm' a seven-year covenant based on a formula that will 'divide the land [of Israel] for [political] gain' there must first be a covenant based on that formula in existence. (You can't even confirm a dentist's appointment unless there was first an appointment made to confirm.) But it just so happens that there IS a peace covenant between Israel and 'the many', outlining a seven-year process based on the formula of 'land for peace' that needs confirming. The vision of 'two states side-by-side' will never be realized, politically speaking, without a universally recognized border (dividing what used to be Israel) into two separate states. But the one who 'confirms' Daniel's covenant isn't the US president, or a 'Quartet' or the United Nations. Daniel says it will be confirmed by the 'prince' of a revived Roman Empire consisting of ten 'kings'. (Note that Daniel calls the antichrist a 'prince' and not a 'king') The modern EU consists of 28 nations, and at its core is the Western European Union consisting of 25. But the WEU has only ten FULL members, the ten most powerful 'kings' in Europe. Both organizations agreed to be led by a kind of 'prince'. In June, 2000, the WEU met at its 46th Session to discuss merger with the EU and decided it couldn't take place. So instead, it recommended creating a kind of joint secretariat whereby the Secretary General of the EU would also be the Secretary General of the WEU, creating a kind of 'prince' appointed by ten 'kings' who, although subordinate to them, wields more power as an individual than the 'kings' can collectively. That recommendation is on the books as WEU Recommendation 666 and the current 'prince' of the revived Roman Empire is Javier Solana. And Solana has been working overtime to insinuate Europe into the Arab-Israeli conflict, going so far as to tell Israel the EU would be part of the process, whether Israel 'likes it or not.' Before anybody jumps the gun, I don't know if Solana is the antichrist. To tell you the truth, I kind of doubt it. The Bible says the whole world will accept the antichrist as 'god' and will worship him as such in order to participate in his system. Even Christians who believe that they will go through the Tribulation have to admit that, when the antichrist comes on the scene, he will be so seductive and "shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect," according to Jesus. (Matthew 24:24) Most mid and post trib interpreters point to the reference to the 'very elect' Jesus is referring to as being evidence of the Church during the Tribulation. If they are correct, then the antichrist is unlikely to be Solana. Solana doesn't fit the profile, but his job description does. The Solana question aside, everything else is falling into place with such precision as to be undeniable. Ticking them off, we have; a failed 7 year 'land for peace' deal, the position of 'prince' in a revived Roman Empire, (created by Assembly Recommendation 666 which is dominated by the ten-nation Brussels Treaty signatories) and; A renewed peace effort at a time when Israel is building a security wall around itself, while the whole world deludes itself into believing genuine peace is possible -- despite the religious element that guarantees it is not. (The power of that delusion is evidenced by the global willingness to honor Arafat as a 'peacemaker' whose death is joked to be worthy of a second Nobel Peace Prize) As Israel struggles to obtain even an illusion of peace and safety, to its north and east, the Gog Magog alliance is taking shape precisely along the lines outlined by Ezekiel. It couldn't be more obvious. Jesus IS coming soon. Current events are conspiring together to bring about the exact political and religious alignments described by the Bible, thousands of years ago, all converging at exactly the same point in history. The only fly in the ointment is the absence of the United States as a major player on the global scene during the Tribulation Period. Taken together with the absence of any mention of the Church's role on earth during the Tribulation, it isn't a stretch to connect the dots and conclude that these two omissions from the last days' record are connected. "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." (1 Corinthians 15:51-52) "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words." (1st Thessalonians 4:17-18)

When I see a man preaching hatred for victims who suffered a tragic death such as 9/11, and many young people support him, I see a nation falling down into the depth's of Hell. When I see Christians facing jail, because they wanted to preach The Word to the lost, Hell's high water is rising. No one deserved to die on 9/11 because it was an attack by Satan on people who may have eventually come to know Christ. Did that young mother of two working to help support her family, deserve to die? Did that wise Grandfather, who was about to become a Great-Grandfather deserve to die? What about the young Father who lived in Baltimore, MD to whom was my parents neighbor, to whom went to New York once a month to carry documents to his office's main branch deserve to die? Or to be called a NAZI? What about that wonderful man of God who stayed by the side of a falling comrade to minister to him and give him last rights? This nation is on the verge of falling into a den of vipers, and the people are willing to allow it to happen as long as their Freedom of Speech is not effected. I believe in this Freedom, but with the freedom there is responsibility. When you preach hate for someone because your disagree with them, then you are preaching for Hell. These days, to preach love of a Savior is considered hate. When you try to preach the love of Christ you have a chance of going to jail. Yet this man who ]preached hate, because he disagreed with those who died because they where making so much money, even though he is making $80000.00 a year is being defended by the Freedom of Speech followers, many of them our young people. Very few are even defending the Ministers in Philadelphia. I see a Nation getting ready to burn. I don't know if and when the rapture is going to happen. I pray it's soon, before this nation is turned to ashes. We all need to pray, that our nation will Repent, before it's too late. Lori

I'm concerned that many preachers today are brushing this off as if it was something that is just a bothersome event. I was watching Hanity and Colms on Fox News the other night and Franklin Gram was on talking about the event. He promoting his charity for helping the victims then when Colms asked him outright. Is this a sign of the End Times. He talked around it but really never answered. He kept preaching that God love's us and came in the the form of Christ to vindicate us, which is fine, but he basically refused to answer the question. He said, that he did not know that this was the time before judgment. Yet we know he and his dad are preaching in churches that these are the endtimes. The only preachers who are saying this is the beginning of God's judgement are the Moslem Preachers. There are few Christian Preacher's even mentioning it. There are a few but they are far in-between. If no one is getting the message then I wonder why God's even trying. What do you all think?

I agree with Dad Ernie. I feel what John was shown was incrediable. I look forward to seeing what John had the chance to see. Lori

I'm a little late coming into this conversation. I apologize, I have yet to even begin reading all the post here. But I to have felt something significant was going to happen. Please keep all those who have suffered through this tragedy in our prayers.

It would be fun wouldn't it? Maybe I should write something on the lines of this. I have always felt led to write. Maybe someday.

This is only my second post here, so if I mess up somewhere simply whip me back into shape. This is proboly reaching but, do you suppose that the seven thunders are seven leaders who will be sent by the Lord to lead the new Christians after the Rapture or even before the Rapture? Lets go even further. Suppose they are leaders from many of the major religions of the world who have found Christ. Do you suppose they could Preach and bring many home before the Rapture? John and James where named the Son's of Thunder and after Christ went home they brought many new converts home to Christ from many different faiths. It's funny that John seemed to be linked to the Thunder Symbolism. Slap me if you fully think I'm wrong. :x: This is just a thought. And a good idea for a novel.