Title:
CAMPAIGN TO DISCREDIT PRESIDENT BUSH SEEMS MOVING INTO HIGHER GEAR Title:
CAMPAIGN TO DISCREDIT PRESIDENT BUSH SEEMS MOVING INTO HIGHER GEAR
|
Resources to aid your Understanding
|
Learn how to protect yourself, your loved ones!
Stand by for insights so startling you will never look at the news the same way again.
YOU ARE NOW ON
THE CUTTING EDGE
"For God has put it into their hearts (Final Ten Kings) to carry out His own purpose by acting in harmony in surrendering their royal power and authority to the beast, until the prophetic words (intentions and promises) of God shall be fulfilled." [Revelation 17:17; Parallel Bible, KJV/Amplified Bible Commentary]
This prophecy is one of the most exciting in the entire Bible! It literally says that God will place the desire into the hearts of the final rulers of the age to "act in harmony" to fulfill His prophecies. When we examine the next verse, we can see that the very fact that these rulers are "acting in harmony" means they are agreed, and are acting according to a preconceived plan.
"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" [Amos 3:3]
This "preconceived plan" is called a "script" by New Age author Peter Lemesurier. Listen carefully:
"Their script is now written .. The stage itself ... is almost ready. Down in the pit, the subterranean orchestra is already tuning up ... the main actors ... have already taken up their roles. Soon it will be time for them to come on stage, ready for the curtain to rise. The time for action will have come." [Lemesurier, "The Armageddon Script", p. 252]
This article deals with one particular outworking (scene) of a script to discredit President Bush which I have been following for nearly six months now. I firmly believe that the Illuminati may have written their script in such a manner as to purposely discredit George Bush, perhaps even to the point of sending him to deliberate defeat in the November presidential election.
As we begin our discussion, remember one fact: when one Illuminist begins to attack another, you are looking at the outworking of a carefully scripted plan. All Illuminists are equally committed to moving the world to the New World Order (a.k.a., Kingdom of Antichrist), and to achieve this coveted goal, are willing to take opposite sides to act out a role in a Dialectic Struggle [Read NEWS1599 for full details on how the Dialectic Struggle works].
The news we are about to share with you seem to strongly point to just such a dialectic struggle unfolding in an apparent attempt to discredit President Bush. Note that the first article is dated February 3, 2004 -- fully four months ago.
ILLUMINIST ZINNI ATTACKING ILLUMINIST BUSH
NEWS BRIEF: "Soldiers, Families Oppose Bush Casualties Mount
After Saddam", by Kerry Taylor, War Times, February 3, 2004, http://www.war-times.org/issues/15art1.html
" 'The First Casualty of War Is Truth' -- President Bush's war in Iraq faces growing opposition from those who are on the front lines: soldiers, their families and veterans, including high-ranking officers. A bipartisan poll published by Business Week in December showed approval for the president at a mere 36 percent among soldiers, their families and veterans."
" 'I think the American people were conned into this [war]', said retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni, a Bush supporter in 2000. Zinni, who was chief of U.S. operations in the Middle East until three years ago, also charged the administration with failing to plan an occupation that would rebuild Iraq, provide internal stability and advance democracy."
Retired Marine Corps General Zinni is a trusted Illuminist insider who served President Bush's as his Middle East envoy for almost 2 years, as he shuttled in and out of Israel trying to arrange a cease-fire, encouraging Israel and the Palestinians to take solid, confidence-building measures toward peace. No one is named as a Presidential envoy who is not a trusted member of the inner circle.
Therefore, when General Zinni suddenly began his attack in early February 3, this year, I was startled. Since I have long known that such a phenomenon usually means that a particular part of a Dialectic Struggle plan is beginning to unfold, I began to watch carefully, to see if Zinni's attacks continued, and to especially see if any other Illuminists began to attack the president.
As I have long stated, the end result of this war in Iraq has got to be seen as a disaster. President Bush ordered the attack on Iraq, exercising his authority as a National Sovereign, ignoring the collective will of the United Nations. Since the Illuminati staged World Wars I and II for the express purpose of eliminating National Sovereignty in favor of the Global Sovereignty of the UN, Bush's invasion had to come to naught! We certainly are seeing the outworking of that part of the plan.
Further, President Bush claims he is a Born Again Christian, too many Evangelical leaders accept him as their de facto leader, and the world too readily sees his campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq as a "Crusade" by a Christian Army. Therefore, if President Bush is discredited, both National Sovereignty and Fundamental Christianity will be discredited. If this occurs, the stage may be set for persecution of Christians by the 44th President.
Now, let us continue to examine instances in which a committed Illuminist is attacking the equally Illuminist President Bush. We shall refrain from listing any comments made by Senator Kerry or any other partisan Democrat, because that kind of criticism is simply politics. What we shall address here is the criticism from Illuminists either not associated with the Democrats or who were originally part of Bush's team.
DRUMBEAT OF CRITICISM
In this first article, we see that a CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) official strongly criticizes Bush on his handling of the potential nuclear crisis with North Korea. If you are not familiar with what the CFR is, and why it was founded, please take a moment to read our archived article: "COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS A MAJOR KEY IN THE DRIVE TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER!" - NEWS1191.
This Illuminist author is saying that the only reason North Korea has not agreed to abandon her nuclear weapons project is because President Bush has failed to provide proper leadership! This charge is serious, for when a nuclear confrontation does develop, President Bush is now in line for tremendous criticism.
NEWS BRIEF: "Harrison Faults Bush Administration for Rejecting Step-by-Step Accords to Halt North Korea's Nuclear Program", Interview with Selig S. Harrison, Director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy, Council on Foreign Relations Online Magazine, May 10, 2004
"Selig S. Harrison, director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy and a longtime expert on North Korea, says Pyongyang is 'eager' to start step-by-step negotiations with Washington to freeze, and end, its nuclear program. But the United States, Harrison says, refuses to take up the offer ... A pair of six-nation talks has been held to try to resolve the sharp dispute between the United States and North Korea over Pyongyang's nuclear program. A working group of officials from the six nations-the United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, and Russia-is to start another round of talks May 12, but Harrison holds out little hope for progress. 'I think it is a charade', he says.
For once, we agree with a member of the CFR! The United States has now held several high-level talks with North Korea on this issue, to no avail. Each of these "negotiations" has, indeed, been a "charade". We appreciate the CFR for verifying what we have been saying for years!
In fact, we intentionally sabotaged the Spring negotiations last year, as we detail in NEWS1805. Furthermore, the Bush Administration adopted a tough, new aggressive posture with North Korea that some fear might spark the very war we say we are trying to avoid (NEWS1839).
Now, let us return to the CFR report to get more detail on their unhappiness with President Bush about how he is handling the nuclear crisis with North Korea.
"I found the North Korean leadership extremely eager to find a way to conclude a nuclear deal with the United States. They need such a deal urgently ... they want improved relations with the United States. As part of that, the nuclear issue would be settled ... I found them very eager for settlement, but the problem is, while they're eager and they need [a deal], but they are not prepared to do it in the way the Bush administration is asking them to do it. The North Koreans say that Washington wants them to, in effect, simply roll over and disarm unilaterally." [Ibid.]
Time and time again, since Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, North Korea has taken a very strong, and somewhat surprising, stand on her nuclear weapons. North Korea noted that Bush did not invade Iraq until United Nations weapons inspectors had repeatedly told him that Iraq possessed no nuclear weapons. In other words, Bush invaded only after he had been assured by the UN inspectors that Iraq possessed no WMD. North Korea strongly maintains that, had Bush believed Iraq was really armed with Weapons of Mass Destruction with which to strike our troops as they invaded, he would never have invaded.
Therefore, North Korea adamantly maintains that their only hope of avoiding an invasion is to strengthen their nuclear weapons capability, not unilaterally disarm. Furthermore, North Korea maintains that cooperation with the United Nations weapons inspectors was a fatal mistake by Saddam; had he refused to allow UN inspectors in his country, the United States would never have been able to thoroughly verify that Iraq had no WMD. Therefore, North Korea distrusts the UN only slightly less than he does the Bush Administration. In fact, he views the United Nations as the stalking horse for the United States.
Therefore, North Korea is playing a diplomatic game with this business of negotiations. On the one hand, they publicly state their willingness to negotiate, while on the other hand, they steadfastly refuse to allow UN inspectors into their country, while just as adamantly refusing American demands that they immediately and unilaterally disarm. They might very well believe that they will not be attacked as long as they are appearing to be serious about negotiations.
Seleg Harrison (CFR) then recounts the rigid position that President Bush has adopted.
"The Bush administration feels that North Korea can't be trusted, that its honor has been found wanting in the past. The Bush administration has what I would call a very rigid position, in that it is not prepared to trade anything to get a process of denuclearization started ... The point is, the administration's objective is really regime change in Pyongyang. The president in his interview in 2002 with [Washington Post correspondent] Bob Woodward in the book 'Bush at War', said he loathed Kim Jong Il, and that he would like to topple his regime ... I think it's a position that risks a war." [Ibid.; Emphasis added]
Harrison then speaks candidly about China and the role she is playing right now in these so-called "negotiations" and the limits to which she is prepared to go. As you read this statement, remember that Western papers are portraying China as fully cooperating with the Bush Administration.
"I was just in China for 10 days, prior to my visit to North Korea, and I had many talks with many very plugged-in Chinese. China is absolutely not prepared to follow that course. China thinks the Bush administration's policy is unrealistic and is not going to accomplish anything. The Chinese want to keep the Bush administration tied up in diplomatic knots so that it won't start a war in Korea, but they are not prepared to go along with the pressure tactics that the Bush people, including [Vice President Richard] Cheney on his recent visit, would like China to pursue. The same viewpoint is found in South Korea." [Ibid.]
With the Chinese playing these diplomatic games, and with President Bush adopting such a rigid strategy, Harrison is laying the groundwork to us to believe that these factors are the reasons the nuclear disarmament "negotiations" are going nowhere. Then, Harrison speaks to the point that our intelligence really is not sure as to what North Korea has, and what she does not have, in terms of nuclear weapons.
"... when you read a story in the paper saying the United States 'thinks' North Korea has two nuclear weapons, or that the estimate is now eight because they processed a lot of plutonium in the last year, what you're reading are stories based on the fact that, prior to the 1994 freeze, they had done some reprocessing, and we haven't yet found out how much they had ... we get stories out of Pakistan saying that scientist A.Q. Khan [the so-called father of Pakistan's nuclear program, who confessed to providing atomic expertise to other countries] has said this and said that, but we don't have any hard evidence. The United States has never talked to A.Q. Khan, and we don't have any specific evidence of a uranium program in North Korea ... " [Ibid.]
Cutting Edge has said that, if we are really going to unilaterally attack nations we say possess WMD, our intelligence had better be 100% correct! We now realize that, not only was our intelligence not correct, but was invented by Bush - Rumsfeld's specially-created intelligence agency, Office of Special Plans (NEWS1890 and NEWS1890b).
In past weeks, we have been hearing the same type of rhetoric being aired by American officials which preceded our attack on Iraq. Cheney recently warned that North Korea might give some of her WMD to terrorists, the same charge we leveled at Iraq -- a charge now known to be false. Harrison speaks to the possibility that North Korea might cooperate with terrorists.
"Questioner: 'They [North Korea] denied, specifically, Cheney's warning that they might sell to al Qaeda?' Harrison: 'Exactly. When Cheney was in Shanghai, he warned that they might sell to al Qaeda, and they said, 'No, we will not do that. We are going to sell missiles for foreign exchange; we think that's our right; there's no international convention accepted by everybody that prevents that. But nuclear material is another matter."
Finally, when Harrison was asked what he thought the prospects of the upcoming negotiations between June 23-26, he responded quickly and to the point.
"Questioner: 'What's going to happen in the working group talks this week in Beijing?' Harrison: 'Very little, if anything. I think it's really a charade'."
We have long believed these negotiations are a charade, because we know the bottom line plan for the role North Korea is to play in the upcoming World War III.
"A hair-raising nuclear confrontation in Korea may, towards the end of the period, threaten man's very survival." [Peter Lemesurier, "The Armageddon Script", p. 252]
So, why is CFR's Harrison severely criticizing Bush? We know both men are Illuminists to their very core; thus, they are pursuing precisely the same goal. What we believe is occurring is that a campaign to discredit Bush is under way in our media and this CFR article is a part of it.
DIPLOMATS AND MILITARY COMMANDERS FOR
CHANGE
Now, let us go to a most shocking recent article which demonstrates the seriousness of this discrediting effort:
NEWS BRIEF: "Retired Officials Say Bush Must Go", By Ronald Brownstein, Los Angeles Times, Sunday, 13 June 2004, http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061404A.shtml
"Washington - A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November. The group, which calls itself Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, will explicitly condemn Bush's foreign policy, according to several of those who signed the document.
" 'It is clear that the statement calls for the defeat of the administration', said William C. Harrop, the ambassador to Israel under President Bush's father and one of the group's principal organizers. Those signing the document, which will be released in Washington on Wednesday, include 20 former U.S. ambassadors, appointed by presidents of both parties, to countries including Israel, the former Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia. Others are senior State Department officials from the Carter, Reagan and Clinton administrations and former military leaders, including retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East under President Bush's father. Hoar is a prominent critic of the war in Iraq."
Whenever you see such insiders as these going to the trouble of forming a special committee, you should know for certain that you are witnessing the outworking of a plan written at the very top by the Illuminati. Since this group was formed just five months before the presidential election, you know that the election is the target at which they are aiming, just as Harrop stated above: 'the statement calls for the defeat of the administration'.
The next portion of this article makes that goal very plain.
"Some of those signing the document - such as Hoar and former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill A. McPeak - have identified themselves as supporters of Sen. John F. Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. But most have not endorsed any candidate, members of the group said. It is unusual for so many former high-level military officials and career diplomats to issue such an overtly political message during a presidential campaign." [Ibid.]
Clearly, a basis is being laid for the electoral defeat of Bush in November. If the Illuminati plan does call for Kerry to defeat Bush in November, the activities of groups like this one can be blamed. American citizens will believe that Bush was defeated because powerful groups like this one set their political gunsights on him. A plausible scenario has to be spun as to why a most popular war-time President was brought down.
But, then, we are told in this article that a similar group was formed in Great Britain last month!
"The document will echo a statement released in April by a group of high-level former British diplomats condemning Prime Minister Tony Blair for being too closely aligned to U.S. policy in Iraq and Israel. Those involved with the new group said their effort was already underway when the British statement was released." [Ibid.]
If a similar high-level group was formed in England in April, we can understand how Blair's party took such a drubbing in elections just concluded. Listen:
NEWS BRIEF: "Blair gets drubbing from war-weary Britons", Reuters, London, reprinted by Taipei Times, June 12, 2004
"Britons angry over Iraq have given Prime Minister Tony Blair a drubbing in local elections, relegating his ruling Labour Party to an unprecedented third place. 'It's a bad night for us, but it's not meltdown," Blair's Home Secretary David Blunkett said yesterday. "On Iraq, we are very clear about that -- it has damaged us'."
Whether these local election results will be repeated in next year's election remains to be seen. However, it is interesting that just one month after such a group was formed in England, Blair's party took a severe loss in interim elections, a loss attributed to Blair's Iraq policy.
Now, let us return to our feature article about the high-level group, Diplomats
and Military Commanders for Change.
"Adm. William J. Crowe Jr., though named chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff under Reagan, supported Clinton in 1992. Crowe has endorsed Kerry. Retired
Adm. Stansfield Turner served as Carter's director of central intelligence and
has also endorsed Kerry. Matlock said he was a registered Democrat during most
of his foreign service career, though he voted for Reagan in 1984 and the elder
Bush twice and now is registered as an independent. Several on the group's list
were appointed to their most important posts under Reagan and the elder Bush.
These include Matlock and Harrop, as well as Arthur A. Hartman, who served as
Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1981 through 1987; H. Allen Holmes,
an assistant secretary of state under Reagan; and Charles Freeman, ambassador
to Saudi Arabia under the elder Bush. Oakley said the statement would argue
that, 'Unfortunately the tough stands [Bush] has taken have made us less secure.
He has neglected the war on terrorism for the war in Iraq. And while we agree
that we are in unprecedented times and we face challenges we didn't even know
about before, these challenges require the cooperation of other countries. We
cannot do it by ourselves'." [Ibid.]
This last statement might turn out to be Kerry's campaign theme slogan: "These challenges require the cooperation of other countries. We cannot do it by ourselves".
Finally, this article specifically lists the people who did join this panel to oppose President Bush.
"The signatories: Although not explicitly endorsing Sen. John F. Kerry for president, 26 former diplomats and military officials, including many who served in Republican administrations, have signed a statement calling for the defeat of President Bush in November. Their names and some of the posts they have held are:
* Avis T. Bohlen - assistant secretary of State for arms control, 1999-2002; deputy assistant secretary of State for European affairs, 1989-1991.
* Retired Adm. William J. Crowe Jr. - chairman, President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Committee, 1993-94; ambassador to Britain, 1993-97; chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1985-89.
* Jeffrey S. Davidow - ambassador to Mexico, 1998-2002; assistant secretary of State for inter-American affairs, 1996.
* William A. DePree - ambassador to Bangladesh, 1987-1990.
* Donald B. Easum - ambassador to Nigeria, 1975-79.
* Charles W. Freeman Jr. - assistant secretary of Defense for international security affairs, 1993-94; ambassador to Saudi Arabia, 1989-1992.
* William C. Harrop - ambassador to Israel, 1991-93; ambassador to Zaire, 1987-1991.
* Arthur A. Hartman - ambassador to the Soviet Union, 1981-87; ambassador to France, 1977-1981.
* Retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar - commander in chief of U.S. Central Command, overseeing forces in the Middle East, 1991-94; deputy chief of staff, Marine Corps, 1990-94.
* H. Allen Holmes - assistant secretary of Defense for special operations, 1993-99; assistant secretary of State for politico-military affairs, 1986-89.
* Robert V. Keeley - ambassador to Greece, 1985-89; ambassador to Zimbabwe, 1980-84.
* Samuel W. Lewis - director of State Department policy and planning, 1993-94; ambassador to Israel, 1977-1985.
* Princeton N. Lyman - assistant secretary of State for international organization affairs, 1995-98; ambassador to South Africa, 1992-95.
* Jack F. Matlock Jr. - ambassador to the Soviet Union, 1987-1991; director for European and Soviet affairs, National Security Council, 1983-86; ambassador to Czechoslovakia, 1981-83.
* Donald F. McHenry - ambassador to the United Nations, 1979-1981.
* Retired Air Force Gen. Merrill A. McPeak - chief of staff, U.S. Air Force, 1990-94.
* George E. Moose - assistant secretary of State for African affairs, 1993-97; ambassador to Senegal, 1988-91.
* David D. Newsom - acting secretary of State, 1980; undersecretary of State for political affairs, 1978-1981; ambassador to Indonesia, 1973-77.
* Phyllis E. Oakley - assistant secretary of State for intelligence and research, 1997-99.
* James Daniel Phillips - ambassador to the Republic of Congo, 1990-93; ambassador to Burundi, 1986-1990.
* John E. Reinhardt - ambassador to Nigeria, 1971-75.
* Retired Air Force Gen. William Y. Smith - deputy commander in chief, U.S. European Command, 1981-83.
* Ronald I. Spiers - undersecretary-general of the United Nations for political affairs, 1989-1992; ambassador to Pakistan, 1981-83.
* Michael Sterner - deputy assistant secretary of State for Near East affairs, 1977-1981; ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, 1974-76.
* Retired Adm. Stansfield Turner - director of the Central Intelligence Agency, 1977-1981.
* Alexander F. Watson - assistant secretary of State for inter-American affairs, 1993-96; deputy permanent representative to the U.N., 1989-1993.
* Source: Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change
Notice the high-level positions these men have either held in the past, or are holding currently. You do not get promoted to these posts unless you are thoroughly Illuminist and fully in sync with the global plan. Therefore, this group is not a "loose cannon", taking positions out of line with the overall plan. You are looking at a major effort here to discredit Bush so his election defeat can be explained away.
WHY DISCREDIT BUSH?
Throughout occult literature, New World Order writers acknowledge only two major enemies. 1) National Sovereignty; 2) Fundamental Christianity
President Bush is tightly tied into both these major "enemies" to the planned global system. Let us quickly explain.
National Sovereignty -- When President Bush ordered American troops to invade Iraq on March 20, 2003, he was exercising his authority as a National Sovereign. He was also repudiating -- publicly at least -- the "collective will" of the International Community as represented by the United Nations. On the one hand, President Bush was vehemently stating that Saddam was a threat to world "peace and safety" because he possessed WMD, and was a threat to give some of that weaponry to Al Qaeda terrorists. On the other hand, the United Nations was just as vehement in their declaration that Iraq possessed no WMD that could be either used against his neighbors or shared with terrorists.
As Coalition Forces were celebrating their victory over Saddam and tearing down his statute in Baghdad, Cutting Edge was warning that the war must be seen, in the final analysis, as a disaster. Otherwise, people will flock to the ever-popular banner of National Sovereignty and National Patriotism, while spurning the Illuminati concept of Global Sovereignty and Global Patriotism. After all, World Wars I and II were staged and fought to establish the principle that only Global Sovereignty could prevent future world conflicts.
If President Bush is thoroughly discredited, he will bring National Sovereignty into great disrepute. If the Iraq war also produces a global confrontation -- World War III -- as is the plan, then Antichrist can point to that war when he arises as THE most important reason he is officially outlawing the exercise of National Sovereignty. From this moment on, he will intone, only he will exercise any authority and it shall be global.
Fundamental Christianity -- From the beginning of his campaign, President Bush claimed to be a Christian (NEWS1398). Based upon his personal testimony alone, many Evangelical Christians believe he is Christian, his fruits to the contrary notwithstanding. We have written many articles on this subject, too many to be listed here (Search Directory of All Articles).
In early 2001, Cutting Edge posted an article noting that President Bush seemed to be the de facto leader of the Christian Right, a position that places him in a position to be considered the leader of the Evangelicals (NEWS1596).
Today, the vast majority of Evangelical Christians are reportedly ready to cast their vote for Bush on their perceived notion that the President is one of them.
NEWS BRIEF: "86% of evangelicals say Bush has their vote, Barna reports", BPNews, June 7, 2004
"NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--A new survey shows that a 'faith gap' exists between the two major presidential candidates, with 86 percent of Christian evangelicals saying they plan to vote for President Bush this fall ... The data, researcher George Barna said, reveals that Bush is receiving more support from evangelicals than he did in 2000 ... Mr. Bush's chances of re-election hinge squarely on the choices of the Christian body."
Considering this level of enthusiastic support Evangelicals have given Bush, it is not too surprising that the outside world considers him and his war to be Christian! Many, many Muslims consider that Muslim Iraq was invaded by a Christian Crusader army. As we detailed in our articles and newsletters, Muslims see our torture and sexual degradation crimes in the Iraqi and Afghanistan military prisons as just the latest example of the moral degradation they have always attributed to "Christian" nations.
If Bush takes down Evangelical Christianity in the eyes of the world, the brush will most definitely be wide enough to color Fundamental Christianity.
If President Bush is thoroughly and completely discredited, he will take down with him the two major "evils" with which the Illuminati has always struggled and which have impeded the progress into the New World Order the most: National Sovereignty and Fundamental Christianity.
Christians may then be set up for persecution by the next President.
We shall have to wait to see how this campaign develops, but
the news thus far seems pretty conclusive. Truly, all elements seem falling
into place for the final push, the planned World War III which shall usher Antichrist
on to the world scene.
Are you spiritually ready? Is your family? Are you adequately protecting your
loved ones? This is the reason for this ministry, to enable you to first understand
the peril facing you, and then help you develop strategies to warn and protect
your loved ones. Once you have been thoroughly
trained, you can also use your knowledge as a means to open the door of discussion
with an unsaved person. I have been able to use it many times, and have seen
people come to Jesus Christ as a result. These perilous times are also a time
when we can reach many souls for Jesus Christ, making an eternal difference.
If you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Savior, but have been very lukewarm in your spiritual walk with Him, you need to immediately ask Him for forgiveness and for renewal. He will instantly forgive you, and fill your heart with the joy of the Holy Spirit. Then, you need to begin a daily walk of prayer and personal Bible Study.
If you have never accepted Jesus Christ as Savior, but have come to realize His reality and the approaching End of the Age, and want to accept His FREE Gift of Eternal Life, you can also do so now, in the privacy of your home. Once you accept Him as Savior, you are spiritually Born Again, and are as assured of Heaven as if you were already there. Then, you can rest assured that the Kingdom of Antichrist will not touch you spiritually.
If you would like to become Born Again, turn to our Salvation Page now.
We hope you have been blessed by this ministry, which seeks to educate and warn people, so that they can see the coming New World Order -- Kingdom of Antichrist -- in their daily news.
Finally, we would love to hear from you.
You can contact us by mail or email.
God bless you.
