December 25, 2012

If We Are Dependent on Government for Our Livelihood, We Are Part of the Problem

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” - Alexis de Tocqueville

Statism, the Belief that Government Is Inherently Superior to the Citizenry, Is the Greatest Threat

By James Bovard, Campaign For Liberty
November 11, 2010

Pervasive confusion over the nature of government and freedom has opened the gates to perhaps the greatest, most widespread increase in political power in history. If we are to regain and safeguard our liberty, we must reject the tenets of modern political thinking. We must repudiate the moral presumptions and prerogatives that allow some people to vastly expand their power over other people.

The state has been by far the largest recipient of intellectual charity during the past hundred years. The issue of government coercion has been taken off the radar screen of politically correct thought. The more government power has grown, the more unfashionable it becomes to discuss or recognize government abuses — as if it were bad form to count the dead brought about by government interventions. There seems to be a gentleman’s agreement among some contemporary political philosophers to pretend that government is something loftier than it actually is — to practice noblesse oblige and to wear white gloves when discussing the nature of the state.

The great political issue of our time is not liberalism versus conservatism, or capitalism versus socialism, but statism — the belief that government is inherently superior to the citizenry, that progress consists of extending the realm of compulsion, that vesting arbitrary power in government officials will make the people happy — eventually.

What type of entity is the state? Is it a highly efficient, purring engine, like a hovercraft sailing deftly above the lives of ordinary citizens? Or is it a lumbering giant bulldozer that rips open the soil and ends up clear-cutting the lives of people it was created to protect?

The effort to find a political mechanism to force government to serve the people is the modern search for the Holy Grail. No such mechanism has been found, and government power has been relentlessly expanded. Yet, to base political philosophy on the assumption that government is inherently benevolent makes as much sense as basing geography on the assumption that the Earth is flat. Too many political thinkers treat government like some Wizard of Oz, ordaining great things, enunciating high ideals, and symbolizing all that is good in society. However, for political philosophy to have any value, it must begin by pulling back the curtain to bare the nature of the state.

Trusting contemporary governments means dividing humanity into two classes: those who can be trusted with power to run other people’s lives, and those who cannot even be trusted to run their own lives. Modern Leviathans give some people the power to play God with other people’s lives, property, and domestic tranquility. Modern political thinking presumes that restraints are bad for the government but good for the people. The first duty of the citizen is to assume the best of the government, while government officials assume the worst of him.

The history of the rise of the idealistic conception of the state is inevitably also the history of the decline of liberty. We cannot put the state on a pedestal without putting the people under the heel of the politician and bureaucrat. To glorify the state is to glorify coercion — the subjugation of some people to other people’s will and dictates.

Welfare-state freedom is based on the illusion that government can financially strip-mine the citizens’ lives without undermining their ability to stand on their own two feet. Citizens are assured that dependence on government is the same as self-reliance, only better. Today’s citizen is obliged to find his freedom only in the narrow ruts pre-approved by his bureaucratic overlords. In the name of freedom, the citizen is obliged to lower the drawbridges around his own life to any government employee who thinks he knows better.

The Supreme Court declared in a 1988 decision, “Servitude means ‘a condition in which a person lacks liberty especially to determine one’s course of action or way of life.’” Yet, despite the vast increase in the number of government decrees restricting people’s “course of action or way of life,” there is little recognition of the growing servitude of the American people to the federal government. Lives are made up of choices. Insofar as government nullifies or demolishes the choices that people can make, it effectively confiscates part of their lives.

Modern democracy

Nowadays, “democracy” serves mainly as a sheepskin for Leviathan, as a label to delude people into thinking that government’s big teeth will never bite them. Voting has changed from a process by which the citizen controls the government to a process that consecrates the government’s control of the people. Elections have become largely futile exercises to reveal comparative popular contempt for competing professional politicians. The question of who nominally holds the leash has become far more important than whether government is actually leashed.

The ability to push a lever and register a protest once every few years is supposedly all the protection citizens’ liberties need — or deserve. Americans are implicitly taught in government schools that they will be able to control their government, regardless of how large it becomes. But the bigger government grows, the more irrelevant the individual voter becomes.  

The current theory of democracy is a relic of an era when government was a tiny fraction of its current size. The illusion of majority rule is now the great sanctifier of government abuses — and perhaps the single greatest barrier to people’s understanding the nature of government. No amount of patriotic appeals can hide the growing imbalance between the citizen’s power to bind the government and the government’s power to bind the citizen.

Modern democracy is now largely an over-glorified choice of caretakers and cage-keepers. Are citizens still free after they vote to make themselves wards of the state? Supposedly, as long as citizens are permitted to push the first domino, they are still self-governing — regardless of how many other government dominos subsequently fall on their heads. Democracy is further corrupted by a demagogy that portrays a right to vote as a license to steal.

Faith in the redemptive powers of government permeates contemporary political thinking. “Fairness” has become a bewitching word to lull people to sleep before politicians attach the latest “shackle of the month.” The more activities government criminalizes, the fairer society supposedly becomes. The tighter the regulatory thumbscrews are twisted, the higher citizens’ souls presumably rise.

Private citizens have become the moral underclass in the modern state. The values of politicians and bureaucrats are presumably so inherently superior that they have a right to coercively impose them on others, the same way that imperialists in the 1800s forcibly “saved” the backward natives in Africa and Asia. But now, instead of the “white man’s burden,” we have the “bureaucrat’s burden” — consisting of endless Federal Register notices, entrapment schemes, and abusive prosecutions. In practice, justice has become whatever serves the political or bureaucratic needs of the government. Every new definition of fairness becomes another trump card that politicians and bureaucrats play against private citizens. Public-policy disputes routinely degenerate into morality plays in which the government is almost always the “good guy.”

In the 19th century, socialists openly ridiculed the notion of a night-watchman state — a government limited to protecting the rights and safety of citizens. The night-watchman state has long since been junk-heaped, replaced by governments zealous to re-engineer society, control the economy, and save persons from themselves. Unfortunately, rather than a triumph of idealism, we now have highway-robber states — governments in which no asset, no contract, no domain is safe from the fleeting whim of a bevy of politicians.

Public policy today is a vast maze of payoffs and kickbacks, tangling everything that the state touches in political intrigue and bureaucratic dependence. Modern societies are increasingly dominated by political money laundering — by politicians commandeering scores of billions of dollars from one group to foist on another group, from one generation to another, or from the general populace to specific occupational groups (such as farmers). And when government defaults on its promises to the citizenry, it is not robbery, but merely sovereign immunity.

Paternalism and happiness

It was a common saying before the Civil War: “That government is best which governs least.” Nowadays, the rule appears to be “that government is best that penalizes most.” Salvation through increased state power means maximizing the number of swords of Damocles hanging over each citizen’s head — maximizing the number of individual lives that can be destroyed by political edicts and the number of people who can be locked away for possessing prohibited substances — people whose homes and cars and wallets can be seized without proof of wrongdoing, whose children can be taken away from them, who can be barred from using their own land, and whom the government devises pretexts to forcibly disarm.

The welfare state offers an “under my thumb” recipe for happiness. Paternalism presumes that the path to the citizen’s happiness consists in increasing the number of government restrictions imposed on him and the number of government employees above him. The more power government acquires, the more a symbol of the superiority of some people over others the state becomes.

Every expansion of government budgets and statute books is another step towards the nationalization of the pursuit of happiness. While earlier types of government coerced people to keep them in their place, the welfare state uses coercion to make them happy — in their place. But the success of the welfare state cannot be measured by the number of citizens who rattle their tin cups when politicians pass by.

The issue is not whether government should or can be abolished; instead, the issue is whether the use of force should be minimized and limited. In the American colonies from the early 1700s onwards, fierce disputes raged between prerogative parties and anti-prerogative parties — between those that favored an expansive interpretation of the king of England’s power and those that sought to restrain or roll back the monarch’s power over colonists. In the future, the grand division in American politics will be between those who champion increased government power and those who demand that government power be slashed.

The notion that governments are inherently entitled to obedience is the most costly entitlement program of them all. Seventeenth-century English philosopher John Locke, who inspired the Founding Fathers, declared, “Tyranny is the exercise of Power beyond Right.” Locke recognized that governments that oppress citizens destroy their own legitimacy. Yet there now seems to be an irrefutable presumption of legitimacy for any exercise of government power not involving genocide or racial discrimination.

Modern political philosophy largely consists of glorifying poorly functioning political machinery — the threats, bribes, and legislative cattle prods by which some people are made to submit to other people. It is a delusion to think of the state as something loftier than all the edicts, penalties, prison sentences, and taxes that it imposes.

Have we transferred to government the rights that we previously condemned in slaveowners? If not, then we must radically reduce the power that some people have captured over everyone else.

December 2, 2012

Building a Stage for Antichrist

By Ken Raggio

This article was first written in 1996 following my return from Israel and the first election of Benjamin Netanyahu. It is now updated to March, 2012.


It is truly shocking to contemplate the reality that such historical Biblical sites such as Bethelehem, Nazareth, Hebron, Jericho, and Galilee will be taken away from Israel with the declaration of a Palestinian state.

George Bush and Condoleezza Rice pushed as hard as possible for a Palestinian State and an imminent final status agreement for Jerusalem. Now, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are turning the heat up on Israel. This certainly will have a bearing on the future status of the Temple Mount, and the prospects for the Third Temple. More and more people believe that the Palestinian Authority (PA) will take East Jerusalem. But hopefully, for the religious Jews, when that happens, there will be negotiated trade-offs favoring Jewish rights to worship on the Temple Mount. We know from Bible prophecy that this absolutely must eventually happen.

Notwithstanding, one missile strike, one car bomb, or one election can radically reroute every one of these eventualities without notice, and in either political direction.

Christians have an interest in Jerusalem and Israel

Christians around the world are affected by events in Israel. How? For one thing, they are looking for signs pointing to the second return of Jesus Christ.

Perhaps one of the most significant signs they look for is the reconstruction of the Holy Temple on Mount Moriah (the Third Temple), and the re-instituting of Old Testament sacrifices. This would be followed, prophetically, by the appearance of Man of Sin (Antichrist) in the Temple to shut it all down again - to call an end to prayers and sacrifices. This is called the Abomination that makes desolate, or the Abomination of Desolation (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:2).

A great deal of interest has been stirred by the making ready of a qualified red heifer for the re-instituting of holy sacrifices on the Temple Mount. In my last trip to Israel, Rabbi Chaim Richman of the Temple Institute mentioned that there was a red heifer named "Geula" being hidden. This may be the very calf that will be used to sanctify the Temple Mount for the Third Temple.

In the 1990s, Yitzak Rabin and Shimon Peres had just about "given away the store" (land give-aways) to achieve peace with their Arab neighbors led by Yasser Arafat. The likelihood of the Third Temple being built seemed to be diminishing, with Israel having less say, and United Nations having more say in the control of Jerusalem and its holy sites.

Now, with increasing pressure from just about every world power, Israel is being forced to fight for its real estate, and ultimately, its very existence. Shimon Peres, at 84, became the President of Israel. He has been one of the principal brokers of land for peace, and he may be the one who finally sits down with Abbas for an East Jerusalem (and by default, a Temple Mount) solution. I strongly suspect that we will see Tony Blair and Shimon Peres at a negotiating table eventually, if Peres survives long enough.

"Peres" is the Hebrew word for "divided." It is the word the Prophet Daniel saw in Belshazzar's court when his kingdom was divided. I suspect that Peres may be here for a prophetic role - permanently dividing Israel by declaring a Palestinian State. If not Peres and Blair, it will certainly be somebody eventually. Peres' legacy of division will certainly endure after he is gone.

Arafat vowed to have Jerusalem

The late PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat vowed to make Jerusalem the capital of a Palestinian state, and never to relinquish control of the Temple Mount. Since Arafat's death, the Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas has struggled with their opposition brethren in the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist organizations. Abbas allowed Hamas to take full control of the Gaza Strip, and dissolve the unity government between Fatah and Hamas. This resulted in Fatah having what appears to be a better opportunity of taking full control over the West Bank.

As early as December 2007, Palestinian television newscasts began broadcasting maps of all of Palestine WITHOUT the State of Israel anywhere on the map. Negotiations attempted at Annapolis, Maryland, under the auspices of George Bush, were fruitless in producing any meaningful progress. Bush worked furiously to create a Palestinian state before his presidency ended, but failed. Now, Barack Hussein Obama shows the strongest anti-Israel sentiments ever seen in a United States President, and the outcome of that is likely to be to the strong advantage of the Palestinians. Only God knows when and how these developments will unfold.

In December of 2007, Olmert spoke openly of allowing the Palestinians to have parts of East Jerusalem. Meanwhile, the radical extremists, Hamas, drafted a resolution and attempted to pass a law in the Palestinian Authority that would declare ANY COMPROMISE other than TOTAL CONTROL OF JERUSALEM an act of treason, punishable by (presumably) death. It is yet to be seen how far that resolution will go. It is, however, the rabid sentiment of the vast majority of Palestinians that Jerusalem SHOULD be the capital of Palestine.

Any estimated outcome would be purely conjecture at this point. Nevertheless, opportunities may present themselves in the near future for Abbas to negotiate with Netanyahu to finally bring about a Palestinian state in the West Bank, and ultimately define what will be done about East Jerusalem - settling the final status of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

Bible prophecies say that Jerusalem certainly WILL be divided.

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months," Revelation 11:2. This verse indicates that Israel will only control the Temple location specifically, while Gentiles (i.e., Muslims under UN supervision) retain control of the rest of the Temple Mount. It further suggests that Jerusalem itself will be divided for three and a half years.

On March 14, 1999, the European Community issued a statement asserting that Jerusalem is technically an "occupied territory," is NOT the capital of Israel, and does NOT even belong to Israel. This is a provocative statement. It leaves the door wide open for non-Jewish claims on Jerusalem. Increasingly, the EU is more empathic to the Muslim side, and more critical of Israel.

At that time, Former Foreign Minister Ariel Sharon responded by saying, "Our government (Israel) has no intention of making any concessions whatsoever regarding the status of Jerusalem. Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish nation for 3000 years now, the capital of the State of Israel for 50 years, and will remain so for eternity." 

I sat in the General Assembly in the United Nations in New York during the World Summit of September, 2005 and listened to Ariel Sharon declare to the world body that Jerusalem is the "eternal and undivided capital of Israel."

Only weeks later, Sharon was in a coma, and since that time, very few voices have echoed that sentiment to protect and preserve Jerusalem.

Shimon Peres accompanied Sharon at the UN, and his opposite "land-for-peace" influence has now replaced Sharon's more conservative, protective stance.

Sharon's successor, Ehud Olmert was perceived to be an ideological successor to Sharon for a while, but it did not take long for Olmert's polices to shift in a completely opposite stance. Olmert and Peres were closer to compromising Jerusalem than at any time in history.

The Jerusalem Issue is certain to flair up into a major conflict in the near future. Scripturally, we can expect Jerusalem to be increasingly embattled. Ultimately, Jerusalem will not fall to Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, or Syria. The New World Order will take control of Jerusalem, and the United Nations and the Roman Catholic Church will govern it. (See related article here)

The Temple Mount Faithful crusade for the Third Temple


Gershon Salomon, Chairman of the Temple Mount Faithful (the preeminent organization in Israel working for the rebuilding of the Third Temple) opined on the record saying that a Netanyahu government would be good news for the prospect of the rebuilding of the temple. In previous political campaigns, Netanyahu incorporated into the platform of his Likud Party, that if he was elected Prime Minister, they would press for the opening of the Temple Mount for Jewish worship.

New Government may help

Netanyahu's comeback is an positive development in the prospects for a new Temple.
Several smaller religious factions also have more power, and the chance of a historic change on the Temple Mount is definitely possible. Of course, the prophecy guarantees the Temple will be built, regardless of the political difficulties, and with or without Netanyahu.

On July 12, 1997, the Ministry of Justice (similar to the Justice Department in the US) announced that it would initiate legal proceedings to open up the Temple Mount to Jews. On July 13, 1997 the Associated Press reported that the Israelis announced their intentions to close the Muslim office that administrates the Temple Mount.
These initiatives went largely unnoticed and unfulfilled, however. If they were truly pressed to action, they would be developments of staggering potential.

As recent as February of 2012, rumors began circulating that the Israeli Government planned to divide the Temple Mount to allow for the freedom of worship for Jews and Christians. This, however, appeared to be a hoax perpertrated by the Al Aqsa Waqf (the Islamic group which manages the site) to provoke Muslim jihad.

The Temple Mount Faithful have the cornerstone ready to lay. I stood beside that cornerstone on my last trip to Israel and imagined what it will be like the day that stone is finally set on the Temple Mount.

In addition, the Temple Institute now has all the furniture and priestly garments ready for the Third Temple.

The Dome of the Rock will not prevent the Third Temple

The Temple Mount is now controlled by Muslims. The Dome of the Rock and the al Aqsa Mosque are the only places of worship on the Temple Mount. Jews and Christians may not pray, worship, or read the Bible aloud on the Temple Mount.

Professor Asher Kaufman of the Hebrew University claims that the Third Temple could be built next door to the Dome of the Rock without necessitating a change in that controversial Muslim landmark. The small cupola on the north side of the Temple Mount, called the Dome of the Spirit, is believed by many to be the actual place where the ancient Holy of Holies was located in ancient times.

Editor's Note: I do not share Mr. Raggio's viewpoint in the next paragraph. Based on my study of the Bible, Christ's return at the sounding of the seventh trump marks the pouring out of the seven vials of God's wrath upon the unjust on earth, the resurrection and reward of the saints (God' people), the judgement of the nations and the battle of Armageddon, the final judgement and resurrection of damnation (the second death) for the 'rest of the dead' (those whose names are not written in the Book of Life), the utter destruction of the earth by fire and the creation of the new heaven and the new earth, the ushering in of eternity with the New Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven, where "the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

When Jesus Christ returns, HE will build the Millennial Temple, different from the Third Temple. There will be NO Dome of the Rock in that day. The Dome of the Rock is inscribed in the Arabic language with this saying, "God has no son." Jesus will prove that to be a grave - fatal - error. The dome will have to go. And it will.

Priesthood being verified

On Sunday, April 4, 1999, at the semi-annual "Priestly Blessing" ceremony at the Western Wall, a booth was erected nearby for the genetic testing Kohanim (priests), to see if they have what is now called "Priestly gene."
Subsequently, an American geneticist found that all Kohanim share a common gene, supporting the belief that they have one common ancestor (presumably Aaron the Priest).

Rabbi Nachman Kahane said at the time that 17 Kohanim had already been tested.
Thirteen tested positive, one negative, and three cases were inconclusive. Now, the Temple Institute has offered all Jews by the name of Cohen to receive a priestly garment for the new temple.

The ancient Sanhedrin Revived

The ancient seventy elders of Israel, the Sanhedrin, has not existed since 358 AD. In October 2004, a group of rabbis in Tiberius came together in an alleged reforming of the Sanhedrin. Their validity has been controversial, but Arutz-7 published an article on October 13, 2004 announcing that the Sanhedrin had been launched by 71 rabbis - the main 70 plus one extra who would play the lead role, similar to the High Priest. They claimed legitimacy, based on the rules of the ancient sage, Maimonides.

The significance of this, pertaining to the Third Temple, is that we now have a hierarchy claiming legal jurisdiction over the official religious matters of Israel. The Sanhedrin could be the most powerful voice in behalf of the reconstruction of the Temple. Rabbi Chaim Richman is a member of the Sanhedrin, and may be considered by some as the new High Priest of Israel. As the International Director of the Temple Institute, he is the most forceful delegate in the world for the rebuilding of the Third Temple. With the force of the entire Sanhedrin behind him, we can expect the most serious efforts to be expended to that end.

Sacrifices begun at Western Wall

On Passover of 1998, Jewish rabbis conducted animal sacrifices at the Western Wall (the "wailing wall"), which may have been the first animal sacrifices conducted at the Temple site since 70 AD. It is difficult to assess the significance of this particular action. Gershon Salomon made his third unsuccessful attempt to conduct sacrifice on the Temple Mount itself on April 4, 1999. In 1998, it was made on a nearby hill called Givat Hananya. Another sacrifice has been performed since then in a different location.

News releases in April of 2008 state that rabbis are preparing now to conduct an animal sacrifice in the near future on the Temple Mount itself. This will be a very provocative act, and will probably trigger an earth-shattering Islamic jihad. It has the potential of escalating into the worst conflict ever inside Jerusalem, maybe even the whole world. I cannot imagine anything in the world being more antagonistic to radical Islam than a Jewish blood sacrifice in the shadow of the Dome of the Rock. The act itself, however, is probably a necessary precursor to any sanctified preparations for the Third Temple.

Many are now ready to build the Temple.

There are now champions for the cause within the government itself, more than have been in many years. That is good news for the Temple Mount Faithful, whose TWO CORNERSTONES for the Third Temple now sit in-waiting near Gershon Salomon's residence. The original cornerstone that had been prominently displayed in a busy traffic intersection downtown Jerusalem was stolen and never recovered.

The Temple Institute is Preparing

It is also good news for the Temple Institute, whose temple vessels and priestly robes are in storage, and whose young rabbis are presently in training for the offices of Temple priests. 

Chaim Richman of the Temple Institute is readying architectural building plans, and says the building could be built in less than one year. I sat in a lecture with Rabbi Richman as he told that the Red Heifer has now been qualified for temple sacrifice. These truly are ominous times.

What does it mean to the Church?

The Church of Jesus Christ will witness the Antichrist's stand in the Third Temple, according to 2 Thessalonians 2.
That event will precipitate the final three-and-a-half years of Daniel's Seventieth Week. Why do I say that? Look at those verses from 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4:

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

NOTICE CAREFULLY what is in those verses. Paul is addressing these subjects:

    1. The coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
    2. Our gathering together unto Him (The Rapture and First Resurrection).
    3. Called here, "the Day of Christ."

Paul says "THAT DAY SHALL NOT COME..." until

    1. there comes a Great Falling Away
    2. the Man of Sin is revealed, the Son of Perdition
    3. he opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God
    4. he, as God, sits in the THIRD TEMPLE, showing himself that he is God.

What do we learn from these statements?

    1. The Rapture will NOT take place until there is a Great Falling Away.
    2. The Rapture will NOT take place until the Man of Sin (Antichrist) is revealed.
    3. The Rapture will NOT take place until the Antichrist sits in the Third Temple.
    4. The Church WILL SEE the Antichrist.
    5. The Church WILL SEE the Third Temple built.
    6. The Church WILL SEE the Abomination of Desolation (see Daniel 9:27).

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

This gives us the MOST IMPORTANT CLUE about how much time we have left.

We will know that the LAST SEVEN YEARS have begun whenever we hear the news that a SEVEN-YEAR COVENANT has been Confirmed by parties under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church (the Roman Prince referred to in Daniel 9:27).

We should be watching very carefully the negotiations that are being conducted between the UN Quartet led by Tony Blair with the State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, or any other multinational governmental authority, such as the Arab League or the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

Certainly, if we hear on the world news outlets that Israel is about to sign a SEVEN-YEAR AGREEMENT with any of these entities, we should become very alert to the possibility that this is the Confirmation of the Covenant spoken of by both Daniel the Prophet and Jesus Christ in Matthew 24.

If such an agreement is reached, we can be almost certain that within the following three-and-a-half years the THIRD TEMPLE WILL BE BUILT, and the Prince of Rome, operating through the Pope, will install the Man of Sin, the Assyrian Antichrist of Daniel 11 will appear in it!
We are certainly nearing the end. The clock of prophecy is ticking toward midnight! Time to prepare our souls for the final events leading the world to Armageddon.

You should also know this...

From ancient times, God said that He put His name in Jerusalem. Not only is the Hebrew "shin" inscribed in the landscape terrain of Jerusalem, but when Jesus returns, God's HIGHEST name, "Jesus" will be declared King of Kings in the Holy Mountains - Zion and Moriah.
Editor's Note: I do not believe in a millennium reign by Christ on this present earth, but I agree with Mr. Raggio on his other points. Of the Lord's kingdom, there is no end (Luke 1:33), and Jesus will never reign from a temple made from human hands (Acts 17:24). In eternity, there is no temple, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it (Revelation 21:22).

Jesus is going to retake Jerusalem, and at that time, it will be a distinctly Jewish city during the Millennium. According to Ezekiel 40-48, Israel will conduct many of the Old Testament rituals as a memorial and testimony of the truths revealed from ancient times. The Jews, however, will have been converted to Jesus Christ as their Messiah, when they "look upon me whom they have pierced," Zechariah 12:10.

All the saints of all the ages will witness Jesus Christ's victorious entrance through the newly conquered Eastern Gate of Jerusalem, (see photo) immediately following the great Battle of Armageddon.

I stood in the Kidron Valley and contemplated the glorious moment when Jesus Christ will at long-last enter into HIS CITY as the KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS and millions upon millions of saints will worship and serve Him for a thousand glorious years on earth before entering the eternal Kingdom of Heaven.

Christians who were resurrected at the rapture and resurrection will rule and reign with Jesus Christ throughout the Gentile nations of the earth, and all nations will flow into their divinely established Capital of Jerusalem. No more World Government in New York, Geneva, Brussels, Moscow, Washington D.C., London, Paris, or Rome.

Here are the determinate prophecies that no man or devil will prevent.

They describe the events that will occur in Jerusalem when Jesus Christ returns at Armageddon to save Israel and establish His kingdom, from Zechariah 12.

2  Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

3  And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

4  In that day, saith the LORD, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness.

5  And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the LORD of hosts their God.

6  In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.

7  The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

9  And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10  And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

11  In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.


John saw more details, as found in Revelation 16. It occurs AFTER the first six vials of God's wrath at the end of the seven year period called "Daniel's Seventieth Week."

16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

17 And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.

18 And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.

19 And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.

20 And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found.

21 And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.

Isaiah 2 gives even more details:

2 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, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

4 And he [Jesus Christ] shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

Here is what Jesus Christ will do at that time: (From Zechariah 6).

12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:

13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.


November 30, 2012

Zionism vs. Peace in the Middle East

"He [Nick Rockefeller] even mentioned to me once that they were having a real problem trying to solve the Israel-Palestinian problem. And he talked to me once about [that] they were playing with the idea of bringing Israel to Arizona, and taking all the people from Israel and giving everybody a million dollars and setting up Israel in the State of Arizona to end that problem. That's a problem that they're not in charge of, in a sense. They're not controlling that problem." - Aaron Russo on His Conversations with Nick Rockefeller About the the Council on Foreign Relations and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (first 41 seconds of the video above; read more...)
Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world." (John 18:36)

His dominion is an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. (Daniel 7:14)
Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people is not surprising, for they have rejected Christ as the Messiah, along with His message to love your enemies. The Zionists in the State of Israel (who follow the Talmud rather than the Torah) are looking for a physical kingdom from which a physical king will reign (just as the Jews of the first century who rejected Christ were looking for a physical kingdom and a physical king), which is why they believe (along with many misguided Christians) that they are entitled to the land occupied by the Palestinians and, most importantly, the temple mount.

The deception by the devil in guiding the Zionists to construct a physical temple for a physical king to reign from Jerusalem for a "millennium" will serve the plan of God — it will be upon this final scene, with the false messiah ruling for "a little season" from the holy place in Jerusalem, showing himself that he is God, that Christ will return in the clouds of heaven for the judgment of the nations. (This deception by the devil will serve the purpose of God just as the rejection of Christ by some in Israel served the purpose of God — and this was to deliver the Gospel to the Gentiles, who now, through faith, partake of the blessings to the fathers and join with believing Jews to constitute the true Israel of God, the Church of Jesus Christ.)

The true Messiah, Christ, will never reign from a physical temple made by human hands; however, the false messiah will reign on this earth for "a little season" from the holy place in Jersualem, and he will deceive many with his signs and wonders — "and all the world, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder after the beast who shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition." This is "the abomination that maketh desolate set up," spoken of by Daniel the prophet. "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand), then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains."

And Jesus answered them, saying, "The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified... Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify Thy name." Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again." The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, an angel spake to Him. Jesus answered and said, "This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes. Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out." (John 12:23,27-31)

"But I say unto you which hear:
'Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
Bless them that curse you and pray for them which despitefully use you.
And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek, offer also the other;
And him that taketh away thy cloke, forbid not to take thy coat also.
Give to every man that asketh of thee;
And of him that taketh away thy goods, ask them not again.
And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great,
And ye shall be the children of the Highest: for He is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
Judge not, and ye shall not be judged:
Condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned:
Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:
Give, and it shall be given unto you;
Good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom.
For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again'."
(Luke 6:27-38)
God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands. (Acts 17:24)

And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in His temple the ark of His testament. (Revelation 11:19)

The Zionists' zeal to claim the temple mount is something over which the Bilderberg-owned governments of the world do not have control. This is the devil's plan, although under the ultimate control of God; and Satan is driving the Zionists to seize the land occupied by the Palestinians, including the temple mount, so that he can build a temple from which he will reign over his anti-Christian one-world government and religion. At the end of this age, for "a little season," the devil will stand in the holy place, showing himself that he is God, and he will deceive many with his signs and wonders.

God and the Nation of Israel

By Wayne Jackson

Premillennialism is the notion that Jesus will return to this earth before he commences a 1000-year reign on David’s throne in Jerusalem. Premillennialism, and its theological sister, dispensationalism, argue that in connection with the second coming of Christ, God intends to reestablish a Jewish kingdom in Palestine. The doctrine contends that there is yet a purpose to be served by physical Israel.

Dispensationalists allege that in the “seven-year tribulation period,” just prior to Christ’s “millennial reign,” God will restore the Jews to Palestine and a national conversion of the Hebrew people will occur. It is not claimed that every Jew will be won to Christ; however, such vast multitudes will be saved—numbers proportionate to Israel’s tragic fall—that it is appropriate to refer to the phenomenon as a “national” conversion.

One writer describes this so-called “restoration” as follows:
The same prophets who predicted the world-wide exile and persecution of the Jews also predicted their restoration as a nation. . . This restoration was to come about in the general time of the climactic seven-year countdown and its finale—the personal appearance of the Messiah to deliver the new state from destruction (Lindsey 1970, 37-38).
The foregoing theory is quite erroneous in that it repudiates numerous fundamental Bible truths. Further, it is exceedingly dangerous in that it offers a false hope to Jews. Walvoord, a millennialist, says that:
“This hope of restoration has sustained the Jews through 1900 years of struggle” (1974, 76).
This “hope” has been grossly misplaced—thanks, in part at least, to millennialists.

Israel in the Divine plan

A balanced study of the nation of Israel must include at least four elements: the selection, testing, rejection, and replacement of the Jewish people.


Almost 2000 years before the birth of Christ, Jehovah selected Abraham to be the founder of a new nation. It was declared that through him a seed would come by whom all peoples of the earth would be blessed (cf. Genesis 12:1-3; 22:17-18). Several centuries later, Abraham’s offspring were delivered from an era of bondage in Egypt. They were given a special law and ritualistic system of worship which were designed to separate them from the other nations of the world (Exodus 19:5-6; cf. Ephesians 2:14). All of this, of course, was in view of the coming Messiah (cf. Galatians 3:24-25; Hebrews 9:1-10).


For some 1500 years the Lord God attempted to cultivate the nation of Israel in preparation for the first advent of the Lord Jesus. It was a constant struggle to get the Hebrews to maintain a semblance of fidelity. They grossly violated the law, frequently went after “strange gods,” and they viciously persecuted the prophets that Jehovah sent to call them to repentance. Jeremiah summarized the history of the Israelite people when he charged that they did “nothing” of all that Jehovah commanded them (32:23).


Because of the accelerating rebellion of the nation, consummated by the murder of Jesus Christ, God rejected the Hebrew people. Inexcusably, the Jews rejected their own Messiah; accordingly, Jehovah repudiated that nation and determined to scatter them as dust (Matthew 21:44). Thus, in the providence of God, the Roman armies came against Palestine in A.D. 70, and Judaism was destroyed (cf. Matthew 22:7; 24:1-34); the Jewish “vessel” was smashed, and it cannot be put back together (cf. Jeremiah 19:11). According to Josephus, some 1.1 million Hebrews were slaughtered, and thousands were taken into slavery. All Jewish records were lost in that holocaust. Today, there is not a single Jew who knows his tribal ancestry (McClintock and Strong 1969, 771). The physical nation of Israel is dead. The “Jews” that make up the State of Israel today (less than 25 percent of the world Jewish population) cannot legitimately be called a “nation.”


As a consequence of Israel’s rejection of the Messiah, God has replaced physical Israel with a new nation, spiritual Israel. Today, the “Jew” is not one who is so physically, but one who is so inwardly, i.e., spiritually (Romans 2:28-29). In this age, those who submit to the gospel plan of redemption—whether Jew or Gentile (Romans 1:16)—become children of God, and thus are constituted as the true “seed of Abraham” (Galatians 3:26-29).

Errors of the Premillennial View Regarding the Nation of Israel

In view of the foregoing considerations, the following factors clearly indicate that the premillennial view of the nation of Israel is erroneous, and it should be rejected by conscientious students of the Bible.

First, it is a reflection upon the benevolent character of Jehovah to suggest that he intended to perpetually favor one nation over all others. Such a notion is at variance with the multiple Bible affirmations which assert the universal love of God, and his just, impartial disposition with reference to the whole human family (cf. Genesis 12:3; Psalm 145:9; Acts 10:34-35).

Second, the premillennial dogma ignores the fact that God’s initial selection of the Hebrew people, and the acquisition of the land of Canaan, was preparatory to the coming Christ. Jehovah employed the Jewish nation as a medium for the introduction of Christ into the world. Now that the Messianic mission has been accomplished, the role of “national Israel” no longer exists (cf. Galatians 3:24-25). That “middle wall of partition,” designed to isolate Israel from the nations, has been broken down (Ephesians 2:14). It was abrogated at the cross (Colossians 2:14). From the divine viewpoint, old physical Israel has passed away. It has been superseded by a new Israel.

Third, the Old Testament makes it abundantly clear that Israel’s favor with Jehovah, even under the Mosaic regime, was conditional.
And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of Jehovah thy God, to observe to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that Jehovah thy God will set thee on high above all the nations of the earth (Deuteronomy 28:1).
The Hebrews were constantly warned of the consequences of disobedience (cf. 28:15ff). They could be disinherited as a nation (Numbers 14:12) and disfranchised of their land (Joshua 23:13,16). The truth is, there are about as many Old Testament warnings to Israel as there are promises!

Fourth, there is not a solitary New Testament passage which speaks of the restoration of national Israel and the reinstitution of Judaistic ritualism, etc. The Old Testament prophecies which predict the literal return of the Hebrews to Palestine were fulfilled in the Jews’ release from political captivity (cf. Jeremiah 29:10; Ezra 1:1). Other predictions, which speak of a “restoration” of Israel, refer to a spiritual restoration (to God, not Palestine—cf. Isaiah 49:5) through Jehovah’s servant, Christ. [Note: Sometimes this spiritual restoration to God, through the redemptive work of Christ, is symbolically viewed in terms of the rebuilding of Jerusalem, etc. (cf. Jeremiah 31:38-40).] This blessing was for Jew and Gentile alike. Study carefully Isaiah 49:5ff, and note Paul’s use of this context in the New Testament (Acts 13:47; 2 Corinthians 6:2).

Fifth, there are many New Testament passages which portray a tragic future for physical Israel, 
with no hint of a national restoration.

Prophetic Pronouncements Concerning Israel

Like modern millennialists, there were Jews of old who felt that there was intrinsic virtue in being a physical descendant of Abraham (cf. John 8:39). John the Baptizer informed them, however, that God was able to use stones in raising up seed to the patriarch. He then warned:
“And even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees” (Matthew 3:10).
The context focuses upon a threatened “wrath to come” (v. 7), which would find its nearest application in the destruction of the Jewish nation by the Romans in A.D. 70. Now here is a vital point. When a tree is cut down, there is hope that it will sprout again, provided its stump or roots remain (cf. Job 14:7,8; Isaiah 11:1). But when the axe is laid at the root, where is the hope of restoration? There simply is none!

Christ once pronounced a curse upon a barren fig tree near Jerusalem. The tree served as an apt illustration of fruitless national Israel. Jesus declared:
“Let there be no fruit from thee henceforth for ever” (Matthew 21:19).
Where is the hope in that? Later, on that same Tuesday, just prior to Friday’s crucifixion, the Lord announced to the Jews,
“The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (21:43).
In other words, barren national Israel would be replaced by fruitful spiritual Israel, the Church (cf. 1 Peter 2:9; Galatians 6:16).

In the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, Jesus spoke concerning those who spurned the royal invitation. It was prophesied that the king (God) would send his armies (the Romans), and destroy those murderers (the Jews), and burn their city (Jerusalem). Why? They “were [imperfect tense—sustained state] not worthy” (Matthew 22:1-8). Is there any suggestion of restoration there? Later, in 23:38, Christ warned:
“Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.”
The term “house,” as Bloomfield notes, refers not merely to the temple alone, but to the whole Jewish nation, especially its metropolis (1837, 116). “Left desolate” has a note of finality about it.

In the parable of the barren fig tree (Luke 13:6-9), it is suggested that fruitless Israel would be soon cut down.
“This parable gives Israel to know that its life is only a respite, and that this respite is nearing its end” (Godet 1879, 119).
There is no suggestion that the “tree” would spring up again. Strange indeed—if millennialism is true.

In another parable, uttered shortly before his death, Jesus depicted himself as a nobleman who was going into a far country (heaven) to receive for himself a kingdom (the Church). Later, he would return (the second coming). However, while he was in that distant land, his citizens (the Jews) hated him (imperfect tense—abiding hatred) and sent this message to him:
“We will not [present tense—continued determination] that [you] reign over us” (Luke 19:14).
Even millennialists admit that this refers to the Jewish rejection of Christ (Martin 1983, 252). Without the remotest suggestion that there would be an alteration of this hateful Jewish disposition, the nobleman, “when he was come back” (v. 15), characterized these citizens as his “enemies,” and commanded they be slain (v. 27). The language describes “the state of rejection in which [the Jews] are plunged till the Lord’s return” (Godet 1879, 223).

In yet another parable, Jesus foretold Israel’s rejection of the gospel, and the subsequent success of the kingdom of heaven among the Gentiles. Of those stubborn Jews, he declared:
“[N]one of those men who were bidden shall taste of my supper” (Luke 14:24). This refers, of course, to the Jewish majority that refused the gospel (a remnant accepted the invitation—cf. Romans 11:5).
Why did not the Lord give some clue that eventually there would be a massive Jewish acceptance of his invitation?

In Luke’s account of the Olivet discourse, Christ, alluding to Jerusalem’s impending destruction, declared that the city would be “trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Luke 21:24). The term “trodden down” is a present tense participle, suggesting prolonged hardships (though not necessarily uninterrupted) for Jerusalem (and what she represented—the nation). This oppression was to continue until the “times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” The phrase “times of the Gentiles” is an expression for the current age. It implies a “times of the Jews” (i.e., the Mosaic period).

For fifteen centuries the Hebrews were Jehovah’s special people—an era which might be appropriately termed “the times of the Jews.” When they rejected the Messiah, that age of prominence (called a “reign”—Matthew 21:43) ended. It was superseded by “the times of the Gentiles”—the Christian age. It is clear that Israel is to be the recipient of divine retribution throughout the Christian era.

Millennialists argue, however, that Jerusalem was to be trodden down only “until” the times of the Gentiles is fulfilled. After that time, they contend, Jerusalem will be exalted to her former glory. The key word in their argument is “until” (Greek, achri). Premillennialists assume the term has a temporal implication in Luke 21:24, thus implying a reversal of events after the time specified. But the assumption is unwarranted. The term achri frequently has a terminal thrust in the New Testament. Consider, for example, Revelation 2:25, where Christ sought to encourage the saints at Thyatira:
“[T]hat which ye have, hold fast till I come.”
Does this suggest that these Christians will relinquish their blessings when he comes? Of course not. Similarly, just because the Lord declared that Jerusalem would be trodden down until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, that does not imply that, following “the times of the Gentiles,” the city would be restored to some sort of divine glory. Proof for such a theory will have to be found somewhere other than in the word “until.” The truth of the matter is, God’s wrath has come upon Israel “to the uttermost” (1 Thessalonians 2:16).

In his letter to the Romans, Paul contends that “a hardening in part hath befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” (11:25). There are several important matters that need to be noted here. First, the “hardening” was the Jewish disbelief in Christ. Second, the “in part” suggests that this lack of faith was characteristic of only a portion of the nation; there was a remnant that did believe (cf. 9:27; 11:5,14). Third, the verb “hath befallen” is a perfect tense form, stressing the abiding nature of that hardness—until the fulness of the Gentiles comes in. Fourth, “fulness of the Gentiles” simply denotes the accomplishment of Jehovah’s purpose among the Gentiles (or the “nations”). In other words, Israel’s hardness will remain until the end of the present dispensation. As B.M. Christiansen comments:
“This partial hardening will continue throughout the time of the Gentiles, i.e., until Christ’s return” (cf. Lenski 1961, 174).
Since the hardening of Israel was not total, but only “in part,” there was/is still hope that many Jews may be saved. But how will the Jews be saved? They will be saved by their acceptance of the gospel (Romans 10:12-16), and their surrender to the Deliverer from Zion (11:26). This provides the correct meaning of “so all Israel shall be saved.” The word “so” is an adverb of manner, meaning, “in this way.” Hence, it is in this way (the way of obeying Christ) that all Israel (who are saved) shall be saved. This passage does not affirm a nation-wide conversion of the people of Israel.
The theory that Paul expected a mass conversion of Israel is flawed on several accounts:
  1. It contradicts his entire line of argument in Romans 9-11.
  2. It leaves as inexplicable the throbbing anguish for his brethren in the flesh, which saturates this entire section. For instance, Paul writes: “For I could wish [potential imperfect—”I kept being on point of wishing"] that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren’s sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh" (Romans 9:3). Why—if he knew that a national conversion of Israel was an ultimate reality?

The premillennial concept of the “nation of Israel” is clearly erroneous. There is no promise of a national conversion of Israel in the Bible. The gospel is still God’s power to save both Jew and Greek (Romans 1:16), and all who possess hearts that are “honest and good” (Luke 8: 15) will accept it. The only “hope” for Israel is in the cross of Christ (see Acts 26:6-23).

Wayne Jackson has written for and edited the Christian Courier since its inception in 1965. He has also written several books on a variety of biblical topics including The Bible and Science, Creation, Evolution, and the Age of the Earth, The Bible on Trial, and a number of commentaries. He lives in Stockton, California with his dear wife and life-long partner, Betty.

A Synopsis of Zionism and the Israel/Palestine Conflict Historic Palestine

For thousands of years there was no conflict in Palestine. In the 19th century, the land of Palestine was inhabited by a multicultural population of Palestinian Arabs — approximately 86 percent Muslim, 10 percent Christian, and 4 percent Jewish. For centuries these groups lived in harmony.

In the late 1800s, a group in Europe decided to colonize this land. Known as "Zionists," this group consisted of an extremist minority of the Jewish population who wanted to create a Jewish homeland. They considered locations in Africa and the Americas before settling on Palestine, where the Jewish State of Israel was established in 1948.

Largely due to one-sided special-interest lobbying by AIPAC, the U.S. has given more funds to Israel than to any other nation: $85 billion in grants, loans and commodities since 1949, with an additional $50 billion in interest costs for advance payments, for a total cost of $135 billion or $23,240 per Israeli. During fiscal year 2007, the U.S. gave an average of $7 million per day to the State of Israel.

Palestinian Loss of Land 1946-2005
Palestinian Loss of Land 1946-2005

Jews Against Zionism

"Although there are those who refuse to accept the teachings of our rabbis and will continue to support the Zionist state, there are also many who are totally unaware of the history of Zionism and its contradiction to the beliefs of Torah-True Jews. From its inception, many rabbis warned of the potential dangers of Zionism and openly declared that all Jews loyal to G-d should stay away from it like one would from fire. They made their opinions clear to their congregants and to the general public. Their message was that Zionism is a chauvinistic racist phenomenon which has absolutely naught to do with Judaism. They publicly expressed that Zionism would definitely be detrimental to the well being of Jews and Gentiles and that its effects on the Jewish religion would be nothing other than destructive. Further, it would taint the reputation of Jewry as a whole and would cause utter confusion in the Jewish and non-Jewish communities. Judaism is a religion. Judaism is not a race or a nationality. That was and still remains the consensus amongst the rabbis."

"We were given the Holy Land by G-d in order to be able to study and practice the Torah without disturbance and to attain levels of holiness difficult to attain outside of the Holy Land. We abused the privilege and we were expelled. That is exactly what all Jews say in their prayers on every Jewish festival, 'Umipnay chatoenu golinu mayartsaynu'—'Because of our sins, we were expelled from our land.'"

"We have been forsworn by G-d 'not to enter the Holy Land as a body before the predestined time;' 'not to rebel against the nations;' to be loyal citizens, not to do anything against the will of any nation or its honour; not to seek vengeance, discord, restitution or compensation; 'not to leave exile ahead of time.' On the contrary, we have to be humble and accept the yoke of exile. To violate the oaths would result in 'your flesh will be made prey as the deer and the antelope in the forest,' and the redemption will be delayed."

Mid-East Strife: Re-Discovering the Bible's Forgotten Solution

By Rev. Ted Pike

The raging conflict in the Middle East sparks two essential questions.
  1. First: Do the Jews own Palestine? The answer is yes. Scripture makes it clear that the land of Palestine was given by God to the physical descendants of Abraham (Gen. 12:7, 13-14-17- 11 Chron. 20:7; Acts 7:5).
  2. Secondly: Do the Jews have the right to occupy Palestine? The answer to this question is no! Scripture states that if Israel rejects Jesus (Yahweh), who brought them into Canaan, He will expel them from the land. They can never lawfully return until they are obedient to their rejected Messiah.
Yahweh's conditional terms of occupancy are bluntly laid down in Leviticus 26-27,33.
"Yet if in spite of this you do not obey me, but act with hostility against me, then I will act with wrathful hostility against you ... I will you scatter among the nations and will draw out a sword after you, as your land becomes desolate and your cities become waste."
Deuteronomy 4:25-27 continues:
"When you do that which is evil in the sight of the Lord your God so as to provoke him to anger, I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that you shall surely perish quickly from the land ... You shall not live long on it, but shall be utterly destroyed. And the Lord will scatter you among the nations, where the Lord shall drive you."
And in Deuteronomy 28:63-4:
"If you are not careful to observe all the words of this law ... you shall be torn from the land where you are entering to possess it. Moreover, the Lord will scatter you among all peoples."
In the Old Testament, when Israel and Judah abandoned Yahweh, both nations were exiled from Palestine: Israel by the Assyrians in 722 B.C., Judah by the Babylonians in 597 B.C.

Only abject repentance entitled a small minority of Judeans, under Ezra and Nehemiah, to return from Babylon and again occupy their land of promise. After the remnant Jews' rejection and crucifixion of Christ, they also were scattered among the nations in fulfillment of God's ancient decree.

Since their expulsion under Titus in 70 A.D., the Jews still have not repented. They have not given Christ the obedience He demands.

Who Has Rights of Occupation?

Who, then, are the legitimate occupants of Palestine today? When God exiled Judah under Nebuchadnezzar in 597 B.C. He allowed various mixed people, later called Samaritans, to occupy Judea. Such occupancy was not conditional on righteousness. What was important was that rebellious Jews not occupy the land.

Similarly, when God expelled the Jews from Palestine in 70 A.D. He allowed various peoples eventually known as Palestinian Arabs to occupy the land in lieu of Jewish obedience.

Do the Palestinians own the land? They do not. But they do have divine approval, as did the ancient Samaritans, to become tenants of the land until Israel repents.

Someday, out of great tribulation, a remnant of Jews will give God the obedience He demands. Christ will lead this believing remnant back to the land of their forefathers; they will dwell there lawfully, in peace and safety. This will be the only legitimate return the Jews will make to Palestine since their rejection of Christ 2000 years ago. It will gloriously fulfill hundreds of Old Testament prophecies (Isa. 4:4, 10:20, 59:20; Hos.14:4; Joel 2:18-20; Zeph. 2:7, 3:11-13). Until that time, God calls heaven and earth to testify that unbelieving Jews must remain dispersed, scattered, "wandering" among the nations (Deut. 4:25-27). And yet, as in ancient Babylon, God encouraged them to build, plant, marry and take root in the land of their dispersion, and to "seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile" (Jer. 29:4-7).

The proper role for unbelieving Jews is to dwell scattered among the very safe and prosperous Jewish communities in New York, London, Paris, etc. They are not to wrest Palestine from its divinely approved occupants, thus inciting persecution and hatred against Jews worldwide. This timeless principle of "no obedience, no occupancy" was illustrated in the time of Joshua (Num. 13:25-33; 14:1-45). God invited the Hebrews to occupy Palestine by faith. Yet when unbelief emerged, He refused to let them in. When the people decided they wanted to penetrate the land anyway, God rejected them, ultimately condemning them to wander and die in the wilderness. Only a new, obedient generation (like the later generation under Ezra and Nehemiah) would be allowed to take root in a land dedicated to obedience.

Changing Times and Laws

Today, God's law requiring Jewish obedience has been subverted by Zionist Jews and by evangelical Christians. Zionism says to Jews:
"We don't have to remain scattered, wanderers according to the curse of God's law. We can be re-gathered, established in peace and safety in the land God expelled us from. Obedience doesn't matter any more."
The evangelical church heartily agrees, blessing them and bidding Godspeed.

Evangelicals believe the Church has a responsibility, like a midwife, to come alongside and encourage Israel's birth of faith in Christ by blessing and endorsing unbelieving Israel, right or wrong. Such blessing, the Church believes, can only hasten Israel's eventual national acceptance of Christ.

Yet the Church has no biblical right to bless the Zionist experiment in Palestine. Zionism's capitol is that fleshly Jerusalem which Revelation describes as "the great city, which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified" (Rev. 11:8). It is anathema that the Church should bid Godspeed or pray for the peace of such a city, a city Scripture portrays as embodying the perversions of Sodom and all the bondage and occultry of ancient Egypt. The Church is obligated to encourage and pray for the peace of that spiritual Jerusalem, which includes all Jews who accept the rulership of the "King of Jerusalem" or "King of Peace," Jesus Christ (Heb. 7:1-3). Yes, Christians must be kind to Jews, responsive to their rights and humanitarian needs — just as Christians are to be charitable, without discrimination, to all people (James 2:1-4). Yet the greatest blessing the Church can give Jews is to preach the gospel to them, leading them to the gift of faith, joy and eternal life in their only true messiah, Jesus.

A Counterfeit Return

Zionism's defiance of God's law not only creates anger in Heaven, but strife, hatred, revenge and terrorism within God's holy land, sending shock waves through the Middle East and the world. Further, because the Zionist presence in Palestine is against God's law, no attempt at peace-making by America, Israel or the Palestinians can succeed. If God really endorsed the Zionist occupation of Palestine, He would bless Israel and the region with harmony — the kind of harmony Solomon enjoyed with his political neighbors. God is the One who causes even the enemies of a righteous man to be at peace with him (Prov. 16:7). Instead, violence, hatred, terrorism erupt in the Middle East: God's laws have been turned upside down.

What is to be done? The evangelical church, while seeking the spiritual good of individual Jews, should end its support of the unlawful Zionist occupation of God's holy land. Such a return to Biblical law does not forsake or persecute Jews. Instead, it is a blessing, helping deliver them from further persecution and anti-Semitism. The fact is, Zionism stimulates hatred against Jews. The modern state of Israel was established ostensibly to provide safe haven to European Jewry — actually, Zionists' unlawful occupation of Palestine, expelling and persecuting the divinely sanctioned occupants, has only heightened hatred of Jews and lessened the security of Jews living in war-torn Palestine. In fact, it would be difficult to imagine a less secure place for Jews than Israel.

The Right Thing to Do

The argument can be made, of course, that God's law is impractical for us today. Exodus of the Jews from Palestine, it could be said, would be like giving America back to the Indians. Yes, it is inconvenient. But it is also God's law — the right thing to do. The alternative — heightened hatred and possible world war, destroying staggering numbers of Arabs, Jews, and probably Americans in order to uphold the Zionists' unbiblical claim — is a much more painful one.

Even worse, Zionist occupation will eventually precipitate the Great Tribulation, when the antichrist, Israel's false messiah, turns on the Jewish people in fury (Isa. 10:5-11; Ezek. 38 & 39). Just as Sargon II and Nebuchadnezzar scattered Israel and Judah, the antichrist will be God's instrument to once again enforce God's law to expel and scatter disobedient Jewry throughout the world (Hos. 9:13, Ezek. 39:23-28, Luke 21:24). Scripture tells us that the Tribulation will be the period of greatest suffering Israel has ever known, a holocaust to end all holocausts at the hands of antichrist, Arabs and gentiles (Deut. 28:15,18-29; Hos. 8:7-8,13; Isa. 47:6; Jer. 6:1-3; Ezek. 23:46-47, 33:28-29; Matt. 24:21-22).

God's Forgotten Law

We have come to a time, as in the time of King Josiah, when the law of the Lord concerning rightful occupation of Palestine has been forgotten. Both Israel and the Church have massively strayed from God's law. The Church, even when confronted with such law, has the greatest difficulty comprehending it. Such light is unwelcome, painful to those who have dwelt for a century in the dark shadow of Zionist propaganda.

It is time the Church returned to confidence that God alone, in His time and on His terms, will bring back His remnant Jews to Palestine. The Church dishonors God by joining with Christ-rejecting Jews in ramming a counterfeit return down the throats of the Arab world. Further, the Church is siding with a bully. It bids Godspeed to arrogant and bloody men. Such include Menachem Begin who, having committed such atrocities as blowing up the King David Hotel and its occupants, proudly proclaimed himself "the father of modern terrorism." Or Ariel Sharon, who presided over the infamous Shattilla and Sabra Massacres in Lebanon, slaughtering hundreds of innocent victims.

Scripture warns that those who misguidedly bless evil men, bidding Godspeed to them, become partakers of their evil deeds (II Jn 1:11). Only by separating from international Zionism can the Church escape further entanglement and corruption by it. The Church must also remind Jews that if they want to avoid persecution, anti-semitism and ceaseless strife, they must return to Christ's divine law and terms of occupancy, given not to the gentiles, but to their forefathers thousands of years ago. If they obey, the Middle East will at last have peace.

Read more:The 'Kingdom Age' vs. the 'Eternal Age': Millennialism vs. A-Millennialism

November 28, 2012

More Than 600 Local Governments in the U.S. Use Taxpayer Dollars to Pay Membership Dues to ICLEI USA

agenda 21

The 'Sustainable' Plot to Erode American Prosperity, Liberty and Independence

Right Angles
September 5, 2011

Colorado is on the verge of succumbing to a virulent plague that's disguised with the innocuous label of “sustainability.” The pestilence is spreading across the entire country. The primary infecting agent is the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives USA, commonly known as ICLEI USA.

Once the pathogenic ICLEI invades a host community, citizens experience seemingly benign symptoms such as smart growth plans that concentrate population centers and initiatives to reduce CO2 and greenhouse gases.

But as the sustainability infection rapidly strengthens, the evidence of a potentially terminal illness is apparent. American citizens are being stripped of liberty, subjected to quasi-government control, and forced into dwindling prosperity.

More than 600 local governments in the United States use taxpayer dollars to pay membership dues to ICLEI USA. In Colorado, member communities include Denver, Fort Collins, Aspen and Carbondale.

On its website, ICLEI unabashedly reveals that it advocates “participatory, long-term, strategic planning processes that address local sustainability while protecting global common goods … and therefore links local action to global goals and targets such as Agenda 21.”

Agenda 21 (aka Agenda for the 21st Century) is the social engineering blueprint of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

According to Agenda 21, the goals of sustainable development are integration of economic, social, and environmental policies to reduce consumption, restore biodiversity and attain social equity.

For the record, social equity is synonymous with social justice, which asserts that all people have the right “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.”

The clear-stated goals of ICLEI are rooted in the core principles of Agenda 21. In that regard, sustainability balances three interrelated aims: environment, economy and social equity. Societal decisions are to be made from a global holistic standpoint, casting aside the narrow perspectives of individual liberty, national sovereignty and free-market economics.

In the United States, ICLEI advocates are increasingly occupying staff positions within local governments. Aided by community activist groups, these staffers push elected leaders to sanction membership in ICLEI USA. The organization offers money and resources to member communities that adopt sustainability plans per ICLEI guidelines.

Sustainability plans typically include a climate action plan with measures like energy efficiency audits of municipal buildings, streetlight retrofits, public transit expansion, and renewable energy projects. Other common initiatives are affordable housing, green jobs programs, and bans on products like plastic bags. The entire globalist agenda is enacted without voter approval.

In addition to membership dues, ICLEI is funded by entities such as the U.S. Department of State, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Green Building Council.

At every level, our own government and regulatory agencies are paying this pseudo-government globalist entity to undermine our constitutional rights as Americans. Citizens are letting it happen because media buzzwords, such as climate change and carbon footprint, incite guilt for adherence to constitutional law and preservation of America's founding principles.

In fact, the rash of local sustainability planning has nothing to do with protecting the environment. ICLEI is part of a scheme, sanctioned by United Nations, to erode American independence, liberty and prosperity. It's about power and control for a globalist movement.

The prognosis is grim. ICLEI-sponsored education programs are already entrenched in our schools, teaching kids to be global citizens instead of Americans. Our inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness could atrophy and die in a generation.

Eradication of the ICLEI infection is imperative. The cure must incorporate educating our children about American history and heritage, enlightening our neighbors about the lies of sustainability, and demanding that our leaders act within the framework of the Constitution. Without a concerted effort, our sovereign health is doomed.

WHITE HOUSE RURAL COUNCIL... Is This Agenda 21? And Why Haven't We Been Informed About This? Who Is Actually Watching Out for Us, Anyone?

February 11, 2012

On June 9, 2011, President Obama signed his 86th Executive Order, and almost nobody noticed.

(For the record, Obama is on par to match President Bush’s 291 orders executed during his two terms in office. The National Archives defines an Executive Order this way; Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government.)

President Obama’s E.O. 13575 is designed to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16% of the American people. Why didn’t we notice it? Weinergate. In the middle of the Anthony Weiner scandal, as the press and most of the American people were distracted, President Obama created something called “The White House Rural Council” (WHRC).

Section One of 13575 states the following:
Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.
Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase “sustainable rural communities” came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America.

The third sentence also makes it quite clear that the government intends to take greater control over “food, fiber, and energy.”

The last sentence in Section 1 further clarifies the intent of the order by tying together “access to the capital necessary for economic growth, health care and education.”

The new White House Rural Council will probably be populated by experts in the various fields that might prove helpful to the folks who live and work outside of large urban areas, right? Well, Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture, will chair the group, but let us review the list of members appointed to serve on this new council – according to the order, the heads of the following groups have been appointed:
  • (1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner
  • (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates
  • (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder
  • (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar
  • (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke
  • (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis
  • (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius
  • (8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan
  • (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood
  • (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu
  • (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan
  • (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki
  • (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano
  • (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson
  • (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps
  • (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag
  • (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren
  • (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske
  • (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee
  • (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress)
  • (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling
  • (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills
  • (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley
  • (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett
  • (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above).
It appears that not a single department in the federal government was excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agriculture secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.

Within the twenty-five designated members of the council are some curious ties to Agenda 21 and the structure being built to implement it:
Valerie Jarrett from the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs served on the board of something called Local Initiatives Support Corportation (LISC). LISC uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their web page details their work to build “Sustainable Communities.”

Melody Barnes head of the Domestic Policy Council – Former VP at George Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

Hilda Solis from the Labor Dept – in 2000 received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.”

Nancy Sutley head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – Served on the board of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and was one of the biggest supporters of low-flow toilets that are now credited with costing more money than expected while causing some nasty problems.
Is it possible that concerns about 13575 are just typical anti-government paranoia? Let us review the mission and function of WHRC:
Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council. The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.
“Economic prosperity” and a better “quality of life,” that all sounds fairly innocent and well-intentioned. But continuing deeper into the order we find the council is charged with four directives:
(a) make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;
The vague language here sounds non-threatening. But, is there a hint here that a “rural stimulus plan” might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating “economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?” It is difficult to discern as the language is so broad.

We continue with the functions of the WHRC:
(b) coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;
Virtually every aspect of rural life seems to now be part of the government’s mission. And while all of the items in (b) sound like typical government speak, you should be alarmed when you read the words “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs). NGOs are unelected, but typically government-funded groups that act like embedded community organizers. And NGOs are key to Agenda 21′s plans.
(c) coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas;
That one sounds very similar to the language found in the United Nations plan for sustainable cities known as Agenda 21. Managing the population in both rural and urban areas, with a focus on controlling “open spaces.”
(d) and identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation related activities.
This function of Executive Order 13575 ties energy development with outdoor recreation and “other conservation related activities.” When did outdoor recreation become a conservation related activity?

Aside from the content of this order and some its vague intentions, the timing of the signing should also be considered. Later this month, Washington DC is hosting a meeting of the Agenda 21 operatives who are members of ICLEI:
Washington, D.C. – ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Series to be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference.
As Secretary-General of Rio+20, Ambassador Sha Zukang will convene high-ranking leaders from government, the private sector and civil society to chart a pathway to accelerate the implementation of sustainable development decisions and the green economy through the creation of an institutional framework and inclusive participation.
The United Nations has pushed their sustainable development program for almost twenty years. The UN’s “social justice” blueprint called Agenda 21 requires governments to control almost all aspects of an individual’s life, but has recently met with substantial resistance in America. Since The Blaze covered this topic and the story appeared on Glenn Beck’s Fox TV program, we have been inundated with reports from around the country about efforts to remove ICLEI and Agenda 21 from local governments.

Carroll County, Maryland: Starting in February, 2011, all five newly elected county commissioners, led by Richard Rothschild, voted to become the first county in the nation to end the ICLEI contract.

Amador County, California: The Mother Lode Tea Party lead the successful effort to remove ICLEI form Amador County.

Montgomery County, Pennsylvania: Activists Ruth Miller and Maggie Roddin have raised awareness that lead to the removal of ICLEI.

Edmond, Oklahoma: Molly Jenkins motivated 200 people to attend the city council meeting and demand action against ICLEI.

Las Cruces, New Mexico: continues to debate the issue, but rational voices are gaining momentum in the community.

Spartanburg, South Carolina: City Councilman Roger Nutt successfully directed the effort against the program and Spartanburg became the 6th community to kick out ICLEI in a vote of 6-0 by City Council (with one abstention).

There have also been anti-ICLEI rallies held in several cities this week, with more planned in the near future:
  • June 27, 11:30am-3:00pm
    Exeter, NH, Exeter High School
  • June 27, 5:00pm-8:30pm
    Galveston, TX, Galveston Convention Center
  • June 27, 8:30am-5:00pm
    Ocean Shores, WA, Quinault Beach Resort and Casino
  • June 30, 1:00pm-5:00pm
    San Francisco Bay Area, CA, TBD
  • June 30, 10:00am-5:00pm
    West Long Branch, NJ, Monmouth University
There appears to be a developing, grass-roots movement to reject programs like Agenda 21. It remains to be seen if these groups might also reject a Washington-based control over rural lands, like the council created by Executive Order 13575.

As long as there’s not another Weinergate, maybe they’ll notice.

What is Agenda 21? If you do not know about it, you should.

Agenda 21 is a two-decade old, grand plan for global ’Sustainable Development,’ brought to you from the United Nations. George H.W. Bush (and 177 other world leaders) agreed to it back in 1992, and in 1995, Bill Clinton signed Executive Order #12858, creating a Presidential Council on ‘Sustainable Development.’ This effectively pushed the UN plan into America’s large, churning government machine without the need for any review or discussion by Congress or the American people.

‘Sustainable Development’ sounds like a nice idea, right? It sounds nice, until you scratch the surface and find that Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development are really cloaked plans to impose the tenets of Social Justice/Socialism on the world.

At risk from Agenda 21:
  • Private Property ownership
  • Single-Family homes
  • Private car ownership and individual travel choices
  • Privately owned farms
The Agenda 21 plan openly targets private property. For over thirty-five years the UN has made their stance very clear on the issue of individuals owning land;
Land… cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.
WHITE HOUSE RURAL COUNCIL is this Agenda 21 and why haven t we been informed about this Who is actually watching out for us anyone

Go to The Lamb Slain Home Page