The Left has long claimed that no president has ever been more corrupt than Richard Nixon, nor will there ever be one to usurp his throne. Let there be no doubt that "Tricky Dick" was corrupt, for he had political enemies spied on through phone tappings, CIA operatives keeping and maintain files on such prominent figures as John Lennon, etc. Then, there was the Watergate scandal, which served as the fait accompli that Nixon's reign as president was over, and he was forced to resign rather than face the humiliation that would come with impeachment and removal by the Democratic-controlled Congress.
The American people have not trusted the federal government in nearly 50 years as a result of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. With the Warren Commission creating more questions about the validity of its statements as well as whether a conspiracy and a cover-up was taking, and furthermore, whether the democratic process that has embodied the very spirit of this republic since the modern federal government's leaders were sworn into office in 1789 was in jeopardy due to the possibility that someone, perhaps Lyndon B. Johnson, had ordered JFK to be assassinated in an attempt to throw a coup d'tat. It did not matter the reason why the government could have been involved; the fact was that it happened, and nobody either knew any of the details about what had transpired, who was involved, etc. For the first time in U.S. history according to many historical and political scholars, the people began to question the motives of the government, and it has only grown more intense since that fateful day of November 22, 1963.
Today, we are facing the greatest threat the nation has ever known. The threat is greater than when the South seceded from the Union and resulted in civil war, or when Nazism, Fascism, and Communism spread the seeds of totalitarianism across the globe between 1917 and 1991, or simply the acts of terror which we experience today -- the acts of terror, not the motive nor the source. The Obama administration is supporting institutions which fund Islamic terrorist groups in the Middle East, most prominent among them being the Muslim Brotherhood, which finances Hamas. We have seen through the past two weeks a crackdown by the Justice Department on free speech against Muslims and the religion of Islam itself by announcements coming from both the legally-embattled U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the U.S. Attorney for East Tennessee Bill Killian, both stating that by people denigrating them on social media sites as Twitter and Facebook, they are, indeed, in violation of their civil rights protected by the First Amendment's mandate that all Americans have the right to freedom of religion, and therefore could face federal charges.
Two days ago, the mass media announced the Obama administration had been spying on millions of random American phone conversations from AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile, and activities on the Internet, with examples of the latter activities being accessing photographs, comments, and messages from Facebook as well as Twitter; website activity; and finally, E-mails. Members of the FBI, Department of Homeland Securtiy, and the NSA all denied this happened over a year or two ago. Sadly, not only is President Obama supporting, and in fact touting and bragging about what he has done in ordering these "acts of surveillance" on the millions of unsuspecting Americans, so, too, are the members of the U.S. Senate -- Democrats AND Republicans a like. What we have here is a government bent on subjugating the general public under some kind of alternative laws not included nor granted by any previous article to the Constitution, nor any other amendment to the supreme law of the land. We must not kid ourselves when I say the four most paramount amendments guaranteed to Americans by the Bill of Rights -- the First, Second, Fourth, and Tenth Amendments -- are under attack. The Constitution itself might be under attack, and a new series of legal codes and statutes implemented reflecting the values of either the Qu'ran or perhaps a more secular beast from literature known as Big Brother, the quasi-divine leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality, but who, in fact, may not exist. Big Brother is the institutional antagonist in George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, and was published 1949.
Numerous political pundits on the Right and a few on the Left have cried foul publicly regarding the Obama administration's activities regarding his series of scandals. Yet, after looking at the first four that have plagued his administration -- Operation "Fast and Furious," the cover-up of the Benghazi terrorist attacks, the IRS targeting conservative tax-exempt organizations, the subpoenaing of the AP, Fox News, and CBS news sources who leaked out details the administration considered top secret -- I believe that in the wake of the latest scandal involving the phone and Internet surveillances that they state are legal in accordance to the PATRIOT Act of 2001 and have, in fact, involved the British government, the United States of America is on the precipice of disintegrating before our very lives, and a new world order could possible be on the horizon, with President Obama serving as either than Madhi of Islamic lore, or as the Orwellian figure of Big Brother.
An interesting description of Oceania and its province of Airstrip One is of "a world of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance, and public mind control, dictated by a political system euphemistically named English Socialism (Ingsoc) under the control of a privileged Inner Party elite that persecutes all individualism and independent thinking as thoughtcrimes." A brief description of Oceanic society and the government's branches and operations are as follows:
The social class system of Oceania is threefold:
- (I) the upper-class Inner Party, the elite ruling minority
- (II) the middle-class Outer Party, and
- (III) the lower-class Proles (from proletariat), who make up 85% of the population and represent the uneducated working class.
As the government, the Party controls the population with four ministries:
- the Ministry of Peace (Minipax), which deals with war,
- the Ministry of Plenty (Miniplenty), which deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation),
- the Ministry of Love (Miniluv), which deals with law and order (torture),
- the Ministry of Truth (Minitrue), which deals with propaganda (news, entertainment, education and art)
Furthermore, I find it interesting the similarities one can draw between the character O'Brien -- a member of the Inner Party who poses as a member of The Brotherhood, the counter-revolutionary resistance, in order to deceive, trap, and capture Winston and Julia -- and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
***
The rest of this article is going to be dedicated to commentary by two of America's leading conservative pundits, personalities, and advocates for preserving our democratic culture and the liberties that have long been attributed to it. The following is a video from Glenn Beck in which he declares that the United States is becoming worse than Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler:
The similarities are eerie. But it gets worse. Beck warns the American people against the rise of a global caliphate (aka. worldwide rule under Shari'ah -- Islamic law) in a seven part series dated February 1, 2012 according to YouTube:
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 1 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 2 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 3 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 4 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 5 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 6 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 7 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 8 of 9.)
(Above: Glenn Beck -- The Rise of the Caliphate, Part 9 of 9.)
Is there any coincidence that President Obama's foreign policy created a paradigm shift in the Middle East by favoring the Islamic Arab States that hate the U.S. and treat as infidels rather than support the vastly-outnumbered Jewish state of Israel? Furthermore, as I wrote in the article "Obama, the Twelfth Imam and Madhi of Islamic Lore: His Jihad on the Christian and Jewish Infidels in America, the West, and Israel," there are, at the very least, cults of leadership and personality enveloped within this man, who has been declared by the Egyptian independent news agency Al-Masry Al-Youm in June 2009 as "Obama the Awaited, drawing parallels to the Mahdi, who in Muslim culture is believed will appear before the end of time as a saviour, like the second coming of Christ." (Courtesy of Agence France Presse) This perception was confirmed in Forbes in a commentary by Amir Taheri in his assessment of what the 2008 election of Obama would mean to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
Also, there is compelling evidence by former Islamic PLO terrorist and Christian convert Walid Shoebat in his book God's War on Terror: Islam, Prophecy and the Bible. The author, who is unnamed, summarizes the book meticulously on his blog, Even at the Doors Blog:Commentary
Obama and Ahmadinejad
Amir Taheri, 10.26.08, 01:33 PM EST
Iran's president and mullahs are rooting for the Democrats.
Is Barack Obama the "promised warrior" coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam.According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us."In a curious coincidence Obama's first and second names--Barack Hussein--mean "the blessing of Hussein" in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means "he is with us," the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition.Mystical reasons aside, the Khomeinist establishment sees Obama's rise as another sign of the West's decline and the triumph of Islam. Obama's promise to seek unconditional talks with the Islamic Republic is cited as a sign that the U.S. is ready to admit defeat. Obama's position could mean abandoning three resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council setting conditions that Iran should meet to avoid sanctions. Seeking unconditional talks with the Khomeinists also means an admission of moral equivalence between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic. It would imply an end to the description by the U.S. of the regime as a "systematic violator of human rights."Obama has abandoned claims by all U.S. administrations in the past 30 years that Iran is "a state sponsor of terrorism." Instead, he uses the term "violent groups" to describe Iran-financed outfits such as Hamas and Hezbollah.Obama has also promised to attend a summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference within the first 100 days of his presidency. Such a move would please the mullahs, who have always demanded that Islam be treated differently, and that Muslim nations act as a bloc in dealings with Infidel nations.Obama's election would boost President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's chances of winning a second term next June. Ahmadinejad's entourage claim that his "steadfastness in resisting the American Great Satan" was a factor in helping Obama defeat "hardliners" such as Hillary Clinton and, later, it hopes, John McCain.
Islam and End-Times Prophecy
(February 22, 2010) Is Islam going to be the one-world religion spoken of in End-Times prophecy? Is the Mahdi or Guided One (an Islamic messianic figure) the Antichrist? Is the Mark of the Beast a badge of submission to Allah? Is Jesus Christ returning to earth to wage war against the Islamic nations who treated the Jews harshly? Walid Shoebat thinks so.
(Does this image contain the Mark of the Beast to be placed on the arms and heads of the Antichrist's followers?)
Walid Shoebat declares that most prophecy students are incorrect in their interpretation of many End-Times prophecies. He believes that Western cultural influences have led to a misunderstanding of the Eastern culturally written Bible. He says that he is a former Muslim terrorist born in Bethlehem who converted to Christianity after reading the Bible in order to convince his Christian wife that her beliefs were in error. He also states that he lived in Jericho during the 1967 Six Day War. He wrote a unique and quite illuminating book on End-Times prophecy titled God’s War on Terror: Islam, Prophecy and the Bible. I have read this book and I believe it makes many compelling points. The following article is a synopsis of his book and quotes extensively from it. I would recommend any student of biblical prophecy read it for themselves. I will put the relevant page numbers from his book in parentheses throughout the article.
Also, when I quote directly from Mr. Shoebat’s book I will enclose the quote in black quotation marks using an italicized font. Inside the quotation marks all emphasis, spelling, brackets, parentheses, grammar, and punctuation will be reproduced exactly as it is printed in his book. I will not make any comments or notations inside of his quotation marks. The only exception to this is that quotations he uses from the Bible will be in red.
Eastern perspective on prophecy
Mr. Shoebat states that his upbringing in the Middle East and Israel in particular as a former Muslim gives him a different insight into understanding the Bible than his Western counterparts (p.23). He rejects the idea that Islam is a peaceful religion and believes that Western commentators are ignorant and politically correct on this subject. Islam creates Fatwas (legal rulings) against its critics, threatens global stability, infiltrates the West using its oil wealth, and attempts to change laws of non-Islamic countries. He points out that Islam persecutes Christians and Jews and is dominant in lands formerly part of every Biblical empire: Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and much of the Roman Empire (p.26). He asked the following question to a gathering of prophecy authors, “Besides the argument of whether Magog is Russia or not, can you name any literal references in the Bible to a nation that God destroys in the end-times that is not Muslim?” He states that no one has given him a valid response to this question. It is because every biblical portrayal of Christ’s return shows Him fighting against a nation that is currently Muslim. How have Western analysts missed this? As he read the Bible he became increasingly aware of this fact and gave some examples such as God pouring out His wrath on Teman (Arabia), Cushan (Sudan), and Midian (Somalia) in Habakkuk ch. 3 and on Egypt with its idols in Isaiah ch. 19. Mr. Shoebat declares that when He read Isaiah 10:33-34 in 1993 he knew that Hezbollah would take over Lebanon. From his Muslim upbringing he knew that Allah would never come down to earth and that Allah hated the Jews. However, when he read the Bible he realized Jesus would return to earth and fight for His Jewish people and the Temple Mount: “so shall the LORD of hosts come down to fight for mount Zion, and for the hill thereof.” (Isaiah 31:4). Jesus will return to earth to judge nations specifically on how they treated the Jewish people, “I will enter into judgment with them there, on account of My people and My heritage Israel, because they have scattered them among the nations, and have divided up My land.” (Joel 3:2). This led him to the conclusion that this is what Hamas and the Palestinian Authority were doing in Israel today. As he read through the Bible Mr. Shoebat could see God’s plan unfolding through the religion of Islam while the West kept ignoring the dangers of Islam (p.29-32).
Mr. Shoebat critiques Islam
Before laying out his belief that God will war against Islam in the End-Times, he writes concerning Islam and Muslims in the first section of his book. He gives an example by quoting Joel 3:4, “Now what have you against me, O Tyre and Sidon [Lebanon] and all you regions of Philistia [Gaza]? Are you repaying me for something I have done? If you are paying Me back, I will swiftly and speedily return on your own heads what you have done.” He says it is as though “Jesus himself is speaking directly to Hezbollah and Hamas”. “Their fight against Israel is in reality a declaration of war on the King himself.” (p.32)
Mr. Shoebat says that as a Muslim he “wanted to destroy Christianity, America and every Jew”. However, it was through reading his enemies’ book, the Bible, which saved him. It was not“land concessions for peace, tolerance, interfaith dialogues, better jobs, secularism, or education”. He couldn’t understand why Jehovah defended Israel in the Bible or why everything “Allah loved, Jehovah hated, and whatever Jehovah loved, Allah hated.” What disturbed him most was that Israel always won. He makes the point that Muslims have an unhealthy fear of Allah because of the threats they read throughout the Qur’an and that even the terrorists are terrorized by the Qur’an! (p.37)
He states that Satan is intent on destroying Israel and thereby preventing Jesus’ Messianic Kingdom from occurring. He refers to Allah as “Satan in disguise” and that the Devil uses bits of prophecy for his own agenda. He gives an example from Revelation 16:9, “And men were scorched with great heat, and they blasphemed the name of God who has power over these plagues; and they did not repent and give Him glory.” How could people experience this scorching heat and still blaspheme God? Most Western commentators think that it is because of mans’ stubbornness and rebelliousness. That is true but it is mainly that“these peoples will be clinging to the satanic Allah, thinking that he is God and begging him for mercy, when instead they should be begging Jehovah, the One True and only God.” Reasoning further, he says that Muslims continue to be defeated by the little nation of Israel yet they keep pleading even harder to Allah rather than praying to Jehovah and asking for forgiveness. He states that Islam is a “barrel of contradictions” and that many Muslims will deny the Holocaust while seeking a new holocaust against the Jews. (p.41-42)
Mr. Shoebat points out that Muslims are ignorant to the fact that their Jihad eschatology fulfills Biblical prophecy and that Christians too are ignorant because they don’t see Islam’s role in these same prophecies. Not only does he reject the Muslim belief that Jews and Christians corrupted the Bible but it is the Muslims themselves who have corrupted it. They took portions of the Bible and created their own Bible, the Qur’an, and claim it is the final Word of God.“Like their god, the accuser, the corruptors accuse the virtuous of corruption, the murderers accuse the innocent of murder, the haters accuse the righteous of hate, the warmongers accuse the peaceful of war, the lovers of death accuse those who love life of cowardice, while cowards who promote instant death are given the title of the brave. Murderers are martyrs, their funerals are weddings, and their victims are criminals unworthy of even a funeral. Their heaven is debauchery and their earth is a hell devoid of even the most innocent music or wedding dance. Everything is turned upside down.“ (p.44)
The Mahdi, Islamic writings, and the Muslim Jesus
In the next section of his book Mr. Shoebat compares biblical prophecies concerning the Antichrist with Islamic writings about the Mahdi who is to come and set up a Caliphate (a governing Islamic political entity). He begins by saying, “You can’t imagine how I felt when I read the Bible and found so much that describes the Mahdi who I had learned so much about growing up. The shock to me was that, while a character identical to my Mahdi was seen throughout the pages of the Bible, this character was not called “the Mahdi”, but rather “the Antichrist.” Were the prophets of the Bible Islamaphobes? After all, the Mahdi to us Sunni Muslims was “The rightly-guided and awaited One.” Shi’a Muslims refer to him as Sahib Al-Zaman “The Lord of the Age.” This is exactly what the Bible calls Satan: “The lord of the age” (II Corinthians 4:4).” Then laying a foundation for the comparisons he is about to make he explains Islamic writings: “Briefly, the Hadith or Sunna are the records of both the words and the deeds of the “prophet” Mohammed. In other words, the Qur’an is “thus says Allah” and the hadiths are “thus says Mohammed.” He then defines a Caliph as the “supreme political, military, and administrative leader of all Muslims worldwide.” He declares there is an effort in the Muslim world with the mandate to have both seats of the Mahdi and Caliph in one: “Mohammed said “There would be a caliph in the last period of my Ummah…He would be Imam Mahdi.”Lastly, Mr. Shoebat talks about the Muslim Jesus. He calls him the“second most important Muslim end-time character” whose name is Isa-Almaseeh or the Muslim Jesus. He states that the Jesus of Islam is different from the historical and biblical Jesus. The Muslim Jesus is merely a prophet sent by Allah and is not a savior/redeemer. Nor will he restore the land of Israel to the Jews. He won’t save his followers from the ongoing persecution of the Antichrist. “In Islam, Jesus comes back as a radical Muslim to lead the Muslim armies, to abolish Christianity and to slaughter the Jews.” (p.52-54)
The Mahdi vs. the Antichrist
Mr. Shoebat makes forty-three comparisons between the Mahdi and the Antichrist. In this section of his book he uses the formulaic chapter headings “Both …” I will highlight a few of them:
Both Kingdoms Suffer a “Head Wound”
Revelation 13:2-3 says the beast suffers a head wound. Mr. Shoebat says the beast or the Antichrist’s empire ended with the Ottoman Empire’s demise and the end of the Caliphate on March 3, 1924. He likens the end of the Caliphate with the feeling Catholics would experience if the office of the pope was abolished. Today however, Muslims worldwide are calling for the reinstitution of the Caliphate. The Mahdi will answer their call. (p.81-82)
Both Work False Miracles
II Thessalonians 2:8-9 says the Antichrist will be in accord with Satan working false wonders and miracles. Mr. Shoebat says the Mahdi will also perform false miracles, “Islamic tradition even confirms this: “Allah will give him power over the wind and the rain, and the earth will bring forth its foliage. He will give away wealth profusely, flocks will be in abundance, and the Ummah [Empire of Islam] will be large and honored…” (p.83)
Both Ride A White Horse
In Revelation 19:11 Jesus rides a white horse at His second coming. Revelation 6:1-2 speaks of a different rider on a white horse who goes out to conquer and famines, plagues, death, persecution, martyrdom of God’s people, a great earthquake, and the wrath of God follow after him. Mr. Shoebat says that an early transcription of the prophet Mohammed’s Hadith confirms that the Imam Mahdi is the rider on the white horse in Revelation chapter 6. He quotes Egyptian authors who wrote, “It is clear that this man is the Mahdi who will ride the white horse and judge by the Qur’an (with justice) and with whom will be men with marks of prostration on their foreheads. Mr. Shoebat concludes, “Our Antichrist is their Messiah–Muslim scholars open the Bible, read about the Antichrist, and see their Savior. This must be quite ironic, if not entirely prophetic. Now you are beginning to see what I was faced with when I began to study the Bible, the True Word of the Almighty God.“ (p.84)
Both Attempt to Change The Law
Daniel 7:25 declares, “He [Antichrist] will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws.” Mr. Shoebat says the Antichrist will try to change the times or accepted world calendar and legal systems and constitutions. “He will attempt to invoke Islam’s evil laws worldwide to replace every other law and constitution.” He states that the Mahdi will institute Shari’a Law as much as he can. However, he says that like Nimrod’s unsuccessful attempt to set up a global government with the Tower of Babel, so too God will not allow the Antichrist/Mahdi to set up a one-world government. He believes that Western prophecy students misunderstand when it comes to the Antichrist setting up a global government. Only Jesus Christ will rule over the world when He sets up His kingdom in Jerusalem. As far as changing the calendar he points out that where Islam rules, the Islamic calendar based on Mohammed’s conquest of Medina in Saudi Arabia is in effect. According to him, Isa, the Muslim Jesus, will be in charge of overseeing the changing of the times and laws.
Both Practice Beheadings
Revelation 20:4 says, “And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God.” Mr. Shoebat relates the long history of Islamic beheadings beginning with Mohammed’s sanctioning of the decapitation of one of his enemies. He also tells of the hundreds of beheadings for crimes, alleged or true, that take place in modern Islamic countries. (p.162-165)
Both Occupy The Temple Mount
Matthew 24:15 says, “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand.” II Thessalonians 2:4 says, “He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.” Mr. Shoebat quotes from an Ayatollah’s book on the Imam Mahdi, “Armies carrying black flags will come from Khurasan. No power will be able to stop them and they will finally reach Eela (Baitul Maqdas in Jerusalem) where they will erect their flags.” He says Baitul Maqdas means the holy house and refers to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. He asks could placing flags with the slogan “There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his Messenger” in the Temple be the Abomination of Desolation? Or possibly that a Black Stone image be set on the Holy of Holies? He quotes other Islamic authors who state that the Mahdi will rule from Jerusalem in a rightly-guided caliphate. (p.174)
Both Enjoy Desecrating Bodies
Revelation 11 tells of God’s Two Witnesses who will preach in Jerusalem during the reign of the Antichrist. He will be unable to harm them until their ministry is finished. Revelation 11:7-12 declares,“7 Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them. 8 Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. 9 For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. 10 The inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and will celebrate by sending each other gifts, because these two prophets had tormented those who live on the earth. 11 Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here.” And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them.” Mr. Shoebat gives examples such as the Somalian people dragging dead soldiers through the streets and charred bodies of Americans hung in Iraq. The purpose is to shame the dead and deter others from committing similar acts. He says it is also a “sick celebration of victory”. As far as the gift-giving in Revelation 11, He points out the celebrations that occurred after the September 11, 2001 attack in America. There was dancing in the streets in Arab countries and children were given candy in Palestine.
Jesus Christ will return to wage war against the Muslims
At the beginning of his book Walid Shoebat declares “In every portrayal of Christ’s return to the earth, He is fighting a nation that today is Muslim.” (p.30) In part three of the book he lays out the scriptural evidence for this assertion. He quotes Habbakuk 3:3-4 to illustrate that Jesus comes in person and is found returning from fighting in the land of Teman in Arabia: “3 God came from Teman, the Holy One from Mount Paran. His glory covered the heavens and his praise filled the earth. 4 His splendor was like the sunrise; rays flashed from his hand, where his power was hidden.”He then begins his presentation with a messianic prophecy: “17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel. He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the sons of Sheth. 18 Edom will be conquered; Seir, his enemy, will be conquered, but Israel will grow strong. 19 A ruler will come out of Jacob and destroy the survivors of the city.” (Numbers 24:17-19) He notes that when Jesus returns He will take His scepter and destroy the countries listed here which today comprise the area from Yemen to Arabia. He then writes about the various Muslim countries that Jesus will inflict His vengeance on when He returns. (p.185-187)
Saudi Arabia and Yemen
Mr. Shoebat quotes what he calls “a most amazing prophecy, Isaiah 63:1-4, “1 Who is this coming from Edom, from Bozrah, with his garments stained crimson? Who is this, robed in splendor, striding forward in the greatness of his strength? “It is I, speaking in righteousness, mighty to save. 2 Why are your garments red, like those of one treading the winepress? I have trodden the winepress alone; from the nations no one was with me. I trampled them in my anger and trod them down in my wrath; their blood spattered my garments, and I stained all my clothing. 4 For the day of vengeance was in my heart, and the year of my redemption has come.” He relates Ezekiel 25:12-13 to this passage in Isaiah, “12 Thus says the Lord GOD; Because that Edom hath dealt against the house of Judah by taking vengeance, and hath greatly offended, and revenged himself upon them; 13 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD; I will also stretch out mine hand upon Edom, and will cut off man and beast from it; and I will make it desolate from Teman; and they of Dedan shall fall by the sword.” Teman is Yemen and Dedan is an ancient city in Saudi Arabia. Jesus will destroy the area from the Red Sea into central Arabia. (p.187-188)
Egypt and Lebanon
“See, Jehovah rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt. The idols of Egypt tremble before him, and the hearts of the Egyptians melt within them.” (Isaiah 19:1) Isaiah 11:14-15 declares, “14 But they shall fly down upon the shoulder of the Philistines toward the west; Together they shall plunder the people of the East; They shall lay their hand on Edom and Moab; And the people of Ammon shall obey them. 15 The LORD will utterly destroy the tongue of the Sea of Egypt; With His mighty wind He will shake His fist over the River, And strike it in the seven streams.” Mr. Shoebat states that the Nile River empties into the Mediterranean Sea by seven streams. These passages indicate that Egypt will be largely destroyed. Isaiah 10:34 states, “Lebanon will fall by the Mighty One”. He says though some may say “The Mighty One” is God the Father in heaven and not the Messiah on earth, Isaiah 19:20 is clearly speaking of the Messiah, “He will send them a Savior and a Mighty One, and He will deliver them.” He declares this judgment against Lebanon is also a judgment against the Antichrist, “O My people, who dwell in Zion, do not be afraid of the Assyrian. He shall strike you with a rod and lift up his staff against you, in the manner of Egypt. 25 For yet a very little while and the indignation will cease, as will My anger in their destruction.” (Isaiah 10:24-25) The Antichrist will be responsible for the destruction of Lebanon,“For the violence done to Lebanon will cover you, And the plunder of beasts which made them afraid, Because of men’s blood And the violence of the land and the city, And of all who dwell in it.”(Habakkuk 2:17} Mr. Shoebat states that “God will punish Islam for what they have done in Lebanon with rape and pillage of Christians in that nation.” (p.188-189)
Why did the West miss this?
How come Western prophecy commentators did not see Islam’s primary role in the End-Times prophetic passages of the Bible? Mr. Shoebat believes it is because most discussion amongst prophecy students focuses on the Book of Revelation and the Book of Daniel. While important, he says that rather than starting with interpreting the visions and imagery of these two books, why not examine the rest of the Bible passages where End-Times prophecy is clear and straightforward. In the next part of his book he does just that.
The Battle for Jerusalem and the Rapture
“1 Blow the trumpet in Zion, And sound an alarm in My holy mountain! Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble; For the day of the LORD is coming, For it is at hand: 2 A day of darkness and gloominess, A day of clouds and thick darkness, Like the morning clouds spread over the mountains. A people come, great and strong, The like of whom has never been; Nor will there ever be any such after them, Even for many successive generations. 3 A fire devours before them, And behind them a flame burns; The land is like the Garden of Eden before them, And behind them a desolate wilderness; Surely nothing shall escape them.” (Joel 2:1-3) Who is this army that devours the land? Mr. Shoebat declares that it is the army of the followers of Jesus Christ who have been Raptured. Concerning the snatching away of the saints he states,“Whether the Rapture takes the believers before the seven years, then prepares them to come down for this battle later, or in the Middle; or we are caught up at the tail end to instantly participate in this, the timing is of no concern to Easterners; I predict that Westerners will wrestle with this issue and with each other until “The Kingdom comes.” To further his point he quotes Psalm 50:3,“A fire shall devour before Him, and it shall be very tempestuous all around Him”; Daniel 7:10, “A fiery stream issued and came before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him”; Isaiah 12:6,“Cry out and shout, O inhabitant of Zion, For great is the Holy One of Israel in your midst!”; and Isaiah 13:3-4, “I have also called My mighty ones for My anger–Those who rejoice in My exaltation. The LORD of hosts musters the army for battle.” He states the “mighty ones” must be the glorified bodies of the saints and they are His army. He quotes Joel 2:11, “The LORD gives voice before His army” and declares this verse covers the Rapture and the War:“Western Christians cannot get a grip over this issue–they will be fighting a war against an Islamic invasion–the battle for Jerusalem.” Concerning Jerusalem and Israel, “…there is a land already in the Tribulation.” He makes it clear that it is not yet the Great Tribulation though. Concerning the West’s squabbling over the timing of the Rapture, “When Muslim Fundamentalists take over a Christian society and begin to behead, they never ask what Rapture position any of their victims hold, neither do they ask their denomination. In the case of Islam we all need to unite.”(p.192-199)
Old Testament prophecies concerning Jesus’ future war against Islam
I am not going to list the various points Walid Shoebat makes in the next part of his book. He begins by illustrating that Isaiah ch. 9 and 14 along with Ezekiel ch. 28 allude to the Antichrist and his connection with Satan. He points out that chapters 13-30 in the Book of Isaiah reference the Muslim nations that God is going to judge. He states that chapters 28-32 in the Book of Ezekiel speak of the Islamic nations that will be cast into Hell. Lastly, he quotes the Psalms, ch. 2, 74, 75, 79-83, 87, and 120 that tell of Jesus Christ fighting against an alliance of these same nations of Islam. (p.226-249)
Rosh, Gog, Magog, Armageddon in Ezekiel 38-39
Western prophecy commentators believe that Rosh, Gog, and Magog in Ezekiel 38:1-9 refers to modern-day Russia. They also think that the alliance of nations that invade Israel in ch. 39 of Ezekiel refers to a battle which occurs before the battle of Armageddon mentioned in ch. 16 and 19 of the Book of Revelation. Mr. Shoebat disputes both of these interpretations. He says the word “Rosh” means head or chief and is etymologically unrelated to the modern word Russia. “So even if Rosh is interpreted as a proper noun, it could point to the Ukraine, Chechnya, or Georgia and possibly even Iran.” All of these countries today are Islamic nations. He quotes Ezekiel 38:2, “the land of Magog, chief prince(head or leader of) of Mesheck and Tubal” and declares that since Meshech and Tubal are regions of Turkey then Magog must also be related to Turkey. Thus Gog is a leader from the region of Turkey.“The error of the Russian theory arose from the Scofield Study Bible, which identifies Mesheck and Tubal with the modern cities of Moscow and Tobolsk. The only basis for this interpretation is the somewhat similar sound of the two words.” (p.250-266)
The battle of Gog in Ezekiel 38 is the same as the battle of Armageddon in the Book of Revelation. Mr. Shoebat says that the description of Israel as pure is the same description of Israel after the battle of Armageddon: “Then they will know that I am the LORD. Son of man, prophesy against Gog and say: This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal…I will make known My holy name among My people Israel. I will no longer let My holy name be profaned, and the nations will know that I the LORD am the Holy One in Israel.”(Ezekiel 38:23-39:1;39:7) Also after this war the Gentile nations will then know God: “And thou [Gog] shall come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in thee, O Gog, before their eyes.” (Ezekiel 38:16) He asks, “How could these be “heathen?” All these nations in Ezekiel 38 are Muslim nations. Why would the Bible call people who claim to believe in Abraham and Jesus as heathen? To me this is one dilemma I had when I read the text as a Muslim, I realized I must be on the wrong side. Worshipping Allah according to the Bible cannot be the same as worshipping Jehovah.” He also notes that Jesus Christ is present in both the battle of Gog and Armageddon: “And all the men that are upon the face of the earth shall shake at my presence” (Ezekiel 38:20) and “And the heathen shall know that I am Jehovah, the Holy One in Israel.” (Ezekiel 39:7) Here Jesus is in Israel while other passages refer to the Holy One of Israel. “The “in” is crucial. It’s like DNA evidence in a court of law. No serious Bible student can doubt the fact that this event is anything other than the Messiah fighting the Antichrist.” He also points out another parallel between Gog of Ezekiel and the Antichrist at Armageddon in Revelation:“Son of man, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: Call out to every kind of bird and all the wild animals: Assemble and come together from all around to the sacrifice I am preparing for you, the great sacrifice on the mountains of Israel. There you will eat flesh and drink blood. 18 You will eat the flesh of mighty men and drink the blood of the princes of the earth… At my table you will eat your fill of horses and riders, mighty men and soldiers of every kind, declares Jehovah the Sovereign.” (Ezekiel 39:17-20) “17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great.” (Revelation 19:17-18) He concludes this section by making other comparisons between the descriptions of the destructions and plagues which occur at both battles. (p.267-274)
Western Misconceptions
Mr. Shoebat discusses how the West has tried to insert Europe and the rest of the world into End-Times prophecy when there is no biblical basis for doing so.
Prophecy in Middle Eastern context
Every nation will not be utterly dominated by the Antichrist. Phrases such as “all the nations of the earth” in Zechariah 12:1-3 and “will gather all nations to Jerusalem to fight against it” in Zechariah 14 refer to the Islamic nations surrounding Israel. He states that “using hyperbole is extremely common in eastern culture.” There are many times the Bible uses all-inclusive phrases when it was impossible that they pertained to countries in the Pacific and elsewhere. Thus the battle of Armageddon will occur between Jesus and His army and the Muslim armies. Tarshish and Cush of Ezekiel 38 probably refer to Turkey and Sudan respectively, not Europe and modern Ethiopia. The kings of the east of Revelation 16 could refer to the former nations of Babylonia and Persia and not China. The wise men who came from the eastare believed to have originated in these regions. Mr. Shoebat declares that Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Indonesia could field a 200 million soldier army. He relates that reformer Martin Luther and Sir Isaac Newton concluded that Muslim warriors from the previous fourteen centuries were a fulfillment of this prophecy as they conquered formerly Christian nations. (p.282-287)
Unlocking prophecy symbolism
Mountains – Eastern symbolism has a different meaning than the ones the West ascribes to them. Mountains refer to kingdoms or governments such as the one describing Jesus’ future reign over the world: “And it shall come to pass in the Last-Days that the mountain of the LORD’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains.” (Isaiah 2:2-4) Many westerners are waiting for the Catholic Church to rise to world power because Rome sits on theseven hills (mountains) of prophecy. Mr. Shoebat quotes Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as using his eastern understanding when he declared in a speech, “Do not doubt, Allah will prevail, and Islam will conquer mountain tops of the entire world.” God speaks against the Babylonian Empire in Jeremiah 51:25, “Behold, I am against thee, O destroying mountain, saith the LORD, which destroyest all the earth: and I will stretch out mine hand upon thee, and roll thee down from the rocks, and will make thee a burnt mountain.” Jesus refers to governments and kingdoms as opposed to literal mountains, “If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.” (Matthew 17:20)
Waters – Waters are mixed ethnic groups. Revelation 17:15 illustrates this, “The waters which thou saw, where the whore sits, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.” He quotes Isaiah 43:2, “When you pass through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire (war), you shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon you.” Mr. Shoebat interprets this as saying when the Israelites pass through the waters or face the people against you, you will prevail.
A Head is a Kingdom – Revelation 17:9-10 states, “The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. 10 They are also seven kings.” Mr. Shoebat states, “A kingdom is obviously ruled by a king: “They are also seven kings.” One cannot have a kingdom without a king. “One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed,” (Revelation 13:3). One of the kingdoms is destroyed but come back to life. One cannot isolate the kingdom from the king. The death of the head is the ending of the kingdom.”
Woman is a spiritual entity with a literal kingdom and capital –“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Revelation 12:17) “This is the kingdom of Israel with its capital, Jerusalem.” A harlot represents a false religion.
Beasts are Empires led by kings – Mr. Shoebat says that many consider the beast of Revelation to be a man but that scripture doesn’t necessarily refer to a single entity as a single being. The wife of Jesus Christ refers to the entire church. Just as the briderepresents many nations so too the beast represents a nation or an empire. He says that every mention of a beast in Daniel ch.7 refers to an empire and horns to kings or rulers. Accordingly, a beast always represents a group of people who follow a false religion and a false ruler or horn. He states that when the beast and false prophet are taken it means that the empire and its leader are removed. Therefore, Muslims are waiting for the Mahdi to follow in the footsteps of his predecessor Mohammed and thus “we see the beast of Revelation 13:3 waiting and determined to follow the previous beast whose “deadly wound was healed.”
A Name is a Declaration of Faith – A Creed – Emanuel means God with us and Isaiah ch. 9 gives the attributes of the Messiah. “No one accepts the names of the true God except the ones who believe in his attributes–that Messiah is Almighty God and the God with us.”“Names in the east always regard the creed, attributes, descriptions and the titles of the person they signify. Therefore, the name of the beast in Revelation 13 puts in God’s place someone other than His Son. The harlot of Revelation has names or creeds of blasphemy on her forehead as do the followers of Antichrist. Muslims today have a creed of blasphemy on their foreheads and hands.
Fish are followers – Jesus refers to potential followers to be drawn out of the waters of nations.
A Stone or Rock is the Messiah – Daniel 2 refers to the stone or Messiah striking the feet made of iron and clay on the symbolic statue. Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone which the builders rejected.
Trees and Birds are fallen angels – “3 Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs. 4 The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent her little rivers unto all the trees of the field.” (Ezekiel 31:3-4) Mr. Shoebat declares that the Assyrian is Satan and that nations made him great and they streamed to worship him and be ambassadors for him.
Stars are angels – In Revelation 12 the dragon of Satan takes a third of the angels with him.
Dragon is Satan – “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called “the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” (Revelation 12:9) “I am against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers.” (Ezekiel 29:3) These verses refer to Satan dwelling in the Antichrist. (p.288-295)
Unlocking Prophetic Allegories
Revelation 17
“9 This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. 10 They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for a little while. 11 The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction.” (Revelation 17:9-11) Mr. Shoebat says that Westerners are misguided in ascribing the seven hills to the seven hills on which the city of Rome sits. This prophecy does not relate to the Vatican or Catholicism. The seven hills or literally mountains refer to seven empires. There will be an eighth empire over which the Antichrist will rule. There have been seven “Beast” empires so far; five before John wrote the Book of Revelation: Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, and Greek. The sixth was the Roman Empire during which John lived or as the angel said, “one is”. The seventh Empire will be fatally wounded and then resurrected under the reign of the Antichrist. If the seventh empire is the revived Roman Empire (meaning Euro-centric in Western interpretations) then that means that the sixth, seventh, and eighth empires are going to be Roman. Not only does that seem illogical but all the previous empires were Middle Eastern-centric and included Jerusalem in their domain. Also, each of the first five empires was defeated by the succeeding empire. Mr. Shoebat asks who took control from the Roman Empire. (p.299-308)
Jerusalem fell to Islam in 637 A.D. This was the beginning of the Islamic Empire which culminated with the Ottoman Empire and lasted thirteen centuries before its fall in 1924. Thus, the seventh empire was Islamic and according to Mr. Shoebat will be revived under the Mahdi/Antichrist and fulfill the prophetic eighth empire. He points out that the Turkish Ottoman Empire falls in line with Ezekiel’s prophecies that focus on the role of Turkey in the last days. (p.309-315)
Daniel 2 and 7
Mr. Shoebat continues the allegorical interpretations from the Book of Daniel which include Nebuchadnezzar’s dream statue, the “Empires” beasts, and the leaders/horns visions. I will not go into detail but he concludes that all these visions point to a Muslim Antichrist ruling over the fourth and final world empire, the Islamic Empire. He does agree with his Western counterparts that the Antichrist will make a peace treaty, rebuild the Jewish Temple and fight wars in and around is Israel during the end times. (p.319-346)
Daniel 9
“Know therefore and understand, That from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; The street shall be built again, and the wall, Even in troublesome times. 26 And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.” (Daniel 9:25-27) This is one of the major prophetic passages that Westerners use to declare that the Antichrist will come out of a revived Roman Empire which would encompass Europe. This prophecy has two fulfillments. Jesus fulfilled the first sixty nine weeks of the prophecy with His first coming. The seventieth week is yet to occur although a type of it was fulfilled in 70 A.D. when the Roman General Titus and his armies destroyed the Jewish Temple after besieging Jerusalem. Since it was a Roman army Westerners believe that the Antichrist will lead a European alliance of armies in an invasion of Israel and enter into the Third Jewish Temple to declare himself God. Mr. Shoebat states that the prince in this prophecy cannot be the Roman General Titus since he did not confirm a peace covenant for seven years? Nor did he set up an abomination of desolation in the Temple. Therefore the title prince refers to the future Antichrist. He also points out that the makeup of the Roman army which destroyed Jerusalem consisted of primarily Middle Eastern soldiers: Arabians, Syrians and Turks. He quotes First Century historians who confirm that this army was drawn from the indigenous people of that region. Thus, a Muslim Antichrist will lead Muslim armies in the future invasion of Israel. (p.347-354)
Unlocking the Mark of the Beast
“16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.”(Revelation 13:16-18) From an Eastern perspective, Mr. Shoebat believes his theory on the mark of the beast is more plausible than Western ideas such as a microchip implant or some kind of UPC code tattoo.
The Name of the Beast
In the Bible names can refer to a person’s nature, character, and mission. Jesus is prophetically called Immanuel (which means God with us) or King of kings or Word of God yet His name was Jesus or Yeshua in Hebrew. Likewise, the name of the beast or Antichrist is not the literal name of a political figure. Rather, it is a creed or declaration of faith about the nature, character, or mission of the Antichrist. Revelation 13:1 states, “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.” This verse declares that the name of the beast or Antichrist is “blasphemy”. Mr. Shoebat defines the biblical meaning of this term: “Blasphemy is an anti-Yahweh or anti-Christ word or deed–to claim the attributes of God, claim to be Messiah, deny the Holy Spirit, deny the trinity, the cross, or even denying God’s edicts and declarations–all are blasphemy. Satan blasphemed when he said, “I will be like the Most High,” (Is. 14:14). Satan has always desired to be like God.” Thus the name of the beast or Antichrist will contain a credal aspect to it that will be anti-Yahweh and anti-Christ and will exalt another one over God.
The Shahadatan is the Islamic creed which declares, “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is The One sent by Allah [The Messenger of Allah].” This creed alone fulfills the blasphemy requirements by stating there is another God other than Jehovah and that Muhammad supercedes the place of Jesus the Messiah. Mr. Shoebat says, “the Mark, the Name, the Number, and the Image of the Beast–are indicators of allegiance and submission to Beast [sic].” “In the simplest of terms, the Mark of the Beast is essentially the emblem, the symbol, or the identifying mark of the coming Beast kingdom. By donning this mark, people will identify with the Kingdom of the Beast and the values and beliefs that this kingdom represents.” (p.363-366)
The Number of the Beast
“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” (Revelation 13:18) A common interpretation of the number 666 usually involves Gematria, “a mystical form of numerology that assigns a numerical value to each letter from any given name. After the sum total of all of the letters is added up, the final result is the number of that individual’s name.” One major problem with this method of interpretation is which alphabet does one use in determining the name of the Antichrist? The biblical Hebrew, the biblical Greek, Latin, English? Mr. Shoebat states that if there is a Gematria interpretation for the number 666 it must correlate with the Name of the Beast which is the anti-Yahweh and anti-Christ creed of blasphemy.
After examining the Codex Vaticanus Greek Text of Revelation, Mr. Shoebat says that he noticed the Greek letters Chi, Xi, Stigma, which formed the 666 of Revelation 13:18, resembled “the most common creed of Islam Bismillah (or Basmalah), written in Arabic. Bismillah literally means “In the Name of Allah,”
and is followed by the symbol of crossed swords, which is used universally throughout the Muslim world to signify Islam.” He says that only the first two words Bismi (Name of) and llah (Allah) are necessary to constitute the Basmalah. The similarities between the two sets of letters/words led him to the conclusion that it was possible that John, to whom God revealed the visions of Revelation, saw the Arabic writing and recorded them with their Greek letter counterparts. This would fulfill the requirement that the number 666 also depict the Name of Blasphemy or as he pointed out, the Name of Allah. [Note: Others have stated that Codex Vaticanus does not contain an original copy of the Book of Revelation but that Mr. Shoebat may have looked at some other ancient manuscript] (p.367-374)
The Mark of the Beast
The Greek word charagma translated as mark in Revelation 13:16-18 means “a stamp, an imprinted mark”. Mr. Shoebat says that in John’s time charagma was reserved for slaves in what was called“a badge of servitude”. He states Muslims are called slaves of Allah and wear headbands and badges with Islamic mottos, creeds, words, and symbols written on them. These express their subservience and allegiance to Allah and his prophet Muhammad. He relates that when he read these passages in Revelation chapter 13 about a mark on the forehead and hand, he noticed they mirrored the Muslims custom of putting badges on their foreheads and arms. They do this in response to a Qur’anic verse, “And when the word is fulfilled concerning them, We shall bring forth a beast of the earth to speak unto them because mankind had not faith in Our revelations.” In the Bible the Beast is evil but in the Qur’an the Beast has a “holy mission to revive Islam and mark the foreheads of all true Muslim believers.” (p.375-379)
The Image of the Beast
“14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. 15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” (Revelation 13:14-15) Some Westerners thinks this means that there will be an animated statue of the Antichrist. Mr. Shoebat gives some possible biblical definitions for the image of Revelation 13. Judaism had a Temple with many articles placed inside such as the Ark of the Covenant and the Menorah: “For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or an image.” (Hosea 3:4) Islam too has a Temple for Allah (the Ka’ba) along with Temple articles (the Black Stone). Just as the Jewish Temple articles foreshadowed the coming of God’s Messiah so too Islam’s Temple foreshadows the coming of Satan’s Antichrist. The image could be a national emblem such as a flag of the revived Islamic Empire and caliphate. It could be an idol such as the statue of King Nebuchadnezzar or the meteorite that Paul said was located in the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus or the Black Stone Ka’ba in Mecca. Indeed, the image might be a likeness of the Antichrist.
Muslims believe and teach that when the Islamic Jesus returns he will abolish Christianity and Judaism. He will destroy all the cross symbols since Islam declares that he was never crucified. In reality, Jesus will return and destroy the images of Islam. Mr. Shoebat quotes Psalms 82 and 83, which he says speaks of a war between the Messiah and the Antichrist, and compares them with Judges 8:21,26: “Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna.” (Psalm 83:11) “So Zebah and Zalmunna said, “Rise yourself, and kill us; for as a man is, so is his strength.” So Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the crescent ornaments that were on their camels’ necks…Now the weight of the gold earrings that he requested was one thousand seven hundred shekels of gold, besides the crescent ornaments, pendants, and purple robes which were on the kings of Midian, and besides the chains that were around their camels’ necks.” (Judges 8:21,26) He states that just as David was a typeof the King Messiah and Joseph a type of the Suffering Messiah, so too is Gideon a type of the Warrior Messiah who will abolish Islam and tear down the Islamic symbols from the high places (the minarets).
The Hebrew word saharon translated as ornaments in Judges 8:21 means crescent, moon and comes from the root word sahar which is the word used for the name of Satan in Isaiah
(Above: Turkey's national flag. Courtesy of Wikipedia.)
14: Hilal ben Sahar. The King James Bible translates Hilal as Lucifer and the full phrase means morning star/crescent moon. The crescent moon and star are Islamic symbols and according to Mr. Shoebat this means that “Islam and the name of Satan are one and the same.” The image of the crescent moon and star are prevalent throughout the Islamic world and may possibly reflect the image of the Antichrist/Mahdi. (p.380-387)
The Ka’ba (Kaaba) or The Black Stone
"Both Antichrist’s followers and Muslims bow to an image. The great idol of Islam, the Black-Stone and its veneration has been around from time immemorial.” “Everyone knows that Ephesus is the official guardian of the temple of the great Artemis, whose image fell down to us from heaven?” (Acts 19:35) Mr. Shoebat says that “the image of Artemis is similar to the meteorite stone image in Mecca which Allah commands 1.3 billion Muslims to literally bow down and prostrate themselves toward at least seventeen times during their five daily prayers.” He makes a connection between the meteorite that is located at the Kaaba and Lucifer’s image depicted in Revelation ch. 8 and 9: “And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.”(Revelation 9:1) “And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood…And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters.” (Revelation 8:8,10) The great star is Satan, the mountain is an empire, and the rivers and waters are the people of the earth. Satan, the fallen star, and the revival of the Islamic Empire will cause one-third of mankind to dies.
“The Black Stone of Mecca owes its reputation to the tradition that it fell from the “heavens”.” Mr. Shoebat declares that the Black Stone of Mecca is “clearly an “image” of Satan”. According to authenticated Islamic tradition Muhammad said the following concerning the animation of the image in Revelation 13:15, “Allah will raise up the stone [the Black Stone] on the Day of Judgment, and it will have two-eyes with which it will see and a tongue which it talks with, and it will give witness in favor of everyone who touched it in truth.” One Islamic author noted that many years ago the Black Stone was, “whiter than milk; it was only later that it became black as it absorbed the sins of those who touched it.”During the Hajj or pilgrimage to the Kaaba, Muslims circle the Black Stone in a counterclockwise movement and are thereby cleansed of their sins. Mr. Shoebat says there is a prophecy that is rarely understood by Western analysts yet alludes to the Islamic Hajj: “3 Behold, the Assyrian (the Antichrist, Satan in the flesh) was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs. 4 The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent her little rivers unto all the trees of the field.” (Ezekiel 31:3-4) He says that applying the key of interpreting symbols leads to the following interpretation: “Behold, Satan, a beautiful angel clothed in beautiful covering, an angel with high status. Peoples and multitudes from every nation made him great, and the underworld set him up high with the multitudes running round about his idol and sent out all the people to all the idols that were set for him.” He points out that the phrase “shadowing shroud” in this verse could refer to the black cloth (the Kiswa) which covers the Kaaba. He quotes Jeremiah 51:44, “And I will punish Bel in Babylon, and I will bring forth out of his mouth that which he has swallowed up: and the nations shall not flow together any more unto him: yea, the wall of Babylon shall fall.” No longer will the nations stream to honor Satan and walk around his idol. (p.388-392)
Mystery Babylon, the Mother of Harlots
The next to last section deals with the Harlot or Prostitute John saw and wrote about in Revelation ch. 17:1-6: “1 One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters. 2 With her the kings of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.” 3 Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. 5This title was written on her forehead: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. 6 I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus.” Western prophecy commentators use to focus on Rome and the Catholicism as the fulfillment of the prophetic Harlot. Looking from an Eastern perspective the Harlot is associated with Arabia and Islam.
The Harlot’s connection to Arabia
Isaiah 21:9 states, “And, behold, here cometh a chariot of men, with a couple of horsemen. And he answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen; and all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto the ground.” This verse is related to Revelation 18:2:“And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.” Mr. Shoebat says that passages which are connected to Mystery Babylon in Isaiah 21, Jeremiah, and the Psalms speak of regions and cities in modern Arabia which was part of the Babylonian Empire. He further surmises that Isaiah 21:16 mentions the “glory of Kedar” which could be a reference to Mecca. Also the phrase “desert of the sea” refers to Arabia which is surrounded by the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and the Persian-Arab Sea. Thus Mystery Babylon is speaking of the region of Saudi Arabia. (p.395-399)
The Harlot’s connection to a desert
“Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns.”(Revelation 17:3) Mr. Shoebat makes a connection between the Harlot in the desert and the subject of Jesus’ statement in Matthew 24:26, “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.” He says that the Beast is the governmental aspect of the Antichrist’s empire while the Harlot is the spiritual aspect of it. Some Westerners suggest that Mystery Babylon could be New York, Rome, or America yet none of these sit in a desert. Conversely, Saudi Arabia fits this prophetic scenario perfectly. (p.400)
The Harlot’s connection to Oil
“1 One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters. 2 With her the kings of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.” (Revelation 17:1-20) Mr. Shoebat states, “There are two very important descriptions of the Harlot that stand out: First, she exists geographically in a desert region. And secondly, we see that the “kings of the earth”figuratively commit adultery with her in order to obtain her “wine”in exchange for betraying God’s people. What desert “wine” intoxicates the earth, and causes this desert region to grow rich? What false religion teaches that the blood of Christians and Jews should be shed? What desert nation today is the geographical womb from which this false harlot religion was birthed?” The answers, according to Mr. Shoebat, are oil, Islam, and Saudi Arabia.
He quotes Joel 3:1-3 which mentions the wine and harlot: “1 For behold, in those days and at that time, When I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, 2 I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the valley of Jehoshaphat Then I will enter into judgment with them there on behalf of My people and My inheritance, Israel, Whom they have scattered among the nations; And they have divided up My land. 3 They have also cast lots for My people, traded a boy for a harlot and sold a girl for wine that they may drink.” He declares that most Christians don’t know the main reason Jesus comes to judge the nations is because they“divided up My land” and their treatment of “My People” the Jews. You can see that modern-day politics have resulted in the carving up of the land of Israel in order to create an Arab Palestinian state. Nations will sell out (they “traded a boy for a harlot and sold a girl for wine that they may drink”) Israel “in order to coddle the Harlot and obtain her wine.” He states that the Harlot will use both Islam and oil as her “wine” through which she “seduces the nations of the world into committing spiritual adultery with her and compromising Israel.” (p.401-408)
The Harlot’s connection to a false religion
Mr. Shoebat writes, “The Beast is a coalition of ten kings representing the seven kingdoms in the past, under the authority of the Antichrist. The Harlot is a distinct and separate geographically definable entity that represents the primary religious source of the Antichrist’s religion. The Harlot is sitting atop the Beast.” He restates his belief that the Beast is the revived Islamic Empire and mentions the similarities of the scarlet coverings of both entities and that just as the Beast Empire will behead God’s people so too the Harlot is drunk on the blood of the saints. Furthermore, the phrase “Mother of all Prostitutes and Abominations” is an Eastern way of expressing a superlative such as the biggest, the worst, unmatched, and most significant. In this context he says the purpose of this phrase is “to portray the Great Harlot as the greatest manifestation of spiritual infidelity against the God of the Bible that has ever existed throughout the history of the world.” The mystery of the Harlot’s false religion is that unlike any other pagan religion “it sprouts from a mixture of a heretical Christian cult and a pagan Moon-god religion that has attempted to cloak itself with certain Jewish and Christian elements in order to appear as a Biblical faith and the rightful successor of the Judeo-Christian tradition.” Paul’s letter to the Galatians illustrates this when he writes concerning two covenants: “22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Hagar. 25 For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. 29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.” (Galatians 4:22-31) Some consider Hagar’s son Ishmael the father of Arabs. From him came a religion of bondage (Islam means “submission”) out of “Mount Sinai in Arabia”.
The Prostitute is adorned with costly, royal robes and jewelry. The scarlet color is the “red” sinfulness of her corrupt and murderous religion. Mr. Shoebat asks, “What Islamic desert nation is governed by a Royal Monarchy that is known throughout the earth as being fabulously wealthy and utterly corrupt? What place is decked with gold, silver, and precious stones?” Saudi Arabia.
The Harlot is described as a great city that rules over the kings of the earth. This means that she is a political and geographical entity. This great city is in contrast to the Holy City of Jerusalem where Jesus will reign from. Islam started out with its adherents praying while facing Jerusalem. Now when they pray, Muslims face Mecca where the Kaaba is located. (p.409-412)
Turkey
In the last section of his book Mr. Shoebat makes the case for the nation of Turkey playing a prominent role in the revived Islamic Empire and the rise of the Antichrist.
Seven Scriptural proofs that Turkey is the Antichrist Nation
- Ezekiel ch.38 lists eight locations in the Gog prophecy. Five of them (Magog, Meshech, Tubal, Togarmah, Gomer) are located in Turkey.
- The first Islamic Empire (which culminated with the Turkish Ottoman Empire whose capital was Istanbul, Turkey) is the fatally wounded seventh Biblical Beast Empire of Revelation ch.17.
- Daniel ch.9 declares the people of the prince will invade Jerusalem. The first part of this prophecy was fulfilled when the Roman army led by the Tenth Legion destroyed the second Jewish Temple in 70 A.D. This legion consisted of primarily Turkish and Syrian soldiers.
- Daniel ch.11 prophesies of a “king of the north” as a type of the Antichrist. Antiochus Epiphanes IV ruled the Seleucid Empire which encompassed Turkey. He blasphemously sacrificed a pig on the Jewish Temple altar and was a forerunner of the Antichrist.
- Isaiah and Micah prophesied of The Assyrian who is the Antichrist. Assyria’s domain included a large part of Turkey.
- Zechariah ch.9 lists Yavan/Ionia (Turkey) as playing a role in the Last Days. They are translated with the word “Greece” in this passage but are actually located on the Western coast of Turkey.
- Revelation ch.2 mentions that the throne of Satan is located in Pergamum, Turkey. (p.421-425)
The Antichrist nation must be a mediator
Daniel ch. 9 indicates that the Antichrist will confirm a covenant or peace treaty. Since it also indicates a Jewish Temple will be built in the Last Days it appears that the Antichrist will have political influence in Israel and with the Arabs that may result in some kind of treaty.
Turkey fulfills the mediator role. It is geographically situated between the East and the West. It is culturally situated between Europe and the Middle East. It is politically situated between Israel and the Muslim world. It is politically situated between moderate Islam and radical Islam. Turkey has been an ally of Israel and the United States and has reached out to Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries in the region. Turkey has mediated and offered to mediate various issues between Muslims countries and involved itself in the Hamas/Israel and Hezbollah/Israel conflicts. The Israeli Prime Minister allowed the Turkish Prime Minister to inspect Israeli construction at the Temple Mount. Israel’s President and the Palestinian President along with leaders from other Middle Eastern countries have spoken before Turkey’s parliament. (p.429-435)
Turkey’s Military Might
Western commentators believe the Antichrist must come from a European nation/alliance because he has a powerful military supporting him. Amongst NATO countries Turkey has the second largest army behind the United States. It is strategically located to control the Suez Canal and other vital areas of the Middle East. (p.436)
Turkey the Hater
Mr. Shoebat states that Anti-Semitic and Anti-Christian attitudes are on the rise in Turkey. Beginning in 1915 Turkey embarked on a genocidal campaign which resulted in the deaths of more than 1.5 million Armenian Christians. Recently, Turkey has increasingly distanced itself from America who considered Turkey a moderate nation. One point of contention has been over the Iraq War. The arrest of eleven Turkish soldiers in Iraq by American troops further alienated the Turkish population. A very popular 2006 movie concerning this incident further revealed the growing Anti-Semitic and Anti-Christian attitude amongst the Turkish people. Mr. Shoebat points out that sales of Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf have soared in Turkey. (p.437-439)
Turkey falls to the Islamists
Turkey had been the longest standing secular government in the Muslim world. The recent 2007 elections saw the Islamic party AKP take control of Turkey’s government. Mr. Shoebat quoted the outgoing President of Turkey after the election, “Turkey’s political regime is under unprecedented threat…Political Islam is being imposed on Turkey as a model.” Although current Prime Minister Erdogan has stated he is “pro-democracy, pro-European Union, pro-America, pro-Israel, pro-peace, and pro-Global-unity,” He quotes him saying the following, “Democracy is like a streetcar. You ride it until you arrive at your destination and then you get off.” (p.440-442)
Turkey in Islamic prophecy
Mr. Shoebat tells of an Islamic prophecy which says there will be aGreat War with the Turkish city Constantinople/Istanbul playing a prominent role: “The flourishing state of Jerusalem will be when Yathrib (Medina) is in ruins, the ruined state of Yathrib will be when the Great War comes, and the outbreak of the Great War will be the conquest of Constantinople and the conquest of Constantinople when the Dajjal (Antichrist) comes forth. He (the Prophet) struck his thigh or his shoulder with his hand and said: This is as true as you are here or as you are sitting.” He writes,“When searching for the Antichrist, one must never look to the Ahmadinejads or Usamas of the world, but instead to someone with a moderate mask–at least in the beginning. His sinister, rabid hatred for Jews and Christians will not be revealed until he lures the sheep into his den.” (p.443-444)
The Reality – The Muslim cry for the Mahdi and the Caliphate
President Ahmadinejad of Iran opened his 2005 United Nations address with a prayer: “From the beginning of time, humanity has longed for the day when justice, peace, equality, and compassion, envelop the world. All of us can contribute to the establishment of such a world. When that day comes, the ultimate promise of all Divine religions will be fulfilled with the emergence of a perfect human being who is heir to all prophets and pious men. He will lead the world to justice and absolute peace. O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace.” President Ahmadinejad is not the only one calling for the return of Al-Mahdi. According to Mr. Shoebat, the Iranian Hojjatieh Society (considered a lunatic fringe by mainstream Shi’a Muslims) believes they can hasten the return of the Twelfth Imam (The Mahdi) by creating a period of chaos on earth. He says they are so extreme that the Ayatollah Khomeini banned them in 1983. He quotes Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu as saying the cult of Mahdi in Iran is why it will be very dangerous if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. The cult of Mahdi is not limited to Iran alone as Mr. Shoebat states there are several Mahdi sects in Iraq. He believes that many Muslims will rise up as claimants to the position of Mahdi in fulfillment of Jesus’ last days warning, “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many…23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time. 26 So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.” (Matthew 24:4-5,23-26)
There is also a call in the Muslim World for the reinstitution of the governing entity called the Caliphate. The worldwide community of Muslim believers is called the Ummah. Their sense of loyalty to Muhammad is above their familial ties as evidenced by their willingness to kill family members who leave Islam. Islam’s sacred traditions cause Muslims to believe that in the future Islam will rule the world. Muslims long for the former glory of the Islamic Empire that was a superpower for thirteen hundred years. All this came to an end in 1924 when Turkey’s first President, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, abolished the Caliphate. The West became prosperous and technologically advanced while the Muslim world regressed into poverty and dictatorships. Muslims blame the West and Israel for their current predicament and want to restore the Caliphate and punish the Western Nations. Thousands of Muslims have had various gatherings around the world to call for a new Caliphate. In 2006 an Islamic leader of the Guiding Helper Foundation in Israel called for the restoration of the Caliphate to a gathering of the Muslim faithful on the Temple Mount. One Islamic group in particular, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, is growing in influence with many of the other pro-Caliphate groups throughout the world. A University of Maryland poll of more than four thousand Muslims from various Islamic countries revealed that 65.2% of them want the Caliphate restored and a similar number want Shari’a Law to be imposed in every Muslim country. Mr. Shoebat says this illustrates that the majority of Muslims are not moderate and are a threat to the West. He says concerning the West’s naïveté about Islam, “It is time to get real.” He also quotes a 2004 U.S. National Intelligence Council report that states a global Caliphate is a real possibility by 2020. With events in the Middle East changing yearly it could occur sooner than that. (p.445-453)
Gog and Magog coalition forming
Although other Muslim nations will be part of the prophesied Gog and Magog war of Ezekiel ch.38, five will play a prominent role in the coalition of countries that will invade Israel: Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, and Turkey. The Muslim world is divided into two camps. These camps are led by the Sunni Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Shi’a Iran although there are some Sunni nations that follow Iran. This division is defined by those Muslim nations that are considered friendly to the West and its ally Israel and those opposed to the West.
In 2007 an Arab summit took place in Saudi Arabia. Because Iran and Syria were not invited to this meeting Libya boycotted it by refusing to attend. Mr. Shoebat says that a military alliance has been formed between Syria and Iran along with an exchange of military information. Western and Israeli Intelligence declared that Syria and Shi’a Iran influenced the election of the Sunni Hamas terrorist organization in the Gaza Strip. In 2007, Iran’s President Ahmadinejad visited Sudan and strengthened ties between the two countries while at the same time blaming the West for the troubles in the area. These events along with the Islamization of Turkey indicate that the alliance of Muslim nations listed in the Gog War of Ezekiel ch.38 may lead to the invasion of Israel in the not too distant future. (p.454-460)
Islam’s Explosive Growth
According to Mr. Shoebat, Islam’s growth rate is four times that of Christianity. Adherents to the Muslim faith constitute one-fifth of the world’s population. One main reason for the explosion of the Muslim population is that their birth rates far exceed those of the Western World. It is estimated by some that in less than twenty years one-third of Europe will be Muslim. Mr. Shoebat declares that“well within this century–the Western world as we know it will cease to exist. For this reason and more, I say that Islam is the future, albeit only temporarily so.” There have been reports that converts to Islam have increased around the world, including America, since the 9/11 attacks. Mr. Shoebat says this could be part of the “great apostasy” that the Bible says will take place before Jesus’ return. He also recognizes that millions of Muslims are converting to Christianity around the world, some as a result of a spiritual vision or dream. However, because of the Muslim birth rates Islam is spreading faster than Christianity. (p.461-467)
Walid Shoebat concludes his book with a note of urgency, “The time is shorter than most think. Let us all hasten; therefore, to do the work of God.”
Walid Shoebat like any prophecy commentator has his critics. One criticism all students of prophecy receive is that they take Bible verses out of context. Other criticisms concern his personal testimony. If nothing else I believe Mr. Shoebat has presented a very plausible framework for the interpretation of End-Times prophecy. As stated above, Islam is called the fastest growing religion in the world, claiming one-fifth of the earth’s population as adherents to the Muslim faith. Earlier in his book Mr. Shoebat made a declarative statement that he agreed with Western prophecy students on End-Times teachings concerning the “Rapture, Tribulation, Millennium, recreation of Israel, 144,000 witnessing Jews in Israel, the Falling Away, the coming of the Antichrist, the coming two witnesses, their death on the streets of Jerusalem, and so much more. In fact, western interpreters agree that Islam is involved. The question I am presenting, though, is: “Does Islam play the main roll [sic]? Or a major roll [sic]? At least we all agree on the latter.” (p.353) After reading his book it would seem that the answer to Walid Shoebat’s question is the former. Islam will be prominent in the fulfillment of End-Times prophecy. Again, I would recommend that any student of Bible prophecy purchase Mr. Shoebat’s book and read for themselves the plausible alternatives to some of the prophecy teachings that have been around for quite a while. I don’t believe he is putting forth any radical or unbiblical theories of End-Times prophecy. He is trying to illustrate that Islam has a main role in the fulfillment of End-Times prophecy and he may very well be correct in that assertion.There are other websites involved with the describing the significance of the number 666, which is know to Christians as the Mark of the Beast, the Sign of the Antichrist. The coincidences of the above-stated facts, as well as the religious-like cults of personality and leadership, have led many theologians and Christian Evangelicals to study these phenomena, and the conclusions they have derived from them are at the very least scary. Couple with the fact that Obama, has through his alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood, surreptitiously supported the violent revolutions occurring throughout the Islamic Arabic World that has been referred to as "The Arab Spring," he has practiced a concept of deception preached in the Qu'ran called muruna, which is Arabic for "flexibility." Shoebat describes this phenomenon in an interview conducted on January 20, 2012. Since the YouTube link is not working, you can go to the website The Right Scoop and view the interview here.
Furthermore, there are other clues to suggest that Obama is the Mahdi or, translated into English, "the promised warrior," "the Awaited," who will conquer the world through jihad by slaughtering the Christians and Jews along with Isa (the Islamic name for "Jesus") and propagate Islam worldwide. Shoebat says as much in his book, as he was quoted above in the blog entry, and he does so in the following YouTube video:
Shoebat also discusses Obama's connection to the Muslim world in this interview below with Sun News:
From the mouth of a former Islamic terrorist, we see that the president's policies regarding the Islamic world in the Middle East, which includes the U.S. "repairing our relationship" with the Muslim world, the "arm bending" of the European Union in pressuring it to admit Turkey into its confederation, and now with the federal law enforcement targeting conservative groups which included Christian Evangelicals and pro-Israeli political interest groups through the IRS and the Justice Department, something sinister is in our midst.
So, is Obama the Antichrist or the Mahdi? Consider the following regarding his characteristics courtesy of The Very Last Days:
THE ANTICHRIST
For anyone who has studied the events of the end times, it will be quite obvious that we are living in the very last days before the return of the Savior. Just as He lived, He will return to reign and rule. One of the signs of the times is that of false Christs walking among us. The scriptures tell us:
- "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." - Matthew 24:23, 24, 26, 27
- "And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect." - Mark 13:21-22
- "And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them." - Luke 21:8
The scriptures are very specific about the details of the times and events surrounding the Lord's return, including the fact that there would be false Christs and false prophets. Some of the false Christs are more obvious and their presence more open than others. One such false Christ that is currently walking among us at the present time is "Maitreya". From the website devoted to Maitreya we read, "In all cultures and religions of the world we can find the belief that one person will bring the unification of religions and fulfill the prophecies. This One is known to the Buddhists as the Compassionate (Maitreya) Buddha or Bodhisattva, to Hindus as the Kalki Avatar, to the Jews and Christians as the Messiah, to the Moslems as Mahdi (Mohammed), to the Baha'is as the One Whom God Shall Make Manifest, etc."
But how do we know that Maitreya or any of the other people running around the world today pretending to be the Messiah constitute the false Christs or Antichrists prophesied in the scriptures? How do we know that this is the time and these are the days where these events are supposed to be taking place? Let's consider these questions in light of the following statements:
- "And do not think that these usurpations, intimidations, and impositions are being done to us through inadvertence or mistake; The whole course is deliberately planned and carried out; its purpose is to destroy the Constitution and our constitutional government; then to bring chaos, out of which the new Statism with its slavery is to arise, with a cruel, relentless, selfish, ambitious crew in the saddle, riding hard with whip and spur, a red-shrouded band of night riders for despotism." - J. Reuben Clark, jr., Church News, September 25, 1949
- "Satan has control now. No matter where you look, he is in control, even in our own land. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. That is why there is so much strife, turmoil, confusion all over the earth.One master mind is governing the nations. It is not the President of the United States... it is not the king or government of England or any other land; it is Satan himself." - Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, pp. 314-315 (published on or before 1954)
- Concerning the United States, the Lord revealed to his prophets that its greatest threat would be a vast, worldwide "secret combination" which would not only threaten the United States but also seek to "overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations..." (Ether 8:25) - Ezra Taft Benson, Conference, October 1961
Here we have just a small sampling of the modern voices of warning concerning the fact that Satan was and is controlling the world affairs that will soon overthrow the freedom of all lands and nations of the world. We most assuredly are living in the times and days spoken of here and prophesied by the ancients concerning the antichrist.
Satan's final push has been going on for quite some time and is accelerating every day. When I look at the dates of the quotes above, I think back to the times of the relatively innocent social and moral values of the 1940's and 50's. By way of example, one of the most popular TV shows of the times was "I Love Lucy," which ran from 1951-1957 (before many of us on the planet were even born). In those days, the moral fiber of our society was so strong that even married couples getting ready for bed were shown in full pajamas (with only head, feet, and hands uncovered) and sleeping in separate beds. Even when Lucy became pregnant, they did not use the word "pregnant" on the show.
Now, compare that to our modern light porn public television programming that becomes more immoral with each new season. Then apply that same comparison of then-to-now to visualize how much more control Satan must have over the affairs of the world today, especially the world leaders compared to back when we actually had an honorable, moral, God fearing society!
In the past, as I contemplated these scriptures, I envisioned these false Christs to come upon the scene much like Maitreya. He even dresses like what you might expect a returning Christ to look like, complete with robes and sandals. Clearly, he is a false Christ, but very limited in the reach of his message and the sphere of his influence. There are others at the present time that are much more charismatic and hypnotic to their followers than I believe Maitreya to be. However, in saying that it is important to note that there are many globalist, both past and present who refer to the returning messiah as "Maitreya." However, the name may be more symbolic than literal.
There are many lesser false Christs who claim some form or fashion of deity. They can be seen in various aspects of our culture, particularly in the entertainment industry. A couple of the most recognizable false Christs are the singers Jay Z and Beyonce. Jay Z's stage name is "HOVA", short for "JEhova." Beyonce makes similar claims, but I won't spend a lot of time on them, because as I said, they are the "lesser of the evils."
Perhaps the biggest and most recognizable false Christ is Barack Obama. In the following video clip, Hollywood entertainer Jamie Foxx introduces Barack Obama as "our God, our Lord and Savior." Notice the reaction of the crowd when he blasphemes against the true Lord and Savior. True to ancient prophecy, the crowd not only doesn't object to such blasphemy, they clap, cheer, and dance as the false Christ is introduced.
In the following video clip, Oprah Winfrey introduces then Senator Obama to voters in Des Moines. This introduction is identical to introductions given at other political rallies by Winfrey. She begins by relating a story from "The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman," a 1974 film based on Ernest Gaines' 1971 novel. As she explains to the waiting crowd, an old woman who had survived slavery and the Civil war would ask every newborn child, "Are you the one? Are you the one?"
According to one academic discussion of the book by Christopher Mulvey, a professor at University of Winchester in the United Kingdom, the passage continues to ask whether the child is the one who will "carry part of our cross," a "messianic figure."
Winfrey goes on to tell the audience, "In '08 I have found the answer to Miss Pittman's question. I have found the answer... it is the same question that our nation is asking, "Are you the one? Are you the one?" I'm here to tell you Iowa, he's the one! He is the one!" Again, notice the reaction of the crowd to the blasphemy spewed out of Oprah Winfrey's mouth!
Watch in the following clip at about the 26 second mark and through 38 seconds. You will hear Obama reassure the audience that contrary to the rumors, he was not born in a manager. He goes on to say that he was sent to save the planet earth. These comments along with those of the next video clip will be useful later in this analysis.
Watch the following video clip at about the 10 second mark and through 15 seconds. You will see Obama state that he (and his team) are the one's we've been waiting for. These comments along with those of the previous clip will be useful later in this analysis.
In the following video clip, Louis Farrakhan, head of the "Nation of Islam," declares the he is God and Obama is the Messiah. Notice the reaction of the crowd and the various images of Obama portrayed as the Messiah.
In the following clip, Louis Farrakhan, head of the "Nation of Islam," declares that Obama is the Messiah.
It is also important to understand how the Arab and Muslim world sees Obama. As is evidenced by the videos above, Obama is seen and revered as a Messiah. After Obama's speech in 2009 in which he apologized for America's existence, the Arab world began to see him as the promised warrior, a "Mahdi" who will lead Islam to victory over the infidels (everyone who is not Muslim) in the last days (people all over the world recognize that these are the last days).
The Egyptian press heralded him as "Obama the Awaited" in a giant front page headline, drawing parallels to the Mahdi, who in Muslim eschatology is believed to appear before the end of days as a Savior, as the second coming of Christ.
Iranian Shiite prophecies also are being grafted onto Obama as a Messiah to the Muslim world. According to a Shiite Hadith (tradition) that describes a "Promised Warrior" a tall black man will assume power in the West and herald the fall of the West and the victory of Islam to conquer the world.
The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam. According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Savior, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes:"Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us."
In a curious coincidence, Obama's first and second names - Barack Hussein - mean "the blessing of Hussein" in Arabic and Persian. His last name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads "O Ba Ma," which means "he is with us," the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition. Obama's rise is seen as another sign of the West's decline and the triumph of Islam.
If I connect those dots, I get "the blessing of Hussein - the Ultimate Savior - he is with us." Isaiah said that the Son of God, the true Savior of the world would be called Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14), meaning "God is with us." If I connect those dots, I get "the Son of God - the True Savior - God is with us." It is hard to miss the unmistakable anti-christ innuendoes and outright blasphemous claims of Obama and his minions to his claim of deity.
On June 4, 2009 Obama gave an unprecedented speech to the Muslim world from Cairo, Egypt declaring that he is launching a new era between the United States and the Muslim world. For the first time, Obama was forthright about his Muslim heritage and stated that the United States- which he is on record as saying is "no longer a Christian nation" is now "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." Newsweek editior Evan Thomas followed the president's speech with a declaration reflected in the opinion of many, that "Obama is standing above the country, above the world, he is a sort of God."
Interestingly enough, Obama was not born with the name he currently uses. His birth name (at least that's the name he used as a child, on school records, etc.) was Barry Soetoro. This is evident from the following video from Fox News. Notice the denial of being Muslim at the end of the video.
In the following video the grown up Barry (AKA Barack) refers to his "Muslim Faith" and the news interviewer has to prompt him that he's spinning himself to be of Christian faith. These are the kinds of truths that are revealed when he does not have his teleprompter. I add this video and the one above to add more dots that can be connected to show the deception and lies. Also, there will surely be people who come to this page and will have believed the propaganda that's been spun of him being a good Christian, so it's best to face the facts all at once.
Why would Barry Soetoro need to change his name? The name he changed it to, Barak Hussein Obama, is three distinctively Muslim names. As evidenced by the significance of his new name in relation to Islamic prophecy, it seems to make perfect sense.
But why would he need to cover up his Muslim faith? Well duh! Most Christian Americans and good old boy redneck Americans don't want someone running our country who might be in any way related to the "middle east Arab terrorists!" You can't have a Muslim in the White House! Actually you can and we do! You just have to dupe the naive sheeple into believing otherwise. Actually, the Quran (Muslim Bible) teaches that it is desirable to lie as necessary to infiltrate the infidels in order to establish Islam... believe it or don't!
Sadly, most of what Obama and his handlers portray him to be is a complete fabrication. There has never been another person on the planet that has been surrounded by more allegations of lies and deceit about who they really are. The list includes; (1) his real birth place, (2) his real parents, (3) his real name, (4) his real nationality, (5) his real religious beliefs, (6) his real birth certificate, (7) his real social security number, (8) his real school records, just to name the most publicized items.
His handlers have packaged him for the public, groomed him, and prepared the world stage for his ascent to power. No other person in the history of the world has claimed or been proclaimed to be the Messiah, been so universally accepted by the people of the world, or ascended to such a position of world influence and power, not just politically, but religiously as well. The ultimate pinnacle of that influence and power has yet to be seen, but simply by being president of the United States, Obama assumes the position of the most powerful man on the planet!
Dozens of churches and faith groups including mainline Protestants organized activities to mark Obama's inauguration as a 'spiritual' event. Randall Balmer, professor of religion in American history at Columbia University admitted he had never seen anything like it before.
CNN went so far as to compare Obama's inauguration to Hajj- the journey by Muslims to the holy city of Mecca, an obligatory pilgrimage that demonstrates their dedication to Allah.
In Des Moines, Iowa, an inaugural parade for Obama included a simulation of the triumphant entry of Christ in which a facsimile of Obama rode upon a donkey. As the reproduction made it's way down the streets, palm branches were handed out to onlookers so that they could wave them like Christ's adorers did in the 21st chapter of Matthew.
Consider the unprecedented messianic rhetoric that reporters, politicians, celebrities, and even preachers used in celebrating the 'spiritual nature' of Obama's meteoric rise from near obscurity to US President. San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Morford characterized it as "a sort of powerful luminosity." In Morford's opinion, this was because Obama is a "a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to... help usher in a new way of being on the planet..."
The dean of the Martin Luther King Jr. International chapel, Lawrence Carter, when further, comparing Obama to the coming of Jesus Christ: "It is powerful and significant on a spiritual level that there is the emergence of Barack Obama... No one saw him coming, and Christians believe God comes at us from strange angles and places we don't expect, like Jesus being born in a manger." Dinesh Sharma, a marketing science consultant with a PhD in Psychology from Harvard appraised Obama likewise: "Many... see in Obama a messiah-like figure, a great soul, and some affectionately call him Mahatma Obama."
Here are some other comments about the deity of Obama from various news sources:
- "Barack's appeal is actually messianic... he... communicates God-like energy... What if God decided to incarnate as men preaching 'hope and change.' And what if we... let them slip away, not availing ourselves... to be led by God!" - Steve Davis, Journal Gazette
- "This is bigger than Kennedy... This is the New Testament! I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often. No, seriously. It's a dramatic event." - Chris Matthews, MSNBC
- "Does it not feel as if some special hand is guiding Obama on his journey, I mean, as he has said, the utter improbability of it all?" - Daily Kos
- "Obama, to me, must be not an ordinary human being but indeed an Advanced Soul, come to lead America out of this mess." - Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun Times
- "He is not operating on the same plane as ordinary politicians.. the agent of transformation in an age of revolution, as a figure uniquely qualified to open the door to the 21st century." - Former U.S. Senator Gary Hart, Huffington Post
- "He is not the Word made flesh [Jesus], but the triumph of word over flesh [better than Jesus]... Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves." - Ezra Klein, Prospect
- "Obama has the capacity to summon heroic forces from the spiritual depths of ordinary citizens and to unleash therefrom a symphonic chorus of unique creative acts whose common purpose is to tame the soul and alleviate the great challenges facing mankind." - Gerald Campbell, First Things First
- "Obama was... blessed and highly favored... I think that... his election... was divinely ordered... I'm a preacher and a pastor; I know that that was God's plan... I think he is being used for some purpose." - Janny Scott, New York Times
- "He won't just heal our city-states and souls. He won't just brink the Heavenly Kingdom- dreamt of in both Platonism and Christianity- to earth. He will heal the earth itself." - Micah Tillman, The Free Liberal
- "The event itself is so extraordinary that another chapter could be added to the Bible to chronicle its significance." - Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., Politico
Several ministries including the Christian Devense Coalition and Faith and Action came together to perform what was heralded as a first for US presidential inaugurations- applying anointing oil to the doorposts of the arched doorway that Obama passed through as he moved to the platform on the West Front of the Capital to be sworn in. Congressman Paul Broun (Georgia) was part of the ritual and joined Reverend Rob Schenck, who said, "Anointing with oil is a rich tradition in the Bible and... symbolizes consecration or setting something apart for God's use."
Not content with just using sacred anointing oil to consecrate Obama for God's use, approximately two thousand New Agers, Wiccans and Shamans gathered at Dupont Circle (chosen because it's considered the gay center of Washington DC) to participate in a cleansing ceremony to purge the White House of evil spirits. A shaman officiated the event, lighting bundles of sage, which smoldered and gave off thick blue aromatic smoke.
It's important to note here that not only does Obama and his handlers want you to believe that he is a deity, but the masses around the world believe it also. Many of the pictures above are the result of people who are deceived into believing in his artificial godliness, wherein they actually worship him, as is evidence by the pictures and artwork above.
In the next video clip, you will see globalist Henry Kissinger telling news reporters that the most important thing for Obama is the great opportunity he has to heal the world and unite the country into creating a new world order.
Clearly, Obama is embraced as the God, Savior, and Messiah (literally and/or figuratively) for a large number of people, cultures, and religions around the world. His popularity reaches across social, geopolitical, and religious boundaries, well beyond just the Muslims and blacks. His disciples in the U.S. championed him into a second term as President. He is the globalist's pick for the man to lead the New World Order / one world government. He is clearly a false Christ, but, does all this make Obama the Antichrist?
When we think of the Antichrist, most people visualize the traditional Christian concept of a very evil man with supernatural powers who rules the earth during the years immediately preceding the second coming. He is seen as stern, but very charismatic and has great speaking abilities. Initially, he will be seen as wonderful and benevolent, solving many of the world's problems. Eventually he will become the embodiment of pure evil.
According to "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie:
- "An antichrist is an opponent of Christ; he is one who is in opposition to the true gospel, the true Church, and the true plan of salvation". (1 John 2:19; 4:4-6.) "He is one who offers salvation to men on some other terms than those laid down by Christ." "Sherem (Jac. 7:1-23), Nehor (Alma 1:2-16), and Korihor (Alma 30:6-60) were antichrists who spread their delusions among the Nephites."
- "Many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." (2 John 7.) "'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?' John asked. 'He is an antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.'" (1 John 2:22.) Though many modern day religionists profess to believe in Christ, the fact is they do not accept him as the literal Son of God and have not turned to him with the full knowledge and devotion necessary to gain salvation. "Whosoever receiveth my word receiveth me," he said, "and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth those, the First Presidency, whom I have sent, whom I have made counselors for my name's sake unto you." (D. & C. 112:20.)
- "The saints in the meridian of time, knowing there would be a great apostasy between their day and the Second Coming of our Lord, referred to the great apostate church as the anti-christ. 'Little children, it is the last time,' John said, 'and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.'" (1 John 2:18.) "And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." (1 John 4:3.) "This great antichrist which is to stand as the antagonist of Christ in the last days, and which is to be overthrown when he comes to cleanse the earth and usher in millennial righteousness, is the church of the devil (Rev. 13; 17), with the man of sin at its head." (2 Thess. 2:1-12.)
Let's consider the two clips above where Obama specifically states that; (1) he wasn't born in a manger, (2) he was sent to save the planet earth, and (3) he is the one we've been waiting for. What he is really saying is that the one who was born in a manager (Jesus) didn't save the planet earth and the earth is no longer waiting for him (Christ), because Jesus is not "the one" In other words, Obama is denying Jesus as the Christ and proclaiming himself to be the awaited Messiah, just as his disciples (i.e. Foxx, Winfrey, Farrakhan, etc.) have proclaimed!
McConkie also provides an explanation for who the Man of Sin is:
- "Lucifer is the man of sin, spoken of by Paul who was to be revealed in the last days before the Second Coming of our Lord." (2 Thess. 2:1-12.) "He is the one of whom men shall say: 'Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?'" (Isa. 14:12-20.)
- Joseph Smith, by revelation, inserted into Paul's account about the man of sin, these words: "He it is who now worketh, and Christ suffereth him to work, until the time is fulfilled that he shall be taken out of the way." (Inspired Version, 2 Thess. 2:7.) That is, Satan was then committing havoc among men, and he would continue to do so until the ushering in of the millennial era when he would be bound.
- Paul's promise that the man of sin must be revealed before our Lord could return for the millennial era has been abundantly fulfilled. Lucifer's wicked plans, purposes, and works have been revealed or manifest from time to time, from the day of Paul to the present. At a conference of the Church held June 3, 1831, "the man of sin was revealed," in that some of the brethren were overcome by devils whom the Prophet rebuked and cast out. (History of the Church, vol. 1, p. 175.)
As far as mortal men are concerned, all those who become the agents and tools of the devil, who are used by him to further his interests and purposes on earth are, also men of sin.
Clearly, Obama is an antichrist by definition. He also fits the requirements very well for being a man of sin as defined here. But, is he the one man of sin who will lead the church of the devil in the very last days which will be overthrown when Christ returns? While we can't say with 100% certainty right now, Obama certainly has all the credentials, characteristics, and mannerisms necessary to be "The One!" And if he's not "the one," it's highly likely that he's the forerunner to the man of sin.
Make sure to check back often, because if turns out there is someone more evil and powerful who is accepted worldwide more than Obama and it turns out Obama's not the one, I will identify which of the world leaders is the most likely candidate is to assume the role as the man of sin.
--
As I mentioned earlier, the Arab Spring, viewed as a movement toward democratization, has consumed virtually all of the Middle East under the penumbra of Shari'ah law due largely to the to the electoral success of Islamist parties following the protests in many Arab countries, the events have also come to be known as "Islamist Spring" or "Islamist Winter."
Critics such as Noam Chomsky have stated that the Obama administration is acting out to stifle democratization in the Arab world. You can view the YouTube video below:
Below is a regional map of the Arab States and a chart detailing what has occurred thus far since the Arab Spring, which officially began on December 18, 2010:
First, from the Danbury Baptist Association:
On the topic of the right to freedom of speech, also a part of the First Amendment, international scholars believe these principles to be true of it:
Another great irony based on the former mufti's quote is how Obama denigrates the United States to all of his Arab State allies. He faults the general public of the U.S. for the predominantly-Islamic states of the Middle East, blaming the attacks on the U.S. Embassies in Egypt and Libya which resulted in the deaths of four innocent Americans, including the Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens on an Egyptian Christian ex-patriot who migrated to the U.S. who filmed an anti-Islamic film in an attempt to divert attention from the fact that his administration, particularly former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, failed to call in the military when the terrorists raided the Embassy in Benghazi, Libya. He also speaks fluent Arabic, often reciting verses from the Qu'ran when he travels to the Middle East. He bowed before King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. According to Wikipedia, the following has been either accused or confirmed about King Abdullah's violations of human rights:
Furthermore, Shoebat describes the Beast's Number:
+symbol.png)
Is Obama the Antichrist, the Mahdi? We cannot be sure. However, the evidence is there to make a strong case for him being so. He fits all the description. He is a complete mystery, the most mysterious president in history despite being the institution's most publicized. We must beware and remain ever vigilant, careful not to allow him to take away our constitutional liberties so as to serves as the ultimate check on his power. He is attempting to strip of us of these rights via applying restrictions or complete disavowals of the First, Second, Fourth, Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. Scandal after scandal has plagued the presidency, and yet people still trust on an overwhelming scale. His intellect his high and clear; his cunning, lethal.
I will close with a famous quote of Benjamin Franklin's from The Historical Review of Pennsylvania that was published in 1759:
Critics such as Noam Chomsky have stated that the Obama administration is acting out to stifle democratization in the Arab world. You can view the YouTube video below:
Below is a regional map of the Arab States and a chart detailing what has occurred thus far since the Arab Spring, which officially began on December 18, 2010:
Government overthrown Civil war Protests and governmental changes
Sustained civil disorder and governmental changes (Bahrain)
Major protests Minor protests Related crises outside the Arab worldSummary of conflicts by country[edit]
| Country | Date started | Status of protests | Outcome | Death toll | Situation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Tunisia | 18 December 2010 | Government overthrown on 14 January 2011 |
Overthrow of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali; Ben Ali flees into exile in Saudi Arabia
| 338[98] | Government overthrown |
 Algeria | 29 December 2010 | Ended in January 2012 | 8[101] | Major protests | |
 Jordan | 14 January 2011 | Ongoing |
| 3[106] | Protests and governmental changes |
 Oman | 17 January 2011 | Ended in May 2011 | 2–6[112][113][114] | Protests and governmental changes | |
 Egypt | 25 January 2011 | Government overthrown on 11 February 2011, protests ongoing |
Overthrow of Hosni Mubarak; Mubarak sentenced to life in prison for ordering the killing of protesters
| 846[60] | Government overthrown, protests ongoing |
 Yemen | 27 January 2011 | Government overthrown on 27 February 2012 |
Overthrow of Ali Abdullah Saleh; Saleh granted immunity from prosecution
| 2,000[127] | Government overthrown |
 Djibouti | 28 January 2011 | Ended in March 2011 | 2[128] | Minor protests | |
 Somalia | 28 January 2011 | Ended in June 2012 | 2[128] | Minor protests | |
 Sudan | 30 January 2011 | Ongoing | 14[130][131][132] | Minor protests | |
 Iraq | 23 December 2012 | Ongoing | 11[135] | Major protests | |
 Bahrain | 14 February 2011 | Ongoing |
| 120[141] | Sustained civil disorder and government changes |
 Libya | 17 February 2011 | Government overthrown on 23 August 2011 |
Overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi; Gaddafi killed by rebel forces
| 25,000-30,000+ [144] | Government overthrown |
 Kuwait | 19 February 2011 | Ongoing |
| 0[147] | Protests and governmental changes |
 Morocco | 20 February 2011 | Ended in March–April 2012 |
| 6[150] | Protests and governmental changes |
 Mauritania | 25 February 2011 | Ongoing | 3[151] | Minor protests | |
 Lebanon | 27 February 2011 | Ended in December 2011 | 0 | Protests and governmental changes | |
 Saudi Arabia | 11 March 2011 | Ongoing |
| 23[157] | Minor protests |
 Syria | 15 March 2011 | Ongoing |
| 94,000+[166] | Ongoing civil war |
 Iran | 15 April 2011 | Ended on 18 April 2011 | [citation needed] | 12 | Major protests |
 Israel | 15 May 2011 | Ended on 5 June 2011 | 30–40[167][168] | Major protests | |
 Palestine | 4 September 2012 | Ongoing | 0 | Protests and governmental changes | |
| Total death toll: | 122,418–127,431+(International estimate, ongoing) |
Turkey is currently experiencing a series of protests across the nation from hundreds of thousands of its citizens. There seems to be a disagreement on whether it, too, is the most recent nation engaged in the Arab Spring phenomenon.
***
Not everyone in the U.S. Senate not named Rand Paul or Ted Cruz is in opposition to the president's cell phone and media surveillance. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) released a statement on his official website yesterday denouncing the Obama administration engaging in spying on tens or even a hundred million or more America's phone conversations and Internet activities (Courtesy of Bernie Sanders, U.S. Senator for Vermont.com):
News June 8
June 8, 2013Senator SandersObama Defends Surveillance President Barack Obama publicly acknowledged the government's electronic sleuthing on its citizens that he justified as a way to protect Americans from terrorism. His comments on Friday came in response to media reports that detailed the government's secret mass collection of phone and Internet communications. “I don’t accept the excuses from the administration,” Sen. Bernie Sanders said during a radio interview Friday on The Thom Hartmann Program. “We expected better from the Obama people.”Sanders is ‘Deeply Disappointed’ When Congress renewed the Patriot Act in 2011, Sen. Sanders opposed the measure because he felt the law gave the federal government too much authority to monitor private phone records. Sanders told Vermont Public Radio that he is dismayed that President Obama expanded the surveillance program started by former President George W. Bush. “Am I deeply disappointed that Barack Obama, who among other things taught and studied Constitutional law, believes he has the authority or that it makes good public policy to do this? Am I disappointed? Absolutely.” LINKNSA Fallout Sen. Sanders voiced concern that the government has overstepped its bounds by tracking phone records and electronic communications for hundreds of millions of people,ABC News reported online. Sanders called for reviewing a controversial section of the Patriot Act, according to The Hill, and said his prior warnings about the Patriot Act “turned out exactly to be true,” according to CNN, The Week and U.S. News and World Report. While the nation must guard against terrorists, Sanders said “we don't have to do it in a way that allows the government to accumulate information on literally tens of millions of innocent Americans,” reported MSNBC, USA Today and Congressional Quarterly. LINK, LINK, LINK,LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINKNSA Fallout Overseas In Syria and other conflict zones on Friday, activists and militants with diverse politics expressed collective outrage over American data mining. Taliban fighters and Qaeda operatives found themselves on the same side of a debate as human rights activists, privacy advocates and conservative civil libertarians, according to The New York Times. It said Iran's semiofficial Mehr News Agency quoted Sen. Sanders saying, ''The United States should not be accumulating phone records on tens of millions of innocent Americans.” LINKLeft and Right Political forces from all over the spectrum are uniting in opposition to newly revealed government surveillance programs, reported The Hill. Opposition to these so-called “Big Brother” programs is coming from Sen. Sanders on the left and Rep. Ron Paul on the right. An editorial in the Ventura County (Calif.) Star said “The only real resistance is from two senators who are … ideological oppositesl.” LINK, LINKGeorge W. Obama During an interview with Sen. Sanders, CNN’s Piers Morgan said Obama’s record on civil liberties may be “worse” than President George W. Bush’s, according to Real Clear Politics and Mediaite. Sanders noted that Bush started the domestic surveillance program. LINKCow Parade The Vermont town of Brattleboro is gearing up for its annual Strolling of the Heifers parade at 10 a.m. today. The event draws tens of thousands of people to downtown Brattleboro for the parade of heifer calves to celebrate family farmers and local food. Sen. Sanders will be walking in the parade, according to the Brattleboro Reformer and a page-one item in the Burlington Free Press. LINK
World
EU: Right to Peaceful Protest European Union officials criticized crackdowns on peaceful protesters in Turkey Friday after another tumultuous week led to three deaths and thousands of injuries, reported The Guardian. LINK
Syria The United Nations warned on Friday that half of all Syrians would need humanitarian aid by the end of the year. A civil war which led to thousands of deaths and millions of refugee displacements is expected to cost more than $5 billion in humanitarian aid, reported CNN International. LINKKoreas to Speak After months of hostility, North and South Korea will reconnect communications lines to diplomatic talks, reported The Washington Post. Nuclear threats previously led officials to sever cross-border ties earlier this year. LINKNationalUS Officials Long Denied Massive Data Trawling For years, top officials of the Bush and Obama administrations dismissed fears about secret government data-mining by reassuring Congress that there were no secret nets trawling for Americans' phone and Internet records, The Associated Press reported. LINKLeak Hunt In the wake of a pair of eye-opening reports on the government's domestic phone and internet monitoring programs, officials are turning their attention to who the source of the leaks was and how top secret information from one of America's most shadowy government agencies slipped into the open, ABC News reported. LINKWhat Jobs Crisis? Congress has already passed 13 laws this year, but none of them are aimed at curbing the country’s unemployment problem, reported National Journal. Another modest jobs report Friday indicated that the country was still on an exceedingly slow path to recovery. LINKCBO Lowers Deficit Projection The Congressional Budget Office released a report Friday that estimated the federal budget defict through May was $627 billion. The total deficit for the 2013 fiscal year is expected to come in at $642 billion when major mortgage lenders pay back billions to the Treasury later this year, reported The Hill. LINKProsecutors Seek Prison for Jacksons Prosecutors Friday recommended four years in prison for former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., following his guilty plea this year on criminal charges that he engaged in a scheme to spend $750,000 in campaign funds on personal items. The government suggested an 18-month sentence for Jackson's wife, Sandra, who pleaded guilty to filing false joint federal income tax returns that understated the couple's income, APreported. LINKRicin Arrest A woman accused of sending ricin-laced envelopes to President Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was arrested Friday according to an NBC News report.LINKVermontVermont Yankee The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant on Friday won the state approval it was seeking for a new emergency diesel generator at the plant, and said it was dropping a lawsuit in which it accused state regulators of foot-dragging on the issue. The state Public Service Board on Friday approved the new 3,000-kilowatt generator for the Vernon reactor, AP reported. LINKRestaurants Grow Local More restaurants are growing their own vegetables in Vermont, reported the Burlington Free Press. Several restaurants have joined the Vermont Fresh Network, a conglomerate of local eateries that utilizes locally grown ingredients. The movement aims to spur local economic growth while providing nutritious food to customers. LINK
--
It should be noted that even though Sen. Sanders is an Independent, he is a member of the Left. Whether in an attempt to save their political careers as a result of being linked to the president's political affiliation or not, Obama is reeling politically, and it should be noted that his approval rating is on the decline in recent weeks, having dropped down to 48% in the latest Gallup Poll.
--
Finally, Rush Limbaugh is convinced that we are experiencing a coup d'tat being thrown by President Obama. The egregious and obvious violations of the Constitution and the people's rights under the Bill of Rights have led Limbaugh to draw parallels between the Nazi regime under Adolf Hitler and the administration of Barack Obama, who is taking away the long-standing system of checks and balance prescribed by the Constitution to limit the power(s) of the Executive Branch and vesting them, instead, directly within his authority. Rush's dialogue as was conducted on his radio show is posted below (Courtesy of Rush Limbaugh.com):
America in the Midst of a Coup d'Etat
June 07, 2013
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
(Above: President Barack Obama defending the government's secret surveillance program.)
I have to tell you when I'm listening to all the smart people tell me this, my mind is about to explode, and I'm saying, "Do these people not realize what we just learned in the last three weeks?" We got the IRS starting in 2010 taking action to suppress the political involvement and ultimately votes of Tea Party people and conservative Republicans. This regime, this government, on the orders of the highest level. In fact, that investigation is ongoing. We have Fast and Furious. We have Obamacare. The evidence of the totalitarian nature or the authoritarian nature of this administration is on display undeniably every day and yet in the midst of this, "Well, don't go off half cocked on this, Rush. Be very levelheaded. Nothing really to see," as though there's no context here.
It made me once again understand, folks, what you and I are up against here. There are just way too many people -- and I'm talking about on our side -- who do not want to admit what we face, who do not want to engage or admit or whatever what we really face here. It matters. This kind of stuff matters because of who the people doing it happen to be. It's one thing if Colonel Sanders would be collecting all this data, but it's not Colonel Sanders. It's Barack Obama and everybody that works for him, and we know who they are and we know what their goals are. We know what their intentions are.
Folks, here's the thing, I guess, that gets me. I mentioned Herbert Meyer. We interviewed him for the Limbaugh Letter a few short months ago. Herbert Meyer was in the national security apparatus during the Reagan administration. He was a good friend of Ronald Reagan, and was instrumental in establishing Reagan administration policies that brought down the Soviet Union. The big news to him that's really noteworthy, we talked about it, is that he thinks that the world's coming out of poverty. And it is a big story, The Economist in London had a big story on it recently. We mentioned it to you, and it's a great testament to capitalism.
It's not socialism, it's not welfare, it's not compassion and it's not the redistribution of wealth. It's not high taxes that are bringing people out of poverty. It's capitalism, and none other than a leftist publication in London had to admit it. Well, Herb Meyer was the first to sound this notice some months ago. I also mentioned he wrote a piece that currently is in the American Thinker earlier this week, and it had the potential to be controversial because he used Adolf Hitler and Nazism in it, and it was his way of explaining, he made a point in the piece that nowhere, you know, people looking for a smoking gun to nail Obama on all these scandals, Herb says, "Ain't gonna be one."
He said whether you believe it or not, there is not one document linking Adolf Hitler to the holocaust. Adolf Hitler never put it on paper what he intended to do. There is no smoking gun. And yet what happened? We know that the Nazis engaged in the Holocaust. Herb Meyer's point was that the people Hitler hired didn't have to be told. They didn't have to be given instructions. All they had to do was listen to what Hitler was saying. All they had to do was listen to what his objectives were. And he said the same thing's happening here with this administration. He went to great pains to say: I'm not calling this administration a bunch of Nazis. I'm just using this as an illustration. I know people will get my point if I use something this notorious, the Nazi regime.
It's a point that I've made here about the IRS. They say, "Well, you can't link it in to Obama." You don't need to link Obama to it. He hired these people. Lois Lerner and everybody at the IRS who's doing this is doing everything they can to please Obama. There's not gonna be a smoking gun, but you don't need a smoking gun to know where this administration's doing what it's doing.
Obama puts people in positions that mirror him. Eric Holder, you name it, they're doing Obama's bidding. Everybody. Susan Rice and Samantha Power, they are Obama, and there's a context for what's happening. Herbert Meyer, if I may quote him again, asserted that essentially what's taking place in the United States right now is a coup, not a violent coup, and not a million artistic coup, but nevertheless a takeover of a government, and it's being done by the Obama administration.
He referred to it as a coup. I don't know if he used the word "peaceful," but clearly there's a coup d'etat going. You know it and I know it. This is what animates us. This is why the Tea Party exists. This country was founded on certain concepts, principles, beliefs -- and they're under assault. Chief among them under assault is the right to privacy, and that's what all this is about. So in the midst of this coup d'etat... I happen to like that formulation.
In seeking ways to persuade, for example, the low-information voters of what's going on, this happens. These are the people continuing to prop Obama up with high approval numbers. The Limbaugh Theorem. How do we reach 'em? How do we tell them? How do we explain what's going on when they have, perhaps, almost an idolatrous relationship with the president? Well, maybe you tell 'em there's a coup going on.
There are people attempting to take over this country and to make it something that it wasn't founded as; turn it into something that it wasn't intended to be. That is happening. You know it and I know it. It's peaceful, nonviolent. The military isn't involved. But nevertheless it's a coup. So in the context of that and the realization that's happening, in the midst of learning that the National Security Agency is literally "Hoovering," vacuuming every telephone record they can, what do we hear?
"Nothing to see here, Rush. Calm down! Slow down, Rush. This is nothing to get concerned about. There's nothing illegal here. The Fourth Amendment's not being violated or breached. This is nothing whatsoever to get concerned about." How can I...? (sigh) I don't know how people can look at this in context and say that. The people doing this are what make it a big deal. Their motives and their intentions and their clear assault on the whole notion of privacy make it interesting.
I'm sorry for the long detour there, but in the midst of being told that I need to be more levelheaded -- and not just me, but all of us who are a little bit concerned here about this Verizon story. We are all being told, "Back off, back off. Nothing to see here. We're not really, really concerned." It was in the midst of that that I heard about Prism. That was a Washington Post story that posted on their website around five or six o'clock yesterday afternoon.
The basic tenet of this story is that somebody in the intelligence community -- NSA, somewhere -- is so concerned over what he's seeing take place that he went to the Washington Post and took with him a little PowerPoint slide presentation and gave it to the Post and their reporters, and they wrote a story up and put it on their website. The story is that practically every major tech group and company in this country is participating with the government in allowing the government access to their servers.
E-mails, texts, phone calls, photographs. Virtually any communication that's taking place via the Apple servers, the Microsoft servers, the Google servers, the NSA is able to look at in real time. This is the story now. The guy that went to the Washington Post said, "It was so scary. They can watch us as we type." The Washington Post published some of the PowerPoint slides. I'm reading this after being told that the Verizon thing is no big deal. "It's nothing to get concerned about.
"Nothing to see here. Don't get too worried about that. Don't go off half cocked!" Here comes the Prism story, and then shortly after the Prism story hits, all of these tech firms start denying it. Apple says, "I never heard of Prism. We don't know what this is about. We never let anybody have access to our servers without a warrant, without a court order. We never!" Google said the same thing. Microsoft said the same thing. Facebook said the same thing.
They're all out there denying it. So I thought, "Did the Washington Post get set up?" I'm asking myself, "Did they get set up by somebody walking in and telling them something that wasn't true?" But then I saw that Prism reported someplace else by this Glenn Greenwald guy at the UK Guardian. So there were two sources for the Prism story, but the tech firms involved continue to deny it. "Nope, it's not happening." Now we've got audio sound bites.
These guys from the tech firms like Greenwald and some of these others, are blaming Bush for all of this, still. Today! Still today, all of this is the fault of Bush. Bush is the guy that got this ball rolling. So there must be something to it if the left is circling the wagons around Obama and trying to make all of us think that all of this is the fault of George W. Bush. I just gotta tell you something, folks. Richard Nixon never even dreamed of this kind of stuff, and yet most people in this country think that Nixon did 10 times as bad as what's happening now.
The fact is, Nixon never dreamed of this.
Whatever he wanted to cook up, he never even came up with this. So there is clearly -- somewhere, somehow, in some form or another -- a coup taking place, and there is an assault on privacy, and there are assaults on people because of their politics and their ideology. It is taking place; it's undeniable. Yet many of the people we would hope would be pushing back against this and doing their best to join us and warning everybody say, "Nothing to see here! Don't get all crazy about this. We must be level headed."
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: So Obama's in California. Why? Fundraising. He's also got a meeting with the Chinese communist premier, but it's fundraising. That's why they go to California. Anyway, he got out there to speak. There was no prompter, and he didn't have any notes, and he just stood there. He didn't know what to do. Honestly, folks. Forty-eight seconds or something. Nothing happened. He finally shouted, "People!" and somebody on his staff brought him his notes. He was clueless.
Now, a lot of people yesterday who were saying, "Rush, Rush, don't get all upset about this. There's nothing to see here in this NSA business and Verizon. Nothing's going on." Look, one of the accusations was that people are just getting upset because it was Obama and just trusting Obama, and it's not reasonable enough to get concerned about this. My point is, speaking about you and me, we're not all stupid out here.
We're not all stupid about this and this is not simply because we don't trust Obama. I don't want my government doing this. I do not want my government preoccupied with paying this close attention to what every citizen is doing every minute of the day. This government's already too big, it's too damn powerful, and it's too unforgiving -- and this doesn't have anything to do with competent intelligence gathering. Throwing wide nets like this is BS. It's assuming way too much to think that this is not a big deal. Left-wing overreaction, my backside.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: There was a time when the United States government earned the trust of its people. There was a time when most people believed that the United States government was protecting them. There was a time when most people believed that the United States government was spying on the bad guys, that the United States government was in fact earning the trust of the people. But this current data collection, scanning, whatever you want to call it, unfortunately has to be judged in context: the IRS leaks, the now unquestionable, undeniable, admitted-to-it IRS tactic of suppressing the vote of Tea Party conservatives, denying them their First Amendment rights.
The regime and its tricks with the Associated Press and Fox reporter James Rosen, the Benghazi cover-ups, the Fast and Furious operation, suing the state of Arizona for simply endorsing essentially federal immigration law. You can't just try to be the smartest guy in the room and say, "Well, we must be levelheaded about this and understand that this is just metadata." We cannot take the motives and intelligence guided by experience watching this administration over the last four-and-a-half, five years, and what their express purpose is.
I was reminded this morning, we had a sound bite of Maxine Waters back on February 3rd of this year. She was on a TV show, some network, TV One. It was a show hosted by Roland Martin, who used to be, may still be, a personality at CNN. He was interviewing Maxine Waters, and every time she speaks, you know, we have a good laugh about it because clearly she's insane. And we nevertheless will play the sound bites. Her natural existence is such that she gives away the game. She will give away what the administration's all about. She will give away the fact that they want to nationalize all these companies. And she did it again on this Washington Watch with Roland Martin show back on February 3rd of 2013. He said to her, "The reality is like anything else: You'd better get what you can while he's there, because, look, come 2016, that's it."
WATERS: Well, you know, I don't know, and I think some people are missing something here. The president has put in place an organization that contains the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life. That's going to be very, very powerful. That database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that it's never been done before.
RUSH: See, she gives it up. Now, I remember playing that sound bite, and we made a big deal about it at the website, Rush 24/7, and we thought, "Well, it's just Maxine being Maxine." But in this case now going back, looking at it in hindsight, what in the world was she talking about? At the time we thought she was talking about all of his high-tech campaign advancements. But maybe she wasn't.
I'll tell you, the New York Times yesterday, this was kind of funny, too, the New York Times decided it was time to get really mad. They wrote an editorial really ripping into Obama over this. They called it: President Obama's Dragnet. The editors at the New York Times were hopping mad, or at least they're pretending to be. And they really got carried away. They had to change their original editorial. They reissued it. The original editorial said: "The administration has now lost all credibility." They changed that in their second issuance to: "The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue." But the point is they were right the first time. I don't know, maybe they don't want shock their readers with so much truth. But they went so far as to say at the New York Times, "Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it."
Now, keep in mind this was written by people who are the loudest proponents of the expansion of government. These are people who don't believe the government can possibly get too big. It's not possible for it to get too big. It's not possible for the government to get too powerful. It's not possible. And yet they are worried at the New York Times about what is happening to it under the guidance of the presidency and Mr. Obama. What everybody knows and nobody wants to really come to grips with is that we are in the midst of a coup taking place.
Now, I know what's gonna happen. The people on the other side of the glass: "Will you dial that coup talk back?" That's all the headlines are gonna be. I don't care. In fact, it's almost on par with: "I hope he fails." How does that sound now, by the way: "I hope he fails"? I'm constantly looking for ways here to persuade people of what I passionately believe, and I'm not in it to lie to anybody. There's nothing to be gained by lying to you about what I really think. There's nothing to be gained here by lying about facts. There's nothing to be gained here by gaining ground under false pretense.
So if the Constitution exists as it is, the country was founded as it was, and an administration comes along and doesn't like that and is doing everything it can to overturn that Constitution without a convention, doing everything it can to change direction of this country, and what's the word, transform it, what's wrong with calling this a coup? "Mr. Limbaugh, a coup is when rebels join forces with the military and start launching military attacks and shooting people." No, no, no. Not always. And that's my point.
When I was a kid, my dad kept saying, "Son, if things don't change, the Soviets are gonna take over this country without firing a shot." What he was talking about was a coup. Anyway, folks, there's a lot here to be concerned about. And you know it as well as I do. I get a little perplexed when people that I think see the world as I do and are, in my opinion, on my side, want to come along for reasons I can't fathom to excuse things that need not be excused. Now, Obama went out there today, he's in Palm Springs, and he addressed this NSA story. He defended the spy programs as legitimate because Congress has been consistently informed about 'em. He didn't get mad, but he sort of complained about all the hype over the phone data gathering, because it's approved by the FISA court. It's approved by the Congress.
He said (paraphrasing), "Nobody's listening to your phone calls. They're looking at megadata," he meant metadata, "and tracking terrorists. Nobody's listening to content. Modest encroachments on privacy are worth doing. We're gonna have to make some choices as a society. You can't have 100% security and have 100% privacy." This is what he said today out in Palm Springs. This is the guy, don't forget, who got elected convincing people that this kind of stuff was never gonna happen anywhere. This is the guy who got elected mischaracterizing the kind of intelligence gathering that was ongoing with the Bush administration.
This is the guy who got elected president by telling us that what is happening now was never going to happen when he was president. This is a guy who got elected telling us in 2007, 2008 that what's going on now was going on then. Bush was doing this, identical stuff, that's what they're trying to tell us, even now. He got elected warning us that what's happening now was happening in 2007, 2008, and promising us, this was not gonna happen. And everything that was happening in 2007 has only grown. There's only more of it. It's more sweeping than it's ever been.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Have we already forgotten what this regime has done to the donors to the Mitt Romney campaign, all of the IRS harassment and audits and attention paid them by the EPA, if necessary? This is clearly an administration that wants to identify its enemies and then take action against them somehow, to intimidate them or what have you. You can't take that context out. The Wall Street Journal has a story here about PRISM. You know, PRISM is a code name, too.
So when these companies like Microsoft and Google and Apple say, "Oh, well, we never heard of it." Well, they may not have heard of it. It may be called something else, and they say, "Well, we don't let anybody have access for our servers without court orders." Well, maybe there have been court orders. If there is a program like this going on, a part of it would have to be that the companies involved would have to be able to deny it. They could not talk about it.
Put it this way: They were sworn to secrecy. They could not broadcast their involvement in it because it's taking place under the guise of national security. Do you realize what a vacuum cleaner that is? I mean, they can Hoover up everything they want under the guise of national security. Anyway, the Wall Street Journal: "US Collects Vast Data Trove -- NSA monitoring includes three phone companies as well as online activity," and then there's this:
"The National Security Agency's monitoring of Americans includes customer records from the three major phone networks as well as emails and Web searches, and the agency also has cataloged credit-card transactions, said people familiar with the agency's activities." Now, would anybody who thought maybe the phone company sweep wasn't any big deal, maybe want to say that cataloging credit card transactions might be news?
I'm just asking.
END TRANSCRIPT
***
If we are doomed to a nation governed by a totalitarian ruler, President Obama certainly has the legal ammunition by which he may hide behind the shroud of the Constitution in his quest of usurping unlimited power. Read below:
The United States Constitution, in Article VI, section 3, states that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The Constitution, however, leaves the determination of voting qualifications to the individual states. Over time, the federal role in elections has increased through amendments to the Constitution and enacted legislation, such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. At least four of the fifteen post-Civil War constitutional amendments were ratified specifically to extend voting rights to different groups of citizens. These extensions state that voting rights cannot be denied or abridged based on the following:
- Birth - "All persons born or naturalized" "are citizens" of the U.S. and the U.S. State where they reside (14th Amendment, 1868)
- "Race, color, or previous condition of servitude" - (15th Amendment, 1870)
- "On account of sex" - (19th Amendment, 1920)
- In Washington, D.C., presidential elections (23rd Amendment, 1961)
- (For federal elections) "By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" - (24th Amendment, 1964)
- (For state elections) Taxes - (Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966))
- "Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age" (26th Amendment, 1971).
In addition, the 17th Amendment provided for the direct election of United States Senators.
The "right to vote" is not explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution except in the above referenced amendments, and only in reference to the fact that the franchise cannot be denied or abridged based solely on the aforementioned qualifications. In other words, the "right to vote" is perhaps better understood, in layman's terms, as only prohibiting certain forms of legal discrimination in establishing qualifications for suffrage. States may deny the "right to vote" for other reasons.
For example, many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote. More controversial restrictions include those laws that prohibit convicted felons from voting or, as seen in Bush v. Gore, disputes as to what rules should apply in counting or recounting ballots.The legal history and precedents set forth merely on implication is listed below:
Religious test
In several British North American colonies, before and after the 1776 Declaration of Independence, Jews, Quakers and/or Catholics were excluded from the franchise and/or from running for elections.
The Delaware Constitution of 1776 stated that "Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust, before taking his seat, or entering upon the execution of his office, shall (...) also make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit: I, A B. do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration." This was repealed by article I, section 2. of the 1792 Constitution: "No religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, under this State." The 1778 Constitution of the State of South Carolina stated that "No person shall be eligible to sit in the house of representatives unless he be of the Protestant religion," the 1777 Constitution of the State of Georgia (art. VI) that "The representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county (...) and they shall be of the Protestant religion."
With the growth in the number of Baptists in Virginia before the Revolution, the issues of religious freedom became important to rising leaders such as James Madison. As a young lawyer, he defended Baptist preachers who were not licensed by (and were opposed by) the established state Anglican Church. He carried developing ideas about religious freedom to be incorporated into the constitutional convention of the United States.
In 1787, Article One of the United States Constitution stated that "the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature". More significantly, Article Six disavowed the religious test requirements of several states, saying: "[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."[I]n 1810 the Last religious prerequisite for voting is eliminated.
In Maryland, voting rights and eligibility as candidates were extended to Jewish Americans in 1828.While there is no specification of there existing a separation in church in state within the constructs of the Constitution, we know these facts to be true:
In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state", as written in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." Jefferson reflected his frequent speaking theme that the government is not to interfere with religion.The entire correspondence between Jefferson and the Danbury Baptist Association is as follows (Courtesy of Wallbuilders):
First, from the Danbury Baptist Association:
The following is Jefferson's response:The address of the Danbury Baptist Association in the State of Connecticut, assembled October 7, 1801.To Thomas Jefferson, Esq., President of the United States of America
Sir,Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your election to office, we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyed in our collective capacity, since your inauguration , to express our great satisfaction in your appointment to the Chief Magistracy in the Unite States. And though the mode of expression may be less courtly and pompous than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, sir, to believe, that none is more sincere.
Our sentiments are uniformly on the side of religious liberty: that Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals, that no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious opinions, [and] that the legitimate power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor. But sir, our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter, together with the laws made coincident therewith, were adapted as the basis of our government at the time of our revolution. And such has been our laws and usages, and such still are, [so] that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation, and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights. And these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore, if those who seek after power and gain, under the pretense of government and Religion, should reproach their fellow men, [or] should reproach their Chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion, law, and good order, because he will not, dares not, assume the prerogative of Jehovah and make laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States is not the National Legislator and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the laws of each State, but our hopes are strong that the sentiment of our beloved President, which have had such genial effect already, like the radiant beams of the sun, will shine and prevail through all these States--and all the world--until hierarchy and tyranny be destroyed from the earth. Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and goodwill shining forth in a course of more than thirty years, we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the Chair of State out of that goodwill which he bears to the millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence and the voice of the people have called you--to sustain and support you and your Administration against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth and importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.Signed in behalf of the Association,Neh,h Dodge }Eph'm Robbins } The CommitteeStephen S. Nelson }
Messrs. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, and Stephen s. NelsonA Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, in the State of Connecticut.
Washington, January 1, 1802Gentlemen,--The affectionate sentiment of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature would "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.Th JeffersonJan. 1. 1802
(Above: A copy of Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association from January 1, 1802. Courtesy of The Library of Congress)
The Bill of Rights was one of the earliest examples in the world of complete religious freedom (adopted in 1791, only preceded by the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789) but it was interpreted as establishing a separation of Church and State only after the letter of Jefferson (see section United States for more details). At the time of the passage of the Bill of Rights, many states acted in ways that would now be held unconstitutional, some of them with official state churches. All of the early official state churches were disestablished by 1833.
The phrase of Jefferson (see above) was quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The Supreme Court did not consider the question of how this applied to the states until 1947; when they did, in Everson v. Board of Education, the court determined that the first amendment applied to the states and that a law enabling reimbursement for busing to all schools (including parochial schools) was constitutional. Before 1947, however, these provisions were not considered to apply at the state level; indeed in the 1870s and 1890s unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the constitution to accomplish this, but it was accomplished by judicial decision in 1947. In the majority decision, Justice Hugo Black wrote:
"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another ... in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' ... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."
The concept was implicit in the flight of Roger Williams from religious oppression in the Massachusetts Bay Colony to found the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations on the principle of state neutrality in matters of faith. Williams was motivated by historical abuse of governmental power, and believed that government must remove itself from anything that touched upon human beings’ relationship with God, advocating a "hedge or wall of Separation between the Garden of the Church and the Wilderness of the world" in order to keep the church pure. Through his work Rhode Island’s charter was confirmed by King Charles II of England, which explicitly stated that no one was to be “molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question, for any differences in opinion, in matters of religion.” Williams is credited with helping to shape the church and state debate in England, and influencing such men as John Milton and particularly John Locke, whose work was studied closely by Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and other architects of the U.S. Constitution. Williams theologically derived his views mainly from Scripture and his motive is seen as religious, but Jefferson's advocation of religious liberty is seen as political and social.
Another early user of the term of separation of church and state was James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights. In a 1789 debate in the House of Representatives regarding the draft of the First Amendment, the following was said:
August 15, 1789. "Mr. [Peter] Sylvester [of New York] had some doubts...He feared it [the First Amendment] might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether...Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry [of Massachusetts] said it would read better if it was that "no religious doctrine shall be established by law."...Mr. [James] Madison [of Virginia] said he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that "Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law."...[T]he State[s]...seemed to entertain an opinion that under the clause of the Constitution...it enabled them [Congress] to make laws of such a nature as might...establish a national religion; to prevent these effects he presumed the amendment was intended...Mr. Madison thought if the word "National" was inserted before religion, it would satisfy the minds of honorable gentlemen...He thought if the word "national" was introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent."
Madison contended "Because if Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body." Several years later he wrote of "total separation of the church from the state." "Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States", Madison wrote, and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States." In a letter to Edward Livingston Madison further expanded, "We are teaching the world the great truth that Govts. do better without Kings & Nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson that Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Govt." This attitude is further reflected in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, originally authored by Jefferson and championed by Madison, and guaranteeing that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination.
"... no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
Under the United States Constitution, the treatment of religion by the government is broken into two clauses: the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. Both are discussed in regard to whether certain state actions would amount to an impermissible government establishment of religion.
The phrase was also mentioned in an eloquent letter written by President John Tyler on July 10, 1843. During the 1960 presidential campaign the potential influence of the Catholic Church on John F. Kennedy's presidency was raised. If elected, it would be the first time that a Catholic would occupy the highest office in the United States. John F. Kennedy, in his Address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on September 12 1960, addressed the question directly, saying:
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute—where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote—where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference—and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him. I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish—where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source—where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials—and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all. [...] I do not speak for my church on public matters—and the church does not speak for me. Whatever issue may come before me as President—on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject—I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise. But if the time should ever come—and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible—when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.
The United States Supreme Court has referenced the separation of church and state metaphor more than 25 times, though not always fully embracing the principle, saying "the metaphor itself is not a wholly accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists between church and state". In Reynolds, the Court denied the free exercise claims of Mormons in the Utah territory who claimed polygamy was an aspect of their religious freedom. The Court used the phrase again by Justice Hugo Black in 1947 in Everson. The term has been used heavily by the Court, but is not unanimously held. In a minority opinion in Wallace v. Jaffree, Justice Rehnquist presented the view that the establishment clause was intended to protect local establishments of religion from federal interference. Rehnquist made numerous citations of cases that rebutted the idea of a total wall of separation between Church and State. A result of such reasoning was Supreme Court support for government payments to faith-based community projects. Justice Antonin Scalia has criticized the metaphor as a bulldozer removing religion from American public life.While there are laws implying the right to vote, they are just that: a mess of implications. President Obama is a brilliant man, and will use such things as implications and technicalities to arrive at how best to deny the people the right to vote based on religion and political affiliation.
On the topic of the right to freedom of speech, also a part of the First Amendment, international scholars believe these principles to be true of it:
The notion of freedom of expression is intimately linked to political debate and the concept of democracy. The norms on limiting freedom of expression mean that public debate may not be completely suppressed even in times of emergency. One of the most notable proponents of the link between freedom of speech and democracy is Alexander Meiklejohn. He argues that the concept of democracy is that of self-government by the people. For such a system to work an informed electorate is necessary. In order to be appropriately knowledgeable, there must be no constraints on the free flow of information and ideas. According to Meiklejohn, democracy will not be true to its essential ideal if those in power are able to manipulate the electorate by withholding information and stifling criticism. Meiklejohn acknowledges that the desire to manipulate opinion can stem from the motive of seeking to benefit society. However, he argues, choosing manipulation negates, in its means, the democratic ideal.
Eric Barendt has called this defense of free speech on the grounds of democracy "probably the most attractive and certainly the most fashionable free speech theory in modern Western democracies." Thomas I. Emerson expanded on this defense when he argued that freedom of speech helps to provide a balance between stability and change. Freedom of speech acts as a "safety valve" to let off steam when people might otherwise be bent on revolution. He argues that "The principle of open discussion is a method of achieving a more adaptable and at the same time more stable community, of maintaining the precarious balance between healthy cleavage and necessary consensus." Emerson furthermore maintains that "Opposition serves a vital social function in offsetting or ameliorating (the) normal process of bureaucratic decay."
Research undertaken by the Worldwide Governance Indicators project at the World Bank, indicates that freedom of speech, and the process of accountability that follows it, have a significant impact in the quality of governance of a country. "Voice and Accountability" within a country, defined as "the extent to which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and free media" is one of the six dimensions of governance that the Worldwide Governance Indicators measure for more than 200 countries.However, there are limitations applied to the principle:
According to the Freedom Forum Organization, legal systems, and society at large, recognize limits on the freedom of speech, particularly when freedom of speech conflicts with other values or rights. Limitations to freedom of speech may follow the "harm principle" or the "offense principle", for example in the case of pornography, or hate speech. Limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction or social disapprobation, or both.
In On Liberty (1859) John Stuart Mill argued that "...there ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered." Mill argues that the fullest liberty of expression is required to push arguments to their logical limits, rather than the limits of social embarrassment. However, Mill also introduced what is known as the harm principle, in placing the following limitation on free expression: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."
In 1985 Joel Feinberg introduced what is known as the "offense principle", arguing that Mill's harm principle does not provide sufficient protection against the wrongful behaviors of others. Feinberg wrote "It is always a good reason in support of a proposed criminal prohibition that it would probably be an effective way of preventing serious offense (as opposed to injury or harm) to persons other than the actor, and that it is probably a necessary means to that end." Hence Feinberg argues that the harm principle sets the bar too high and that some forms of expression can be legitimately prohibited by law because they are very offensive. But, as offending someone is less serious than harming someone, the penalties imposed should be higher for causing harm. In contrast Mill does not support legal penalties unless they are based on the harm principle. Because the degree to which people may take offense varies, or may be the result of unjustified prejudice, Feinberg suggests that a number of factors need to be taken into account when applying the offense principle, including: the extent, duration and social value of the speech, the ease with which it can be avoided, the motives of the speaker, the number of people offended, the intensity of the offense, and the general interest of the community at large.
Jo Glanville, editor of the Index on Censorship, states that "the Internet has been a revolution for censorship as much as for free speech." International, national and regional standards recognize that freedom of speech, as one form of freedom of expression, applies to any medium, including the Internet. The Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 was the first major attempt by the United States Congress to regulate pornographic material on the Internet. In 1997, in the landmark cyberlaw case of Reno v. ACLU, the U.S. Supreme Court partially overturned the law. Judge Stewart R. Dalzell, one of the three federal judges who in June 1996 declared parts of the CDA unconstitutional, in his opinion stated the following:
Jo Glanville, editor of the Index on Censorship, states that "the Internet has been a revolution for censorship as much as for free speech." International, national and regional standards recognise that freedom of speech, as one form of freedom of expression, applies to any medium, including the Internet. The Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 was the first major attempt by the United States Congress to regulate pornographic material on the Internet. In 1997, in the landmark cyberlaw case of Reno v. ACLU, the U.S. Supreme Court partially overturned the law. Judge Stewart R. Dalzell, one of the three federal judges who in June 1996 declared parts of the CDA unconstitutional, in his opinion stated the following:
"The Internet is a far more speech-enhancing medium than print, the village green, or the mails. Because it would necessarily affect the Internet itself, the CDA would necessarily reduce the speech available for adults on the medium. This is a constitutionally intolerable result. Some of the dialogue on the Internet surely tests the limits of conventional discourse. Speech on the Internet can be unfiltered, unpolished, and unconventional, even emotionally charged, sexually explicit, and vulgar – in a word, "indecent" in many communities. But we should expect such speech to occur in a medium in which citizens from all walks of life have a voice. We should also protect the autonomy that such a medium confers to ordinary people as well as media magnates. [...] My analysis does not deprive the Government of all means of protecting children from the dangers of Internet communication. The Government can continue to protect children from pornography on the Internet through vigorous enforcement of existing laws criminalizing obscenity and child pornography. [...] As we learned at the hearing, there is also a compelling need for public educations about the benefits and dangers of this new medium, and the Government can fill that role as well. In my view, our action today should only mean that Government’s permissible supervision of Internet contents stops at the traditional line of unprotected speech. [...] The absence of governmental regulation of Internet content has unquestionably produced a kind of chaos, but as one of the plaintiff’s experts put it with such resonance at the hearing: "What achieved success was the very chaos that the Internet is. The strength of the Internet is chaos." Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so that strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects."
The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Declaration of Principles adopted in 2003 makes specific reference to the importance of the right to freedom of expression for the "Information Society" in stating:
"We reaffirm, as an essential foundation of the Information society, and as outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; that this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Communication is a fundamental social process, a basic human need and the foundation of all social organisation. It is central to the Information Society. Everyone, everywhere should have the opportunity to participate and no one should be excluded from the benefits of the Information Society offers."
According to Bernt Hugenholtz and Lucie Guibault the public domain is under pressure from the "commodification of information" as item of information that previously had little or no economic value, have acquired independent economic value in the information age, such as factual data, personal data, genetic information and pure ideas. The commodification of information is taking place through intellectual property law, contract law, as well as broadcasting and telecommunications law.So it is with international law, which has been largely a manifestation of the Socialist Left. What does the First Amendment imply through its legal statute?:
Speech critical of the government
The Supreme Court declined to rule on the constitutionality of any federal law regarding the Free Speech Clause until the 20th century. For example, the Supreme Court never ruled on the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, legislation by President John Adams' Federalist Party to ban seditious libel; three of the Supreme Court's justices presided over resulting sedition trials without indicating any reservations. The leading critics of the law, Vice President Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, argued for the Acts' unconstitutionality based on the First Amendment and other Constitutional provisions. Jefferson succeeded Adams as president, in part due to the unpopularity of the latter's sedition prosecutions; he and his party quickly overturned the Acts and pardoned those imprisoned by them. In the majority opinion in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. noted the importance of this public debate as a precedent in First Amendment law and ruled that the Acts had been unconstitutional: "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history."
World War I
During the patriotic fervor of World War I, the Espionage Act of 1917 imposed a maximum sentence of twenty years for anyone who caused or attempted to cause "insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces of the United States." Hundreds of prosecutions followed. In 1919, the Supreme Court heard four appeals resulting from these cases: Schenck v. United States, Debs v. United States, Frohwerk v. United States, and Abrams v. United States
In the first of these cases, Socialist Party of America official Charles Schenck had been convicted under the Espionage Act for publishing leaflets urging resistance to the draft. Schenck appealed, arguing that the Espionage Act violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected Schenck's appeal and affirmed his conviction. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., writing for the Court, explained that "the question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." One week later, in Frohwerk v. United States, the court again upheld an Espionage Act conviction, this time that of a journalist who had criticized U.S. involvement in foreign wars.
The "clear and present danger" test of Schenck was elaborated in Debs v. United States. On June 16, 1918, Eugene V. Debs, a political activist, delivered a speech in Canton, Ohio, in which he spoke of "most loyal comrades were paying the penalty to the working class – these being Wagenknecht, Baker and Ruthenberg, who had been convicted of aiding and abetting another in failing to register for the draft." Following his speech, Debs was charged and convicted under the Espionage Act. In upholding his conviction, the Court reasoned that although he had not spoken any words that posed a "clear and present danger", taken in context, the speech had a "natural tendency and a probable effect to obstruct the recruiting services". In Abrams v. United States, four Russian refugees appealed their conviction for throwing leaflets from a building in New York; the leaflets argued against President Woodrow Wilson's intervention in Russia against the Bolshevik Revolution. The majority upheld their conviction, but Holmes and Justice Louis Brandeis dissented, holding that the government had demonstrated no "clear and present danger" in the four's political advocacy.
Extending protections
The Supreme Court denied a number of Free Speech Clause claims throughout the 1920's, including the appeal of a labor organizer, Benjamin Gitlow, who had been convicted after distributing a manifesto calling for a "revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat." In Gitlow v. New York (1925), the Court upheld the conviction, but a majority also found that the First Amendment applied to state laws as well as federal laws, via the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Holmes and Brandeis dissented in several more cases in this decade, however, advancing the argument that the Free Speech Clause protected a far greater range of political speech than the Court had previously acknowledged. In Whitney v. California (1927), in which Communist Party USA organizer Charlotte Anita Whitney had been arrested for "criminal syndicalism", Brandeis wrote a dissent in which he argued for broader protections for political speech:
Those who won our independence ... believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.
In Herndon v. Lowry (1937), the Court heard the case of African American Communist Party organizer Angelo Herndon, who had been convicted under the Slave Insurrection Statute for advocating black rule in the southern United States. In a 5-4 decision, the Court reversed Herndon's conviction, upholding Holmes' "clear and present danger" test for the first time and arguing that the state of Georgia had not demonstrated that Herndon's actions met this standard.
In 1940, Congress enacted the Smith Act, making it illegal to advocate "the propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force and violence." The statute provided law enforcement a tool to combat Communist leaders. After Eugene Dennis was convicted in the Foley Square trial for attempting to organize a Communist Party, he petitioned for certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted. In Dennis v. United States (1951), the Court upheld the law 6-2. Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson relied on Holmes' "clear and present danger" test as adapted by Learned Hand: "In each case [courts] must ask whether the gravity of the 'evil,' discounted by its improbability, justifies such invasion of free speech as necessary to avoid the danger." Clearly, Vinson suggested, clear and present danger did not intimate "that before the Government may act, it must wait until the putsch is about to be executed, the plans have been laid and the signal is awaited." In a concurring opinion, Justice Felix Frankfurter proposed a "balancing test", which soon supplanted the "clear and present danger" test:
"The demands of free speech in a democratic society as well as the interest in national security are better served by candid and informed weighing of the competing interests, within the confines of the judicial process."
In Yates v. United States (1957), the Supreme Court limited the Smith Act prosecutions to "advocacy of action" rather than "advocacy in the realm of ideas". Advocacy of abstract doctrine remained protected while speech explicitly inciting the forcible overthrow of the government was punishable under the Smith Act.
During the Vietnam War, the Court's position on public criticism of the government changed drastically. Though the Court upheld a law prohibiting the forgery, mutilation, or destruction of draft cards in United States v. O'Brien (1968), fearing that burning draft cards would interfere with the "smooth and efficient functioning" of the draft system, the next year, the court handed down its decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), expressly overruling Whitney v. California. Now the Supreme Court referred to the right to speak openly of violent action and revolution in broad terms:
"[Our] decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not allow a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or cause such action."
Brandenburg discarded the "clear and present danger" test introduced in Schenck and further eroded Dennis. In Cohen v. California (1971), the Court voted 5-4 to reverse the conviction of a man wearing a jacket reading "Fuck the Draft" in the corridors of a Los Angeles County Courthouse. Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote in the majority opinion that Cohen's jacket fell in the category of protected political speech despite the use of an expletive: "one man's vulgarity is another man's lyric."And now we come to the point where we discuss political speech:
Political speech
Anonymous speech
In Talley v. California (1960), the Court struck down a Los Angeles city ordinance that made it a crime to distribute anonymous pamphlets. Justice Hugo Black wrote in the majority opinion: "There can be no doubt that such an identification requirement would tend to restrict freedom to distribute information and thereby freedom of expression ... Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind." In McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission (1995), the Court struck down an Ohio statute that made it a crime to distribute anonymous campaign literature. However, in Meese v. Keene (1987), the Court upheld the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, under which several Canadian films were defined as "political propaganda," requiring their sponsors to be identified.
Flag desecration
The divisive issue of flag desecration as a form of protest first came before the Supreme Court in Street v. New York (1969). In response to hearing an erroneous report of the murder of civil rights activist James Meredith, Sidney Street burned a 48-star U.S. flag. Street was arrested and charged with a New York state law making it a crime "publicly [to] mutilate, deface, defile, or defy, trample upon, or cast contempt upon either by words or act [any flag of the United States]." In a 5–4 decision, the Court, relying on Stromberg v. California (1931), found that because the provision of the New York law criminalizing "words" against the flag was unconstitutional, and the trial did not sufficiently demonstrate that he was convicted solely under the provisions not yet deemed unconstitutional, the conviction was unconstitutional. The Court, however, "resist[ed] the pulls to decide the constitutional issues involved in this case on a broader basis" and left the constitutionality of flag-burning unaddressed.
The ambiguity with regard to flag-burning statutes was eliminated in Texas v. Johnson (1989). In that case, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag at a demonstration during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. Charged with violating a Texas law prohibiting the vandalizing of venerated objects, Johnson was convicted, sentenced to one year in prison, and fined $2,000. The Supreme Court reversed his conviction in a 5–4 vote. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. wrote in the decision that "if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Congress then passed a federal law barring flag burning, but the Supreme Court struck it down as well in United States v. Eichman (1990). A Flag Desecration Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been proposed repeatedly in Congress since 1989, and in 2006 failed to pass the Senate by a single vote.
The federal government and the states have long been permitted to limit obscenity or pornography. While the Supreme Court has generally refused to give obscenity any protection under the First Amendment, pornography is subject to little regulation. However, the definitions of obscenity and pornography have changed over time.
In Rosen v. United States (1896), the Supreme Court adopted the same obscenity standard as had been articulated in a famous British case, Regina v. Hicklin (1868). The Hicklin test defined material as obscene if it tended "to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall." In the early twentieth century, literary works including An American Tragedy (Theodore Dreiser, 1925) and Lady Chatterley's Lover (D.H. Lawrence, 1928) were banned for obscenity. In the federal district court case United States v. One Book Called Ulysses (1933), Judge John M. Woolsey established a new standard to evaluate James Joyce's novel Ulysses (1922), stating that works must be considered in their entirety, rather than declared obscene on the basis of an individual part of the work.
The Supreme Court ruled in Roth v. United States (1957) that the First Amendment did not protect obscenity. It also ruled that the Hicklin test was inappropriate; instead, the Roth test for obscenity was "whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest." This definition proved hard to apply, however, and in the following decade, members of the Court often reviewed films individually in a court building screening room to determine if they should be considered obscene. Justice Potter Stewart, in Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964), famously stated that, although he could not precisely define pornography, "I know it when I see it."
The Roth test was expanded when the Court decided Miller v. California (1973). Under the Miller test, a work is obscene if:
(a)...‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find the work, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,...(b)...the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (c)...the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Note that "community" standards—not national standards—are applied whether the material appeals to the prurient interest, leaving the question of obscenity to local authorities. Child pornography is not subject to the Miller test, as the Supreme Court decided in New York v. Ferber (1982) and Osborne v. Ohio (1990), ruling that the government's interest in protecting children from abuse was paramount.
Personal possession of obscene material in the home may not be prohibited by law. In Stanley v. Georgia (1969), the Court ruled that "[i]f the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch." However, it is constitutionally permissible for the government to prevent the mailing or sale of obscene items, though they may be viewed only in private. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) further upheld these rights by invalidating the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996, holding that, because the act "[p]rohibit[ed] child pornography that does not depict an actual child" it was overly broad and unconstitutional under the First Amendment and that:
"First Amendment freedoms are most in danger when the government seeks to control thought or to justify its laws for that impermissible end. The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought."
In United States v. Williams (2008), the Court upheld the PROTECT Act of 2003, ruling that prohibiting offers to provide and requests to obtain child pornography did not violate the First Amendment, even if a person charged under the Act did not possess child pornography.
Defamation
American tort liability for defamatory speech or publications traces its origins to English common law. For the first two hundred years of American jurisprudence, the basic substance of defamation law continued to resemble that existing in England at the time of the Revolution. An 1898 American legal textbook on defamation provides definitions of libel and slander nearly identical to those given by Blackstone and Coke. An action of slander required the following:
- Actionable words, such as those imputing the injured party: is guilty of some offense, suffers from a contagious disease or psychological disorder, is unfit for public office because of moral failings or an inability to discharge his or her duties, or lacks integrity in profession, trade or business;
- That the charge must be false;
- That the charge must be articulated to a third person, verbally or in writing;
- That the words are not subject to legal protection, such as those uttered in Congress; and
- That the charge must be motivated by malice.
An action of libel required the same five general points as slander, except that it specifically involved the publication of defamatory statements. For certain criminal charges of libel, such as seditious libel, the truth or falsity of the statements was immaterial, as such laws were intended to maintain public support of the government and true statements could damage this support even more than false ones. Instead, libel placed specific emphasis on the result of the publication. Libelous publications tended to "degrade and injure another person" or "bring him into contempt, hatred or ridicule."
Concerns that defamation under common law might be incompatible with the new republican form of government caused early American courts to struggle between William Blackstone's argument that the punishment of "dangerous or offensive writings...[was] necessary for the preservation of peace and good order, of government and religion, the only solid foundations of civil liberty" and the argument that the need for a free press guaranteed by the Constitution outweighed the fear of what might be written. Consequently, very few changes were made in the first two centuries after the ratification of the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court's ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) fundamentally changed American defamation law. The case redefined the type of "malice" needed to sustain a libel case. Common law malice consisted of "ill-will" or "wickedness". Now, a public officials seeking to sustain a civil action against a tort feasor needed to prove by "clear and convincing evidence" actual malice. The case involved an advertisement published in The New York Times indicating that officials in Montgomery, Alabama had acted violently in suppressing the protests of African-Americans during the civil rights movement. The Montgomery Police Commissioner, L. B. Sullivan, sued the Times for libel, stating that the advertisement damaged his reputation. The Supreme Court unanimously overruled the $500,000 judgment against the Times. Justice Brennan suggested that public officials may sue for libel only if the publisher published the statements in question with "actual malice" — "knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not."
While actual malice standard applies to public officials and public figures, in Philadelphia Newspapers v. Hepps (1988), the Court found that, with regard to private individuals, the First Amendment does "not necessarily force any change in at least some features of the common-law landscape." In Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. (1985) the Court ruled that "actual malice" need not be shown in cases involving private individuals, holding that "[i]n light of the reduced constitutional value of speech involving no matters of public concern...the state interest adequately supports awards of presumed and punitive damages – even absent a showing of 'actual malice.'" In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., the Court ruled that a private individual had to prove actual malice only to be awarded punitive damages, but not to seek actual damages. In Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988), the Court extended the "actual malice" standard to intentional infliction of emotional distress in a ruling which protected parody, in this case a fake advertisement in Hustler suggesting that evangelist Jerry Falwell's first sexual experience had been with his mother in an outhouse. Since Falwell was a public figure, the Court ruled that "importance of the free flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern" was the paramount concern, and reversed the judgement Falwell had won against Hustler for emotional distress.
In Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. (1990), the Court ruled that the First Amendment offers no wholesale exception to defamation law for statements labeled "opinion," but instead that a statement must be provably false (falsifiable) before it can be the subject of a libel suit.
Private action
State constitutions provide free speech protections similar to those of the U.S. Constitution. In a few states, such as California, a state constitution has been interpreted as providing more comprehensive protections than the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has permitted states to extend such enhanced protections, most notably in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins. In that case, the Court unanimously ruled that while the First Amendment may allow private property owners to prohibit trespass by political speakers and petition-gatherers, California was permitted to restrict property owners whose property is equivalent to a traditional public forum (often shopping malls and grocery stores) from enforcing their private property rights to exclude such individuals. However, the Court did maintain that shopping centers could impose "reasonable restrictions on expressive activity." Subsequently, New Jersey, Colorado, Massachusetts and Puerto Rico courts have adopted the doctrine; California's courts have repeatedly reaffirmed it.And the press:
The Free Press Clause protects the freedom to publish. In Lovell v. City of Griffin (1938), Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes defined "press" as "every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion." This right has been extended to media including newspapers, books, plays, movies, and video games.
A landmark decision for press freedom came in Near v. Minnesota (1931), in which the Supreme Court rejected prior restraint (pre-publication censorship). In this case, the Minnesota legislature passed a statute allowing courts to shut down "malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspapers", allowing a defense of truth only in cases where the truth had been told "with good motives and for justifiable ends." In a 5-4 decision, the Court applied the Free Press Clause to the states, rejecting the statute as unconstitutional. Hughes quoted Madison in the majority decision, writing, "The impairment of the fundamental security of life and property by criminal alliances and official neglect emphasizes the primary need of a vigilant and courageous press."
However, Near also noted an exception, allowing prior restraint in cases such as "publication of sailing dates of transports or the number or location of troops." This exception was a key point in another landmark case four decades later: New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), in which the administration of President Richard M. Nixon sought to ban the publication of the Pentagon Papers, classified government documents about the Vietnam War secretly copied by analyst Daniel Ellsberg. The Court found 6-3 that the U.S. had not met the heavy burden of proof required for prior restraint. Justice Brennan, drawing on Near in a concurrent opinion, wrote that "only governmental allegation and proof that publication must inevitably, directly, and immediately cause the occurrence of an evil kindred to imperiling the safety of a transport already at sea can support even the issuance of an interim restraining order." Justices Black and Douglas went still further, writing that prior restraints were never justified.
The courts have rarely treated content-based regulation of journalism with any sympathy. In Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974), the Court unanimously struck down a state law requiring newspapers criticizing political candidates to publish their responses. The state claimed that the law had been passed to ensure journalistic responsibility. The Supreme Court found that freedom, but not responsibility, is mandated by the First Amendment and so it ruled that the government may not force newspapers to publish that which they do not desire to publish.
Content-based regulation of television and radio, however, have been sustained by the Supreme Court in various cases. Since there is a limited number of frequencies for non-cable television and radio stations, the government licenses them to various companies. However, the Supreme Court has ruled that the problem of scarcity does not allow the raising of a First Amendment issue. The government may restrain broadcasters, but only on a content-neutral basis. In Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, the Supreme Court upheld the Federal Communications Commission's authority to restrict the use of "indecent" material in broadcasting.
State governments retain the right to tax newspapers, just as they may tax other commercial products. Generally, however, taxes that focus exclusively on newspapers have been found unconstitutional. In Grosjean v. American Press Co.(1936), the Court invalidated a state tax on newspaper advertising revenues, holding that the role of the press in creating "informed public opinion" was vital. Similarly, some taxes that give preferential treatment to the press have been struck down. In Arkansas Writers' Project v. Ragland (1987), for instance, the Court invalidated an Arkansas law exempting "religious, professional, trade and sports journals" from taxation since the law amounted to the regulation of newspaper content. In Leathers v. Medlock (1991), the Supreme Court found that states may treat different types of the media differently, such as by taxing cable television, but not newspapers. The Court found that "differential taxation of speakers, even members of the press, does not implicate the First Amendment unless the tax is directed at, or presents the danger of suppressing, particular ideas."
Petition and assembly:In Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), the Court ruled that the First Amendment did not give a journalist the right to refuse a subpoena from a grand jury. The issue decided in the case was whether a journalist could refuse to "appear and testify before state and Federal grand juries" basing the refusal on the belief that such appearance and testimony "abridges the freedom of speech and press guaranteed by the First Amendment." The 5–4 decision was that such a protection was not provided by the First Amendment. However, a concurring opinion by Justice Lewis F. Powell, in which he stated that a claim for press privilege "should be judged on its facts by the striking of a proper balance between freedom of the press", has been frequently cited by lower courts since the decision.
The Petition Clause protects the right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The Petition Clause first came to prominence in the 1830's, when Congress established the gag rule barring anti-slavery petitions from being heard; the rule was overturned by Congress several years later. Petitions against the Espionage Act of 1917 resulted in imprisonments. The Supreme Court did not rule on either issue.
Today this right encompasses petitions to all three branches of the federal government—the Congress, the executive and the judiciary—and has been extended to the states through incorporation. According to the Supreme Court, "redress of grievances" is to be construed broadly: it includes not solely appeals by the public to the government for the redressing of a grievance in the traditional sense, but also, petitions on behalf of private interests seeking personal gain. The right not only protects demands for "a redress of grievances" but also demands for government action.
In Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri (2011), the Supreme Court stated regarding the Free Speech Clause and the Petition Clause:
"It is not necessary to say that the two Clauses are identical in their mandate or their purpose and effect to acknowledge that the rights of speech and petition share substantial common ground... Both speech and petition are integral to the democratic process, although not necessarily in the same way. The right to petition allows citizens to express their ideas, hopes, and concerns to their government and their elected representatives, whereas the right to speak fosters the public exchange of ideas that is integral to deliberative democracy as well as to the whole realm of ideas and human affairs. Beyond the political sphere, both speech and petition advance personal expression, although the right to petition is generally concerned with expression directed to the government seeking redress of a grievance."
The right of assembly was originally distinguished from the right to petition. In United States v. Cruikshank (1875), the Supreme Court held that "the right of the people peaceably to assemble for the purpose of petitioning Congress for a redress of grievances, or for anything else connected with the powers or duties of the National Government, is an attribute of national citizenship, and, as such, under protection of, and guaranteed by, the United States. The very idea of a government, republican in form, implies a right on the part of its citizens to meet peaceably for consultation in respect to public affairs and to petition for a redress of grievances." Justice Morrison Waite's opinion for the Court carefully distinguished the right to peaceably assemble as a secondary right, while the right to petition was labeled to be a primary right. Later cases, however, paid less attention to these distinctions.
In two 1960's decisions collectively known as forming the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, the Court established that the right to petition prohibited the application of antitrust law to statements made by private entities before public bodies: a monopolist may freely go before the city council and encourage the denial of its competitor's building permit without being subject to Sherman Act liabilityAnd finally, the mythical freedom of association:
Although the First Amendment does not explicitly mention freedom of association, the Supreme Court ruled, in National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama (1958), that this freedom was protected by the Amendment and that privacy of membership was an essential part of this freedom. In Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984), the Court held that associations may not exclude people for reasons unrelated to the group's expression, such as gender.
Thus, as you can see, with the broad range of legal statutes that can be so broadly interpreted by our lawmakers and the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court as to essentially lead to the laws' implied meaning based on their varying degrees of ambiguity alone, one can see from where President Obama is deriving his authority. The fact that in no part of the Constitution is there written that the American people specifically have the right to vote, but we do anyway because it is an implied right of man based on "the laws of nature and the Laws of nature's God," what will stop Obama from deriving the authority to cease the culture and institution that has determined the course of political history in the United States since 1789? Furthermore, since the Constitution does not provide a statute for a separation of church and state, but rather this concept was originated in the January 1, 1802 letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, this is contributing to the further irony behind the president's close-knit alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood. With his background being entrenched in Islam, the president has dedicated the majority of his foreign and domestic policies in try to sell the religion to the Western nations of Christendom. Also, none other than Noam Chomsky has observed Obama's attempts at undermining the process of democratization in the Arab States. Could this be a coincidence? In the article I wrote titled "Obama, the Twelfth Imam and Madhi of Islamic Lore: His Jihad on the Christian and Jewish Infidels in America, the West, and Israel," I provided a series of lists examining the teachings of the Qu'ran courtesy of The Religion of Peace, with one of those lists pertaining to the question of whether the religion of Islam, which is governed under the system of laws known as Shari'ah, and a non-Muslim government can coexist. The answer, as I have always suspected, was an emphatic "no." There are multiple verses within the Qu'ran declaring the sovereignty of Allah over all. Here are a few verses from the website that provide these declarations from the Islamic holy book:However, in Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston (1995), the Court ruled that a group may exclude people from membership if their presence would affect the group's ability to advocate a particular point of view. Likewise, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000), the Court ruled that a New Jersey law, which forced the Boy Scouts of America to admit an openly gay member, to be an unconstitutional abridgment of the Boy Scouts' right to free association.
It should be noted that Islam requires undying loyalty to Allah and his Messenger, the Prophet Muhammad. Thus, there can be no allegiance paid by a Muslim to a kafir nation. (English translation "a person who rejects God in Islam or who hides, denies, or covers the "Islamic version of truth.") As the website quoted the former mufti of the Grand Mosque in Mecca as having said: "His homeland may not be Islamic, so how can he be loyal to his homeland?"
Another great irony based on the former mufti's quote is how Obama denigrates the United States to all of his Arab State allies. He faults the general public of the U.S. for the predominantly-Islamic states of the Middle East, blaming the attacks on the U.S. Embassies in Egypt and Libya which resulted in the deaths of four innocent Americans, including the Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens on an Egyptian Christian ex-patriot who migrated to the U.S. who filmed an anti-Islamic film in an attempt to divert attention from the fact that his administration, particularly former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, failed to call in the military when the terrorists raided the Embassy in Benghazi, Libya. He also speaks fluent Arabic, often reciting verses from the Qu'ran when he travels to the Middle East. He bowed before King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. According to Wikipedia, the following has been either accused or confirmed about King Abdullah's violations of human rights:
On 16 February 2003, Parade Magazine's David Wallechinsky rated King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah as the second worst dictator in the world. Most of this criticism stems from the fact that most of Saudi citizens live under a strict Wahhabist interpretation of Sharia law, which mandates the amputation of hands as a punishment for theft and floggings for crimes like drunkenness. Execution by public beheading is common for murder, rape, drug trafficking, and witchcraft, and Abdullah's policies towards the rights of women have also been criticized. In a slight rebuff to accusations of human rights violations, Saudi inmates of Najran Province sent the King well-wishes from jail and wished him a speedy recovery.
King Abdullah has also been criticized for his policies on religious freedom, which is reportedly non-existent, and the Saudi government allegedly has arrested Shiite pilgrims on the Hajj. On 24 January 2007, Human Rights Watch sent an open letter to King Abdullah asking him to cease religious persecution of the Ahmadi faith in Saudi Arabia. Two letters were sent in November 2006 and February 2007 asking him to remove the travel ban on critics of the Saudi government. Human Rights Watch has not yet indicated whether they have received any response to these letters.
In a nutshell, Chomsky has asserted that by dent of Obama stifling the process of democratization in nations espousing Shari'ah law, he is guilty by association with that which dictated his upbringing from a small child to his current status as the world's most powerful man. Furthermore, let us not forget what the Shi'ite legend according to the Hadith called the Bahar al-Anvar, which states that according to "Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a 'tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West.' Commanding 'the strongest army on earth,' the new ruler in the West will carry 'a clear sign' from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us.'" Also, the other items of interest regarding Obama are to be noted as well: In a curious coincidence "Obama's first and second names--Barack Hussein--mean 'the blessing of Hussein' in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means 'he is with us,' the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition." We also know that the Egyptian independent news agency Al-Masry Al-Youm promulgated the president to be "Obama the Awaited" sometime around June 5, 2009, less than half a year into his first year in office. Lastly, various celebrities and political figures such as Jamie Foxx, who declared Obama to be "The Lord and Savior"; Oprah, who proudly proclaimed during the 2008 campaign stop in Iowa that "He is the One!" not but once but twice; and finally, there is the Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who claimed that he himself was God and Obama was the Messiah -- all of these things led to mass rounds of applause and cheers. The Obama administration is currently mired in a series of scandals that just got added to with the current revelation of the PRISM program of phone, Internet, and credit card surveillance on tens of millions of random American citizens. However, the British news agency The Guardian reports the National Security Agency (NSA) has a tool called "Boundless Informant" that details and even maps by country the voluminous amount of information it collects from computer and telephone networks:On 30 October 2007, during a state visit to the United Kingdom, King Abdullah was greeted by protesters accusing him of being a "murderer" and a "torturer". Concerns were raised in the UK about the treatment of women and homosexuals by the Saudi kingdom and over alleged bribes involving arms deals between Saudi Arabia and the UK.
(The color scheme ranges from green [least subjected to surveillance] through yellow and orange to red [most surveillance]. Note the '2007' date in the image relates to the document from which the interactive map derives its top secret classification, not to the map itself.)
The National Security Agency has developed a powerful tool for recording and analysing where its intelligence comes from, raising questions about its repeated assurances to Congress that it cannot keep track of all the surveillance it performs on American communications.
The Guardian has acquired top-secret documents about the NSA datamining tool, called Boundless Informant, that details and even maps by country the voluminous amount of information it collects from computer and telephone networks.
The focus of the internal NSA tool is on counting and categorizing the records of communications, known as metadata, rather than the content of an email or instant message.
The Boundless Informant documents show the agency collecting almost 3 billion pieces of intelligence from US computer networks over a 30-day period ending in March 2013. One document says it is designed to give NSA officials answers to questions like, "What type of coverage do we have on country X" in "near real-time by asking the SIGINT [signals intelligence] infrastructure."
An NSA factsheet about the program, acquired by the Guardian, says: "The tool allows users to select a country on a map and view the metadata volume and select details about the collections against that country."
Under the heading "Sample use cases", the factsheet also states the tool shows information including: "How many records (and what type) are collected against a particular country."
A snapshot of the Boundless Informant data, contained in a top secret NSA "global heat map" seen by the Guardian, shows that in March 2013 the agency collected 97bn pieces of intelligence from computer networks worldwide.
(The heat map reveals how much data is being collected from around the world. Note the '2007' date in the image relates to the document from which the interactive map derives its top secret classification, not to the map itself.)
Iran was the country where the largest amount of intelligence was gathered, with more than 14bn reports in that period, followed by 13.5bn from Pakistan. Jordan, one of America's closest Arab allies, came third with 12.7bn, Egypt fourth with 7.6bn and India fifth with 6.3bn.
The heatmap gives each nation a color code based on how extensively it is subjected to NSA surveillance. The color scheme ranges from green (least subjected to surveillance) through yellow and orange to red (most surveillance).
The disclosure of the internal Boundless Informant system comes amid a struggle between the NSA and its overseers in the Senate over whether it can track the intelligence it collects on American communications. The NSA's position is that it is not technologically feasible to do so.
At a hearing of the Senate intelligence committee In March this year, Democratic senator Ron Wyden asked James Clapper, the director of national intelligence: "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"
"No sir," replied Clapper.
Judith Emmel, an NSA spokeswoman, told the Guardian in a response to the latest disclosures: "NSA has consistently reported – including to Congress – that we do not have the ability to determine with certainty the identity or location of all communicants within a given communication. That remains the case."
Other documents seen by the Guardian further demonstrate that the NSA does in fact break down its surveillance intercepts which could allow the agency to determine how many of them are from the US. The level of detail includes individual IP addresses.
IP address is not a perfect proxy for someone's physical location but it is rather close, said Chris Soghoian, the principal technologist with the Speech Privacy and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "If you don't take steps to hide it, the IP address provided by yourinternet provider will certainly tell you what country, state and, typically, city you are in," Soghoian said.
That approximation has implications for the ongoing oversight battle between the intelligence agencies and Congress.
On Friday, in his first public response to the Guardian's disclosures this week on NSA surveillance, Barack Obama said that that congressional oversight was the American peoples' best guarantee that they were not being spied on.
"These are the folks you all vote for as your representatives in Congress and they are being fully briefed on these programs," he said. Obama also insisted that any surveillance was "very narrowly circumscribed".
Senators have expressed their frustration at the NSA's refusal to supply statistics. In a letter to NSA director General Keith Alexander in October last year, senator Wyden and his Democratic colleague on the Senate intelligence committee, Mark Udall, noted that "the intelligence community has stated repeatedly that it is not possible to provide even a rough estimate of how many American communications have been collected under the Fisa Amendments Act, and has even declined to estimate the scale of this collection."
At a congressional hearing in March last year, Alexander denied point-blank that the agency had the figures on how many Americans had their electronic communications collected or reviewed. Asked if he had the capability to get them, Alexander said: "No. No. We do not have the technical insights in the United States." He added that "nor do we do have the equipment in the United States to actually collect that kind of information".
Soon after, the NSA, through the inspector general of the overall US intelligence community, told the senators that making such a determination would jeopardize US intelligence operations – and might itself violate Americans' privacy.
"All that senator Udall and I are asking for is a ballpark estimate of how many Americans have been monitored under this law, and it is disappointing that the inspectors general cannot provide it," Wyden told Wired magazine at the time.
The documents show that the team responsible for Boundless Informant assured its bosses that the tool is on track for upgrades.
The team will "accept user requests for additional functionality or enhancements," according to the FAQ acquired by the Guardian. "Users are also allowed to vote on which functionality or enhancements are most important to them (as well as add comments). The BOUNDLESS INFORMANT team will periodically review all requests and triage according to level of effort (Easy, Medium, Hard) and mission impact (High, Medium, Low)."
Emmel, the NSA spokeswoman, told the Guardian: "Current technology simply does not permit us to positively identify all of the persons or locations associated with a given communication (for example, it may be possible to say with certainty that a communication traversed a particular path within the internet. It is harder to know the ultimate source or destination, or more particularly the identity of the person represented by the TO:, FROM: or CC: field of an e-mail address or the abstraction of an IP address).
"Thus, we apply rigorous training and technological advancements to combine both our automated and manual (human) processes to characterize communications – ensuring protection of the privacy rights of the American people. This is not just our judgment, but that of the relevant inspectors general, who have also reported this."
She added: "The continued publication of these allegations about highly classified issues, and other information taken out of context, makes it impossible to conduct a reasonable discussion on the merits of these programs."
Additional reporting: James Ball in New York and Spencer Ackerman in Washington.
--
So, we now know the information has been leaked to a much greater extent to the British media. But there are more detail regarding the British government (Courtesy of The Associated Press):
--
So, there has been an Anglo-American alliance with regard to PRISM. It looks like Henry Kissinger's recommendation for Obama to create a "new world order" may be coming to fruition right before our eyes.
The two items I have posted are the two scariest ideas and revelations yet. The first is a video from Glenn Beck, who claims World War III is on the horizon:
(Above: The first video presented by Glenn Beck on World War III.)
(Above: The second video presented by Glenn Beck on World War III.)
The Blaze quotes Beck on his theories:
On Tuesday, Beck told his audience where he believes the road will now lead: World War III.“The one thing that always gets me in trouble is usually I am way ahead of the game, and I have no perception of time,” Beck said. “I see things on a flat wall. They are coming, but it won’t be tomorrow.”He added: “I hope with everything in me that I’m wrong, but the pattern of history is incredibly consistent…Everything is up for grabs in the world, and the rush for power is on.”Beck argued that there are currently three dominant groups:‘The Caliphate’: “It is the stated goal of Muslim Brotherhood leaders and many far left Islamists to re-establish the Caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, or the global Islamic state,” Beck said, playing video of Islamist leaders across the globe saying just that.But, he added, this group is divided between Sunni and Shia Muslims. While Sunni Muslims — who dominate much of post-Arab Spring North Africa, Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood — aim to implement an Islamic state, Beck said the radical Shiites who wield influence in places like Iran, Assad’s Syria, and Pakistan are more focused on hastening the return of the twelfth imam. They believe he will only appear when the world is drowned in blood and chaos, so they aim to create those conditions.“But either way, they both [believe] they control the entire world in the end,” Beck said.‘The Controllers’: “Whether they are communists, socialists, fascists, progressives, Fabian socialists, bankers, Bilderbergs, Nazis, drug lords, Mayor Bloomberg… ” Beck stated. “[This is] anyone who wants either wants power in their own little fiefdom, or wants to control the planet through the United Nations or whatever. Anyone who wants a slice of that ‘control’ pie.”He put countries like Russia, China, and North Korea in the “control” category.‘Those That Just Want to Survive’: But throughout the world, most people aren’t thinking in terms of global domination, Beck said. Most people just want to live their lives, or, depending on where they live, just want enough food and water to get by. Beck put about 90% of the world into this category.“That, unfortunately, this is the group that loses in the end, because this group is always forced to choose between stuff and sacrifice,” Beck said. “They have to choose sides eventually.”
He goes on to say:
“The problem is, nobody is offering you a real choice,” Beck said, proceeding to draw out the potential “new map.”
“The only way we stand in the end is to stand for something. If we don’t, we’ll have to choose between one of [the first] two groups,” Beck declared.
At the end of the show, Beck invited Patrick Poole, the national security expert at PJ Media, and Frank Gaffney, the former assistant secretary of defense and the founder of the Center for Security Policy, to weigh in on his conclusions.
All three agreed that Syria is a lynchpin, and that intervention will have major, international ramifications.
“We’re watching flash points developing all over the world,” Gaffney added. “North Korea, China, Sweden, Venezuela and what’s coming next in Latin America, Africa…The problem is, we’ve got these tectonic shifts that are taking place, and we’re not an anchor.”
***
And finally, most frightening of all, is an article pertaining to a meeting between journalist Doug Hagmann and a high-level figure within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (Courtesy of Canada Free Press):
Washington, D.C.—Something quite unexpected happened just hours ago, in the dark of night, during a two-day layover in Washington, DC. My son and I are scheduled to take part in a seminar outside of Raleigh, North Carolina this weekend, so we combined our travels to include a side-trip to DC for a business meeting we had previously arranged. It was during this layover that something seemingly ripped from the pages of a spy novel took place.
While I was in the middle of a perfectly good and well needed sleep in the very early hours of this morning, I received a message. I cannot disclose how I received this message, at least not now. The discerning reader will understand why, which, by the way, would make a very interesting story alone. The message was extremely clear and precise. I was to meet my high level DHS insider at a very specific location in Washington, DC, at a time when most ‘normal’ people, except third-shift workers are still asleep. And, I was to come alone and make certain that I was not being followed, and I was to leave any cell phone or electronic device behind.
Seriously? I thought, as I was still trying to make sense of it all. Is all this really necessary? Is this really happening? I considered waking my son to accompany me, but opted to follow the instructions to the letter. Besides, I thought, he’s not the most affable middle-of-the-night person. I left a hastily written but detailed note in my hotel room before my departure in the event something happened. I looked at the digital clock on my rental car (my personal car would never survive our long distance trip). It was 3:20 a.m.
The meeting
I felt like I was part of a spy movie set in our nation’s capital. A chill rose up my spine as I waited in the dark of a chilly, misty and foggy pre-dawn morning. I was to meet with my DHS insider source at a time when most of the nation is asleep, at a place I could swear was featured in the movie All the President’s Men. No one and I mean no one knows I’m here, I thought, as I could see one of the most recognizable national landmarks in the distance.
My source appeared out of nowhere, or so it seemed, and handed me a cup of coffee with the astute observation that I looked like I needed it. So tell me, I asked impatiently, why do we have to meet at this time, at this location, and under such specific circumstances? ‘Because this might be our last meeting,’ he stated.
Maybe it was the lack of sleep, the time, the place, or the chill of the misty rain that caused my sense of foreboding. “Explain,” I asked in an almost demanding tone. So he did, without mincing words.
The details
“If anyone thinks that what’s going on right now with all of this surveillance of American citizens is to fight some sort of foreign enemy, they’re delusional. If people think that this ‘scandal’ can’t get any worse, it will, hour by hour, day by day. This has the ability to bring down our national leadership, the administration and other senior elected officials working in collusion with this administration, both Republican and Democrats. People within the NSA, the Department of Justice, and others, they know who they are, need to come forth with the documentation of ‘policy and practice’ in their possession, disclose what they know, fight what’s going on, and just do their job. I have never seen anything like this, ever. The present administration is going after leakers, media sources, anyone and everyone who is even suspected of ‘betrayal.’ That’s what they call it, ‘betrayal.’ Can you believe the size of their cahones? This administration considers anyone telling the truth about Benghazi, the IRS, hell, you name the issue, ‘betrayal,’” he said.
“We know all this already,” I stated. He looked at me, giving me a look like I’ve never seen, and actually pushed his finger into my chest. “You don’t know jack,” he said, “this is bigger than you can imagine, bigger than anyone can imagine. This administration is collecting names of sources, whistle blowers and their families, names of media sources and everybody they talk to and have talked to, and they already have a huge list. If you’re not working for MSNBC or CNN, you’re probably on that list. If you are a website owner with a brisk readership and a conservative bent, you’re on that list. It’s a political dissident list, not an enemy threat list,” he stated.
“What’s that exactly mean, being on that list, that is,” I asked, trying to make sense of it all.
“It means that there will be censorship under the color of authority of anyone in the U.S. who is attempting to expose what’s going on in our name. It’s about controlling any damning information from reaching epidemic proportions. It’s damage control to the extreme. It’s about the upcoming censorship of the internet in the name of national security. The plans are already in place. These latest reports about ‘spying eyes’ have turned this administration and others connected to it into something very, very dangerous. They feel cornered and threatened, and I’m hearing about some plans they have to shut down the flow of information that is implicating them of wrongdoing. Time is short,” he stated.
“How are they going to do this? How is it even possible” I asked.
“First, they intend to use the Justice Department to silence journalists like in the Rosen case, but they won’t stop there. They will use a host of national security policies, laws, letters, whatever to take out the bigger threats,” he stated.
Next, they will use some sort of excuse, an external threat, and I believe it will be a combination of the economic collapse and a Mid-East war that will begin in Syria to throttle the information that is accessible on the Internet. And you know what? People will believe it!”
Based on what I’ve seen, most of which I should not have seen, the DHS is co-ordinating efforts with other federal agencies to begin to threaten American citizens with incarceration for non-compliance. You know the old talk of color coded lists? Well, this is what they will be using. People exposing the truth about Benghazi, killing the U.S. Dollar, even those questioning Obama?s legal status and eligibility to be President are the current targets. And they’ve had five long years to get to this point. The ugly truth is that these policies and practices did not start under Obama, but long before. This is about the killing of our Constitutional Republic. The murder of our country and the stripping of our rights. While many have been preoccupied with one issue, few have seen the bigger issue. This is the ‘end game,’ for all the marbles,” he stated.
More to come
“Please,” pleaded my source, “get this information out while you can. Tell people what I’m saying, that we don’t have much time, that after the latest exposure of spying, Obama, Jarrett, Axelrod, and others, including members of Congress, have put their plans into high gear. This is about the Marxist takeover of America. This is about our country being able to survive another July 4th holiday. This is about a world war about to break out that will kill millions of people, all because of the agenda of this administration.”
“They are very dangerous and will do anything and everything to stop the onslaught of negative information that’s being reported by the main stream media. But only about one quarter of the real information is being reported. The other three quarters will be the game changer. But first, tell people what I’ve said. Let them know that more will follow but get this information out right now while the internet is still relatively free. Do it today.”
My source provided additional information, but I am abiding by his wish to get this much out. I am writing now to let people know that we are in for seriously dangerous times ahead. Deadly times. War, and censorship under the color of authority and under the pretext of of national security. It’s about to get a lot uglier. Stay tuned.
***
Plato stated in his greatest philosophical work The Republic one of the most famous quotes in the history of Western democracy:
"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men."Valarie Jarrett, Senior Adviser to President Barack Obama, is quoted to have said this during the 2012 Presidential Election:
(Above: Picture of Valarie Jarrett, Senior Adviser to President Barack Obama, in a quote before the 2012 Presidential Election. Courtesy of Wikipedia.)
“After we win this election, it’s our turn. Payback time. Everyone not with us is against us and they better be ready because we don’t forget. The ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go.” (Courtesy of United Liberty)
Better than 50% of registered voters in both 2008 and 2012 voted for Barack Obama to be president. The warning signs that there might well be a problem at the time of his election were there, yet the people bought into his messages of "Change," and "Yes, we can!" He has been hailed by Oprah Winfrey, Jamie Foxx, and Louis Farrakhan domestically as a messianic figure, and various media outlets and world leaders in the Islamic states of the Arab world that he is "Obama the Awaited," while Shi'ite Muslims are comparing the irony of Obama's rise to power as his being the "promised warrior," the Mahdi, the Ultimate Savior, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. It should be reiterated that Obama's first and second names--Barack Hussein--mean "the blessing of Hussein" in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means "he is with us," the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition. Furthermore, it is said that the Mahdi will assume power in the West and herald the fall of the West and the victory of Islam to conquer the world. With definition of "Hussein" being what it is and Isaiah said that the Son of God, the true Savior of the world would be called Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14), meaning "God is with us," one may derive that Obama is a man declaring himself to be "the Son of God - the True Savior - God is with us." Therefore, there can be no mistaking the undeniable fact that the theme of the Antichrist is strongly embodied within the cult of personality of Barack Obama, for he and his minions have dropped subtle, yet unmistakable hints to his claim of deity.
My theory is the Obama is quite possibly the Mahdi, and through these various acts of political and religious persecution with the IRS, the State Department, and the Justice Department, he is slowly building upon the Orwellian theme of "the omnipotence of the state." Doug Hagmann warned his readers, who in general are the American people, of "the Marxist takeover of America." It is interesting to note how Muslims in America are traditionally aligned with the Democratic Party, which is a "soft" form of Marxism. But if one reads further into how Obama is going about achieving his goals, it is obvious he is employing the Islamic teaching of muruna, which is English for "flexibility." which has been used to catapult Shari'ah by Western means. There is a verse in the Qu'ran that states the following:
Bukhari (49:857): "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."
Sheikh Yusif al-Qaradawi, the main Muslim Brotherhood intellect who initiated muruna in 1989 while in the United States during the annual conference of the Association of Muslim Youth Forums, was with Mohammed Hamadi, a leading rebel in Libya who participated heavily in the “Arab Spring.” Hamadi is also the head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Mauritania. In what the forum termed “The Priorities of The Islamic Movement in The Next Three Decades” (from 1990 to 2020), they planned to attain what they described as “the goals of the Islamic Movement.” The plan confirms Badei’s utopian hope for the “establishment of an Islamic state, governed according to Qur’anic law — first in Egypt and eventually in the entire world.” Accordingly, muruna calls for “organized, popular work to return to Islam in order to lead society, all of society … to bring back the caliphate … to announce Jihad either by arms, by pen, or by heart.” Thus, by reversing Islamic law, muruna "concludes an amazing doctrine that permits all prohibitions. (Courtesy of PJ Media)
There is still yet the issue regarding the Name and the Mark of the Beast. Walid Shoebat describes this in startling detail:
"Revelation 13:1 states, "And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the seas, having seven hands and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy."
Shoebat says this verse "declares that the name of the beast or Antichrist is "blasphemy." Mr. Shoebat defines the biblical meaning of this term: "Blasphemy is an anti-Yehweh or anti-Christ word or deed to claim the attributes of God, claim to be Messiah, deny the Holy Spirit, deny the trinity, the cross, or even denying God's edicts and declarations -- all are blasphemy. Satan blasphemed when he said, 'I will be like the Most High,' (Isaish 14:14). Satan has always desired to be like God." Thus, according to Shoebat, the name of the beast or Antichrist will contain a credal aspect to it that will be anti-Yahweh and anti-Christ and will exalt another one over God. The Shahadatan is the Islamic creed which declares, “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is The One sent by Allah [The Messenger of Allah].” This creed alone fulfills the blasphemy requirements by stating there is another God other than Jehovah and that Muhammad supercedes the place of Jesus the Messiah. Mr. Shoebat says, “the Mark, the Name, the Number, and the Image of the Beast–are indicators of allegiance and submission to Beast [sic].” “In the simplest of terms, the Mark of the Beast is essentially the emblem, the symbol, or the identifying mark of the coming Beast kingdom. By donning this mark, people will identify with the Kingdom of the Beast and the values and beliefs that this kingdom represents.”
"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." (Revelation 13:18) A common interpretation of the number 666 usually involves Gematria, "a mystical form of numerology that assigns a numerical value to each letter from any given name. After the sum total of all of the letters is added up, the final result is the number of that individual's name." One major problem with this method of interpretation is which alphabet does one use in determining the name of the Antichrist? The biblical Hebrew, the biblical Greek, Latin, English? Shoebat states that if there is a Gematria interpretation for the number 666 it must correlate with the Name of the Beast which is the anti-Yahweh and anti-Christ creed of blasphemy.
After examining the Codex Vaticanus Greek Text of Revelation, Mr. Shoebat says that he noticed the Greek letters Chi, Xi, Stigma, which formed the 666 of Revelation 13:18, resembled "the most common creed of Islam Bismillah (or Basmalah), written in Arabic. Bismillah literally means "In the Name of Allah," and is followed by the symbol of crossed swords, which is used universally throughout the Muslim world to signify Islam." He says that only the first two words Bismi (Name of) and llah (Allah) are necessary to constitute the Basmalah. The similarities between the two sets of letters/words led him to the conclusion that it was possible that John, to whom God revealed the visions of Revelation, saw the Arabic writing and recorded them with their Greek letter counterparts. This would fulfill the requirement that the number 666 also depict the Name of Blasphemy or as he pointed out, the Name of Allah. [Note: Others have stated that Codex Vaticanus does not contain an original copy of the Book of Revelation but that Mr. Shoebat may have looked at some other ancient manuscript] (p. 367-374)On the issue of the Mark of the Beast:
The Greek word charagma translated as mark in Revelation 13:16-18 means "a stamp, an imprinted mark." Mr. Shoebat says that in John's time charagma was reserved for slaves in what was called a badge of servitude." He states Muslims are called slaves of Allah and wear headbands and badges with Islamic mottos, creeds, words, and symbols written on them. These express their subservience and allegiance to Allah and his prophet Muhammad. He relates that when he read these passages in Revelation chapter 13 about a mark on the forehead and hand, he noticed they mirrored the Muslims' custom of putting badges on their foreheads and arms. They do this in response to a Qur'anic verse, "And when the word is fulfilled concerning them, We shall bring forth a beast of the earth to speak unto them because mankind had not faith in Our revelations." In the Bible the Beast is evil but in the Qur'an the Beast has a "holy mission to revive Islam and mark the foreheads of all true Muslim believers." (p. 375-379)And about the Image of the Beast:
“14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. 15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” (Revelation 13:14-15) Some Westerners thinks this means that there will be an animated statue of the Antichrist. Mr. Shoebat gives some possible biblical definitions for the image of Revelation 13. Judaism had a Temple with many articles placed inside such as the Ark of the Covenant and the Menorah: “For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or an image.” (Hosea 3:4) Islam too has a Temple for Allah (the Ka’ba) along with Temple articles (the Black Stone). Just as the Jewish Temple articles foreshadowed the coming of God’s Messiah so too Islam’s Temple foreshadows the coming of Satan’s Antichrist. The image could be a national emblem such as a flag of the revived Islamic Empire and caliphate. It could be an idol such as the statue of King Nebuchadnezzar or the meteorite that Paul said was located in the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus or the Black Stone Ka’ba in Mecca. Indeed, the image might be a likeness of the Antichrist.
Muslims believe and teach that when the Islamic Jesus returns he will abolish Christianity and Judaism. He will destroy all the cross symbols since Islam declares that he was never crucified. In reality, Jesus will return and destroy the images of Islam. Mr. Shoebat quotes Psalms 82 and 83, which he says speaks of a war between the Messiah and the Antichrist, and compares them with Judges 8:21,26: “Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna.” (Psalm 83:11) “So Zebah and Zalmunna said, “Rise yourself, and kill us; for as a man is, so is his strength.” So Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the crescent ornaments that were on their camels’ necks…Now the weight of the gold earrings that he requested was one thousand seven hundred shekels of gold, besides the crescent ornaments, pendants, and purple robes which were on the kings of Midian, and besides the chains that were around their camels’ necks.” (Judges 8:21,26) He states that just as David was a type of the King Messiah and Joseph a type of the Suffering Messiah, so too is Gideon a type of the Warrior Messiah who will abolish Islam and tear down the Islamic symbols from the high places (the minarets).
The Hebrew word saharon translated as ornaments in Judges 8:21 means crescent, moon and comes from the root word sahar which is the word used for the name of Satan in Isaiah 14: Hilal ben Sahar. The King James Bible translates Hilal as Lucifer and the full phrase means morning star/crescent moon. The crescent moon and star are Islamic symbols and according to Mr. Shoebat this means that “Islam and the name of Satan are one and the same.” The image of the crescent moon and star are prevalent throughout the Islamic world and may possibly reflect the image of the Antichrist/Mahdi. (p.380-387)And on the ultimate act of worshiping an idol -- the Ka'ba (the Black Stone):
“Both Antichrist’s followers and Muslims bow to an image. The great idol of Islam, the Black-Stone and its veneration has been around from time immemorial.” “Everyone knows that Ephesus is the official guardian of the temple of the great Artemis, whose image fell down to us from heaven?” (Acts 19:35) Mr. Shoebat says that “the image of Artemis is similar to the meteorite stone image in Mecca which Allah commands 1.3 billion Muslims to literally bow down and prostrate themselves toward at least seventeen times during their five daily prayers.” He makes a connection between the meteorite that is located at the Kaaba and Lucifer’s image depicted in Revelation ch. 8 and 9: “And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.”(Revelation 9:1) “And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood…And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters.” (Revelation 8:8,10) The great star is Satan, the mountain is an empire, and the rivers and waters are the people of the earth. Satan, the fallen star, and the revival of the Islamic Empire will cause one-third of mankind to dies.
“The Black Stone of Mecca owes its reputation to the tradition that it fell from the “heavens”.” Mr. Shoebat declares that the Black Stone of Mecca is “clearly an “image” of Satan”. According to authenticated Islamic tradition Muhammad said the following concerning the animation of the image in Revelation 13:15, “Allah will raise up the stone [the Black Stone] on the Day of Judgment, and it will have two-eyes with which it will see and a tongue which it talks with, and it will give witness in favor of everyone who touched it in truth.” One Islamic author noted that many years ago the Black Stone was, “whiter than milk; it was only later that it became black as it absorbed the sins of those who touched it.” During the Hajj or pilgrimage to the Kaaba, Muslims circle the Black Stone in a counterclockwise movement and are thereby cleansed of their sins. Mr. Shoebat says there is a prophecy that is rarely understood by Western analysts yet alludes to the Islamic Hajj: “3 Behold, the Assyrian (the Antichrist, Satan in the flesh) was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs. 4 The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent her little rivers unto all the trees of the field.” (Ezekiel 31:3-4) He says that applying the key of interpreting symbols leads to the following interpretation: “Behold, Satan, a beautiful angel clothed in beautiful covering, an angel with high status. Peoples and multitudes from every nation made him great, and the underworld set him up high with the multitudes running round about his idol and sent out all the people to all the idols that were set for him.” He points out that the phrase “shadowing shroud” in this verse could refer to the black cloth (the Kiswa) which covers the Kaaba. He quotes Jeremiah 51:44, “And I will punish Bel in Babylon, and I will bring forth out of his mouth that which he has swallowed up: and the nations shall not flow together any more unto him: yea, the wall of Babylon shall fall.” No longer will the nations stream to honor Satan and walk around his idol. (p.388-392)And finally, the explosive growth of Islam across the globe:
According to Mr. Shoebat, Islam’s growth rate is four times that of Christianity. Adherents to the Muslim faith constitute one-fifth of the world’s population. One main reason for the explosion of the Muslim population is that their birth rates far exceed those of the Western World. It is estimated by some that in less than twenty years one-third of Europe will be Muslim. Mr. Shoebat declares that“well within this century–the Western world as we know it will cease to exist. For this reason and more, I say that Islam is the future, albeit only temporarily so.” There have been reports that converts to Islam have increased around the world, including America, since the 9/11 attacks. Mr. Shoebat says this could be part of the “great apostasy” that the Bible says will take place before Jesus’ return. He also recognizes that millions of Muslims are converting to Christianity around the world, some as a result of a spiritual vision or dream. However, because of the Muslim birth rates Islam is spreading faster than Christianity. (p.461-467)
Walid Shoebat concludes his book with a note of urgency, “The time is shorter than most think. Let us all hasten; therefore, to do the work of God.”
--
And though the source of this commentary is on a blog, it nevertheless bears mentioning how President Obama was able recite Shahaadatayn (Declaration of Faith) by memory (Courtesy of Len Bilen's Blog):
Is Obama a Muslim?
To become a Muslim one must simply pronounce the Shahaadatayn (Declaration of Faith) with sincerity and conviction. The Shahadah can be declared as follows: “ASH-HADU ANLA ELAHA ILLA-ALLAH WA ASH-HADU ANNA MOHAMMADAN RASUL-ALLAH”. The English translation is:
“I bear witness that there is no deity worthy to be worshiped but Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and messenger.”
Barack Hussein Obama “took Shahada” from memory.
Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”
When Barack Hussein Obama publicly confessed the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, he “took Shahada“. To all Muslims it is therefore quite evident that Obama is a Muslim.
The only thing that can undo this and make Obama a Christian in Muslim minds is if he submits to water baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. If Obama produces a Baptism Certificate dated after the time he took Shahada , then and only then will I believe he is not a Muslim. . He says he is a Christian. No devout Christian can refuse to submit to water Baptism and be believed. I stand corrected if he produces his water Baptism certificate, complete with a renunciation of the Shahada. (The only known exception to this rule as far as I know is if he is a devout Quaker. They only recognize the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.)Len Bilen wrote an article more recently referring to the bevy of scandals and what could potentially be perceived as their having resulted in consequences with biblical proportions (Courtesy of Len Bilen's Blog):
The four Obama administration scandals, the four horsemen of the Apocalypse and the headless horseman.
The book of Revelation can be interpreted many ways. For instance, the message to the seven churches in chapters 2 and 3 can be said to be messages to seven actual churches, but the messages carry on importance today. They can be interpreted as a portrait of church history where each church represent the spiritual state of the seven churches. It can be taken individually. What does the Spirit say to you? Or, what does the spirit say to your church?
Likewise the four horsemen of the apocalypse in chapter 6 has been subject to numerous interpretations, always ominous and never without controversy. Let us take a look at the four horsemen in view of the recent scandals.
Revelation (6: 1-8) I watched as the Lamb opened the first of the seven seals. Then I heard one of the four living creatures say in a voice like thunder, “Come!” 2 I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.
3 When the Lamb opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature say, “Come!” 4 Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make people kill each other. To him was given a large sword.
5 When the Lamb opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature say, “Come!” I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. 6 Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “Two pounds of wheat for a day’s wages, and six pounds of barley for a day’s wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!”
7 When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, “Come!” 8 I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.
3 When the Lamb opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature say, “Come!” 4 Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make people kill each other. To him was given a large sword.
5 When the Lamb opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature say, “Come!” I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. 6 Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “Two pounds of wheat for a day’s wages, and six pounds of barley for a day’s wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!”
7 When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, “Come!” 8 I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.
The first horse is white. The rider has a bow and a crown, and he is bent on conquest. For this analysis it represents the press, or the “fifth estate”. The seizing of the telephone records and more of the Associated Press and the criminal investigation of James Rosen is an attack on the first amendment, and an attack on its five freedoms: Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom to peacefully assembly and freedom to lobby.
The second horse is red. The rider made people kill each other. This represents the “fast and furious” operation where weapons were sold and delivered to the Mexican Drug Cartel without any tracing or alerting the Mexican authorities, leading to hundreds of Mexican deaths and at least two U.S. officials.
The third horse is black, and the rider represents the IRS with its power to selectively tax and audit.
The fourth horse is most interesting. Most bible translation calls its color pale. The Greek word is chloros as in chlorophyll and in the two other instances in the N.T. it is translated green.
The color of Islam is green, as can be seen in the flag of many Islamic nations. We can see this description fits since Islam by now has about 1,75 billion followers and the world’s population is about 7 Billion. In addition, their highest honor is to die as martyrs in Jihad.
It is against this backdrop we must look at the events in Benghazi last September 11.
We know the embassy in Tripoli had inadequate security.
We know the mission in Benghazi had no US protection whatsoever. It was protected by “The February 17th Martyrs Brigade”, a Benghazi-based militia with Islamist elements, hired by the State Department as a “quick reaction force” (QRF). They warned the State Department that it would not protect the movements of Ambassador Chris Stevens when he visited there last September.
That warning was relayed to the regional security officer (RSO) at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli–the top security adviser to the ambassador–in an internal State Department email dated Sept. 9, 2012.
The CIA annex had some “special forces” protection totally inadequate for any organized attack.
We still do not know why Ambassador Stevens, or for that matter what the CIA was really up to in Benghazi. There is speculation that US were trying to buy up the Stinger that had gotten in the hands of Al-Qaida affiliated groups after the fall of Kaddafi but the secret mission was found out and had to be stopped by either forces under the control of either Iran or Egypt.
The chants in Egypt the same day of the Benghazi attacks were “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama!” as the Al-Qaida flag was posted on top of the U.S. embassy in Cairo.
What we are seeing playing itself out in Benghazi, Syria, and the Benghazi still to happen, in Beirut is a Sunni – Shia Muslim war with many more factions on deck is the beginning of the Islamist forces to fight for a new Caliphate.
So, the warnings came the day before 9/11, the State department was fully aware the Benghazi people were on their own; then why was the order given to stand down when the attack occurred??
The only logical conclusion is that the Obama administration willfully sacrificed the whole Benghazi operation when it blew up in their face because it did not fit their narrative that the Libyan situation was being normalized, Al-Qaida was on the run and the Arab Spring was making it possible to achieve peace in the Arab world.
The pale green horse is a representative of the Muslim world.
What is Obama’s role in all of this? Since he had no knowledge of any of the four scandals before, during or after they occurred he in more like the headless horseman in the legend of Sleepy Hollow.
There is one more troubling fact. The number of Christians martyred for their faith is rising and are now numbering 100000 per year or more. The State Department is strangely silent about this matter, but they show great concern about people insulting the “Prophet” Mohammed” even though most of these martyrs are killed because some Muslims believe the Koran promises them that dying for or kill in the name of Jihad is the only sure way to get to heaven.
With the four first seals opened, the next event is the opening of the fifth seal found in Revelation 6:9-11. 9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. 10 They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” 11 Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers and sisters, were killed just as they had been.
This is where we are right now.
When is the full number complete?
***
We are on the verge of a Middle East war involving a potential pan-Arabic alliance partnership with Russia. We are, according to the Obama administration, preparing to engage in a cyberwar with China, which could no doubt lead to armed conflict that would involve North Korea and, again, Russia. Also involving China is their massive arms build up -- the Chinese Communist Party is currently spending approximately $100 billion, and it could be much more because the CCP is notorious for fudging the truth. The Obama administration has aligned the U.S. with the Muslim states in the Middle East and has ordered the Justice Department to arrest and detain people regardless of citizenship status for an indefinite period of time without trial (Section 1021).With the federal government already engaging in cell phone, Internet, and credit card surveillance which violate the Constitution; the IRS and EPA targeting conservative groups (including Christian Evangelicals and pro-Israel Jewish groups); the Justice Department subpoenaing source information and accusing investigative journalist James Rosen of Fox News of conspiring against the federal government; and lastly, the Benghazi cover-up that resulted in Obama and the Ambassador to Egypt blaming the attacks on Islamophobia, it seems all too clear to me that along with the facts above about the translation of the full name of the president Barack Hussein Obama, the story of who the Mahdi is according to the Islamic text Bahar-al Anvar, and finally the revelations that most of the Arab Spring nations are electing Islamic fundamentalists interested in only instituting in instituting governments based solely on Shari'ah law, it appears that we are heading toward World War III, just like Glenn Beck and Walid Shoebat have suggested. Whether Obama is the Antichrist, the Mahdi, or Islam is the religion of Satan is almost nebulous. One way or another, Obama's ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have resulted in the widespread epidemic of Arab states falling to politicians pontificating Shari'ah law.
The federal government is preparing to go to war and possibly kill scores of young American soldiers under the pretense of securing democracy for politicians who are implementing Shari'ah law. These people in Syria the majority of our lawmakers want to fight for, known as the Free Syria Army, are anti-Israeli and have killed an entire village of Christians just a couple of weeks ago. That is a textbook act of ethnic-cleansing with the intent on the eventual genocide of all Christians and Jews. President Obama is also demanding the European Union to admit Turkey; the E.U. is hesitant to do so. As Shoebat discussed in his book, Islam is growing at four times the rate of Christianity. Part of that is because the birth rate is higher, but another reason is that there is what Shoebat refers to as the "great apostosy" occurring. Finally, the coincidence that the crescent moon with the star on the flags and banners of multiple nations in the Middle East which are Islamic are, according to Shoebat, the Hebrew word saharon translated as ornaments in Judges 8:21 means crescent, moon and comes from the root word sahar which is the word used for the name of Satan in Isaiah 14: Hilal be Sahar, while the King James Bible translates Hilal as Lucifer and the full phrase means morning star/crescent moon. The crescent moon and the star are Islamic symbols and according to Mr. Shoebat this means that "Islam and the name of Satan are on and the same." The image of the crescent moon and star are prevalent throughout the Islamic world and may possibly reflect the image of the Antichrist/Mahdi.
+symbol.png)
***
In conclusion, President Obama has constitutional authority to by way of implied interpretation to created an Islamic state in the United States because there is no article within the Constitution specifically stating there is an actual separation of church and state; that notion and exactly phrase was created by Thomas Jefferson in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut. We also do not have a legal right specifically guaranteeing everyone the right to vote; that is a right traditionally delegated to the states in accordance to the Tenth Amendment. We see already the president transforming the U.S. into a police state, delegating more and more authority to himself through his 157 Executive Orders through June 3, 2013 that have largely been utilized to curtail the rights of the American people. There is more, though. The actions of the various agencies of the federal government as well as his Cabinet members implementing policies that are suppressing Americans are not doing so by Executive Orders, but through secret "behind-closed-doors" meetings such as the ones involving the former commissioner of the IRS Doug Shulman. Sadly, the president has members of both parties in Congress duped into believing that by engaging in surveillance on tens and maybe even millions of Americans as well as people around the globe, making it appear as if we have an oligarchial elite comprised of wealthy individuals (Courtesy of Thomas Jefferson's Monticello)
John Basil Barnhill was quoted to have said:
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."Thomas Jefferson stated this in an 1825 letter to his dear friend William Short:
"Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent."Sadly, President Obama does not fear the American people, a majority of whom are Christians. In th ename of jihad, he is slowly applying the Islamic principle of muruna into effect in order to destroy the Constitution and install a government under the law of Shari'ah. Rush Limbaugh senses there is a coup d'tat occurring and yet the majority of our population does not see it; Glenn Beck feels the president's Islamic-friendly policies toward the Middle East that have largely disavowed the legitimacy and respect previous administrations have paid heed to since 1946 will lead to World War III. In my reading of Nostradamus, the 16th Century French prophet, this war will last for 27 years, and will come as as result of the assassination of a political figure known as Mabus. Obama ordered the assassination of Osama bin Laden two years ago, and the violence and revolts in the Middle East has dramatically increased in various places throughout the nations engaged in the current Arab Spring, which, too, was encouraged by the president and his allies, the Muslim Brotherhood. Not coincidentally, at a forum called "The Priorities of The Islamic Movement in The Next Three Decades” (from 1990 to 2020), they planned to attain what they described as “the goals of the Islamic Movement.” The plan confirms Badei’s utopian hope for the “establishment of an Islamic state, governed according to Qur’anic law — first in Egypt and eventually in the entire world.” Muruna, the tactic President Obama is utilizing to do this, calls for “organized, popular work to return to Islam in order to lead society, all of society … to bring back the caliphate … to announce Jihad either by arms, by pen, or by heart.” Thus, with the advent of the Arab Spring and its resulting in the majority of the nations involved who become democratized voting in leaders who are for creating a state governed under the law of Shari'ah, and the president's pro-Islamic agenda overseas and domestically that led to the first two major government overthrows in Egypt and Libya as well as the expenditure of billions in Arab Islamic nations such as Egypt ($1.5 billion), war seems inevitable along with the other NATO allies, particularly Britain.
Is Obama the Antichrist, the Mahdi? We cannot be sure. However, the evidence is there to make a strong case for him being so. He fits all the description. He is a complete mystery, the most mysterious president in history despite being the institution's most publicized. We must beware and remain ever vigilant, careful not to allow him to take away our constitutional liberties so as to serves as the ultimate check on his power. He is attempting to strip of us of these rights via applying restrictions or complete disavowals of the First, Second, Fourth, Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. Scandal after scandal has plagued the presidency, and yet people still trust on an overwhelming scale. His intellect his high and clear; his cunning, lethal.
I will close with a famous quote of Benjamin Franklin's from The Historical Review of Pennsylvania that was published in 1759:
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."The Ninth Crusade in the Holy Land is upon us, a war in which will devastate mankind in such a way as we may never recover. If Armageddon is here, let us not go off half-cocked. Let us fight the evils being imposed upon our great nation as well as the rest of the world under the name of Allah and the saharon, which are, according to Walid Shoebat, symbolic of Satan. This is not merely a battle for our liberties and freedoms; this is a battle for our souls and our as people of God and our savior, Jesus Christ.
