Nostradamus and the Last Days overview

I watched the Nostradamus "lost book" program on the History Channel last night. One of the predictions, interpreted by the scholars looking at the book of illustrations, and at the original quatrains, comes out roughly depicting this present Middle Eastern war lasting through two "nobles" or presidents, both with long terms. So, if that is correct, we're only midway through the "War on Terror" and if Iraq is winding down quickly as seems to be the case, then another front on this war is about to open that will last probably well into the second term of the next president, with an interruption due to the pre-Antichrist calm if the man of sin is to be revealed in 2012. Again, I say, if.

Also, the Nostradamus program pointed up the astronomical significance -- in Earth-Sun-Galaxy alignments -- of the year 2012. Apparently an alignment of the Sun in between the constellations Ophiuchus, Scorpio, and Sagittarius will center it exactly over the Galactic Center for the first time in 13,000 years in that year, as the ecliptic (Earth's orbital plane, path of the Sun in the sky) exactly intersects the center of the Milky Way as seen from Earth. What that actually means, who knows, but it's interesting. Anyway, coincident with that astronomical alignment is a repeat fulfillment (based on illustrations from the "lost book of Nostradamus") of Noah's Ark, or a sign of something similar happening. The interesting thing for me was that the Ark was depicted in the air, not on water. A sign of an aerial catching away, perhaps?

Another program on Nostradamus that I watched prior to the "lost book" program gives us a name for the evil ruler in the last days, MABUS. The experts were saying this is probably an anagram, but they combine the names Osama-Bush -- i.e., O.S.A.MABUS.H. However, my own opinion of this is neither Osama nor Bush are the Antichrist, even if their actions are bringing about the coming of this ruler. Being an anagram I think it is more likely a clue to the actual name of the ruler as "Hister" was to Hitler. If we rearrange the letters we probably get a lot closer to the name... such as Musab which is a name of one of the earliest and most famous disciples of Muhammed (as well as a moniker of Al Zarkawi, the recently killed Al Qaida figure in Iraq), and is pretty much the only Arab name with widespread references I can get out of it. If you think of others let me know.

This is a link -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mus%60ab_ibn_%60Umair to the original Mu'sab of history, as seen through the eyes of an obvious Muslim admirer... note the similarities between his character and career as a proselytizer and those of the apostles of Christ in Acts. We should probably expect a "man of peace" to look very much like this, until the time of war comes and he shows his true colors.

By the way, none of this should be taken to mean that any Biblical fulfillments taught on by Gene Scott or some others that I've elaborated on are negated by these scenarios.... I may not know how it all fits together yet, and Dr. Scott was probably the only one who did. So I am not by any means negating the future Ten Toes; one should include portions of Europe in it, into the Balkan nations, Turkey, the central Arab states, Egypt, and it will also include Iran, which technically is not an Arab nation and is also an ally of Russia as Turkey may soon become. In any case the union of ten is the last step of pre-Rapture fulfillment OR the very first thing that happens after the general church Rapture. When you see that, "look up, for your redemption is nigh."

I believe the Arab or rather Middle Eastern-Southeast European ten toes union comes after a US-Iran war if there is going to be a US-Iran war. Neither the present Iraq war nor a near-future Iran war is the Antichrist war, that's not yet. It's my firm but considered belief that a period of peace must intervene for Antichrist to come on the scene, probably a short period of calm following exhaustion due to war in the region. Let's not also forget that Egypt is to be a troubler in the last day, so there must be a regime in place there which is hostile to the US and hostile to peace with Israel, which means Mubarak and his supporters are out of the scene by then. (He is well into his 70s now.) And, Turkey is to wind up in the Russian sphere of influence to fulfill Ezekiel 37 in the last days, and the Kurdish troubles may spark that separation from the US toward Russia in the coming year or two. I'm already rather amazed at how fast the Iranian-Russian alliance beginning the fulfillment of Ezekiel 37 has progressed so far, after America blew opportunity after opportunity to win Iran over in recent years. Turkey appears to be next to gravitate into the Russian orbit, so watch that country, and also watch Egypt and its radical movements.

Foreigners get equality under the law, or we are hypocrites as a nation.

If foreigners do not deserve the same rights as Americans, then any war we are fighting to "liberate" anyone in the world is based on a lie. This nation is supposed to be set apart from the jungle by its values of rights of people and constitutional rule of law, and here we are supposedly fighting for the rights of other people whose rights we decided not to honor any more in our own court system. That turns American altruism into hypocrisy.

Now, it isn't that I'm advocating aliens get the right to vote, they should have that in their own countries, but all persons under the Stars and Stripes are subject to constitutional due process of law and equal treatment under the law... and habeas corpus should NOT be denied in the absence of an invasion or insurrection, not because it is convenient for us but because it is REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION. We do NOT have an invasion just because somebody is threatening to blow up a building or two, which they haven't done in years. And, we certainly don't have an insurrection... my blog is probably among the closest things to having that. So, where are Gitmo's writs of habeas corpus???

The adjudication of a captured terrorist's rights, if any, should occur under due process of law as demanded by the Bill of Rights -- OR -- he should be detained as a prisoner of war under treaties the United States has signed and committed itself to honoring. By not honoring those treaties and its own Constitution that the Founders worked so hard to craft together, and by not honoring all the blood, sweat, tears, and souls poured into the amendments that enshrine our rights, this government is nothing more than a nascent fascist system on the horizon with nothing to distinguish it except moral depravity at its worst -- the kind that cloaks itself in hypocritical guise as the guardian of the so-called Free World while using every excuse to sabotage freedom and rule of law at home. If this situation continues -- mark my words -- we will lose our freedom to a fascist dictatorship. My honest opinion is, because of the laxity of the people and their loss of vigilance, they don't deserve to have the Constitution any more. That we still have it at all is thanks to the grace of God. I would suggest we stop taxing His patience -- the Constitution is the rightful King of the United States and the fact that it is here means God appointed it ruler of this land, according to Romans 13:

Rom 13:1
¶
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Rom 13:2
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

Rom 13:3
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

Rom 13:4
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Rom 13:5
Wherefore [ye] must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

Heed also the warning to the people of Israel for demanding that God replace His appointed judges with a king such as every other nation had:

1Sa 8:4
Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,

1Sa 8:5
And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.

In other words the Constitution just doesn't get the job done, the system is corrupt, those weak minded judges and juries will acquit terrorists so give up on it and get us a stronger executive branch, like France or Russia....

1Sa 8:6
¶
But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.

1Sa 8:7
And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

See that? Reject the rule of the proper legal authorities and you reject God, and HE TAKES OFFENSE. So how did God handle this bunch of fascism-loving rebels 3,000 years ago? We read on that first God warns them:

1Sa 8:10
¶
And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.

1Sa 8:11
And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint [them] for himself, for his chariots, and [to be] his horsemen; and [some] shall run before his chariots.

1Sa 8:12
And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and [will set them] to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

1Sa 8:13
And he will take your daughters [to be] confectionaries, and [to be] cooks, and [to be] bakers.

1Sa 8:14
And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, [even] the best [of them], and give [them] to his servants.

1Sa 8:15
And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

1Sa 8:16
And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put [them] to his work.

1Sa 8:17
He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

1Sa 8:18
And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

God issues the same warning that I and others have been screaming about -- if you reject the Constitutional rule of law, you embrace fascism and you are headed for tyranny. God said it 3,000 years ago!!! But here's Israel's response, and God's answer to their insistence:

1Sa 8:19
¶
Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

1Sa 8:20
That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.

Right, a stronger President will be able to fight the War On Terror and win it without having his hands tied behind his back. Sound familiar?

1Sa 8:21
And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD.

1Sa 8:22
And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.

And the rest of the story in 1 Samuel 9, he makes Saul of Kish king, the people love him, and in future chapters God rejects him two years later as he doesn't listen to the prophets of God and then becomes a tyrant, seeking out David and the prophets to destroy them.

So God gave them what they wanted, and I'm making this warning on Biblical grounds -- if this abuse of the Constitution continues and makes plain that the people no longer want or care about it, God will take it away and put something evil in its place. Then when all of you are complaining that the government took away all your freedom and is exacting whatever it wants at every turn, you're not going to get any sympathy from God about it; you'll be stuck with fascism permanently, or until Jesus comes. MARK MY WORDS.

Speculation on whether Bush and Ahmedinejad planned the next war

I see a way for the Iran war to happen without a terrorist (false flag op) on American soil. (I think the Bush boys know the American public is getting wise to that.) No, what I foresee happening, if the conspiracy theory holds true about the Iraqi war being related to shale oil, and price regulation to push America into world energy dominance, is this:

Following the meeting between Bush and Ahmedinejad that may have taken place in the UN Assembly building in New York City recently, both nations begin ratcheting up tensions and sending signals out that they are becoming more aggressive. Simultaneously the arms and funding to the insurgents in Iraq are closed off as Iran diverts its attention to the coming war and the US prepares with a buildup of military assets in the region. (Anyone notice the Iraq combat deaths in October are running half of what they were last month and only a third of August?) So, conveniently, the scenario to keep oil prices high is contracted between Iran and the United States, in order to have a showdown between the two countries amid the background of the US being able to claim it won the war against the insurgents in Iraq. Of course it did, it was the US who funded most of the insurgency in the first place... just cut the funds and the insurgency stops.

So here's the rest of the scenario as I see it playing out, if there is a real conspiracy between Bush and Ahmedinejad: Iran launches a major invasion of Iraq's northern regions -- Kurdistan -- and Turkey sends in forces of its own. Rather than withdraw, the US and Iraqi forces counterattack (with a Congressional mandate in Bush's hands -- always gotta respond to naked aggression, after all) and that counterattack send both nations across their borders again. That ends the war for Turkey, since it's a NATO ally and it's facing its own ally on the battle lines, but drives it into the camp of Russia from then on, fulfilling Ezekiel 37 in part. As for Iran, that war becomes open-ended and both Iraqi and US forces are from then on engaged with Iran for years to come, ensuring that oil prices stay high and shale's development proceeds until the US becomes a net exporter of oil. After that happens energy prices drop and the situation in the Middle East calms down.... because energy prices dropped (somewhat) and the funding for arms and terror runs low again. Quite possibly, by that time the world is crying "peace, prosperity, safety" and following that..... the Great Tribulations.

If Bush and Ahmedinejad are not in cahoots, then I very much doubt there will be a US-Iranian war. I don't see most Iranians being that enthusiastic about invading Iraq, on their own volition. I think it would have to happen only because it was a conspiracy's idea to do it to inflate energy prices. The whole reason, by the way, that Iran wants nuclear reactors? They have seen the end of liquid crude oil on the horizon as an economically viable staple. Cold nuclear fusion research is slowly making its way in several parts of the world, though being subjected to pressure to suppress in the United States by big oil. Those in control of America want us permanently hooked on oil, and the world hooked on what will be American shale oil, for as long as possible before the cold fusion wave hits and ends all dependence on fossil fuels. And, I do not think the conspiracy will completely succeed -- that house of cards will topple long before they are ready for it to.

Aliens don't get to have America's rights? And we fight for what, exactly...?

Senator Mel Martinez (R, Florida) wrote to me, in part:

"The strength of America depends on the preservation of our values. Terrorists who are detained in this war, and subsequently prosecuted, should be afforded an appropriate legal process; however, these detainees simply cannot and should not be afforded the same rights and process that our citizens enjoy in our courts."

I asked him in reply, "So you're saying aliens should not have the same rights as Americans? OK. What exactly are we fighting for in the Middle East then?"

My choices for President and Vice President

I once endorsed Ron Paul, a Republican Congressman from Texas, for President, and retired Gen. Wesley Clark, a former Democratic presidential candidate, as my choices for President and Vice President of the United States. I believed the two of them were the best choices because neither one seemed to be "owned" by any corporate interests, both were opposed to the war in Iraq, one is a veteran with loads of experience in defense matters, and both seemed to be quite interested in restoring Constitutional government and making it work for the people.

However, I found some problems with Paul's arch-conservative stances against abortion, against equal rights for people of alternative lifestyles, and for doctrinaire laissez-faire capitalism which I think has harmed the United States when it has been let run unchecked. Therefore I'm withdrawing my support of Ron Paul, and for now I am only endorsing Gen. Clark for President. I think I may write in Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf for Vice President pending a study of issues and causes he supports.

I sent the following email to Senator Mel Martinez (R, FL) and appended a copy to Senator Bill Nelson (D, FL) after reading that a cloture bill failed to revoke the suspension of habeas corpus for detainees. This is the text of the email:

I don't know by what rationale the GOP justifies the suspension of habeas corpus for detainees, maybe you could explain that to me? Last I checked the US Constitution, habeas corpus is not to be suspended except in cases of insurrection or invasion. I don't see an insurrection or an invasion. Just as a comparison, the Lincoln suspension of habeas corpus took place in the Civil War which was an insurrection. It's the only other time I'm aware of that this basic right in the body of the Constitution itself was ever suspended. I'm looking around and I don't see Confederate troops flooding the streets in gray or shelling Tampa.

If I or anyone I know is ever affected by this, I can promise a class action civil rights lawsuit for the highest sum of money I can convince a lawyer to sue for, and I will name everyone who votes to continue habeas corpus suspension, next time it comes up, as a respondent to that civil rights lawsuit. Just so we're all clear on what I think about this issue.

Examples of First Amendment under attack in America

This is to be considered an update and amendment to my previous blog. In it I made general statements about the direction of restrictions on assembly and speech in the US -- well, it turns out the picture is quite a lot more complicated than I imagined, and in some cases considerably more frightening. Here's some specific examples:

Pleasantville, New Jersey had as of May 2003 a parade ordinance that required a permit for a parade or procession of any kind, which had to be approved by the mayor AND the chief of police, and which required demonstrators to obtain expensive insurance. Failure to abide by this could result in fines up to $1,000 and 90 days in jail. There was also no limit placed on the discretion of the mayor or police chief to approve or deny the permit. See http://www.aclu.org/FilesPDFs/dissent_report.pdf page 11.

West Virginians (now Texans) Jeffrey and Nicole Rank, and Coloradans Alex Young and Leslie Weise filed a lawsuit in June 2007 with the aid of the ACLU against Gregory Jenkins, the Director of the White House Office of Presidential Advance, for violating their civil rights. In July 2004 the Ranks entered a Bush campaign rally in Charleston, West Virginia that was open to the public and removed shirts revealing an antiwar symbol. They were immediately arrested and put in jail on a charge of trespassing -- remember, this was a public assembly. After they were fingerprinted and booked the charges were dismissed and they were released. Following that, in March 2005 Young and Weise went to see President Bush speak in Denver on Social Security, with no intent to do anything but go to the event and listen to the speech. They had gotten tickets through proper channels, and were never told that persons with opinions contrary to the President's views would be unwelcome.

But when Weise went into the event through a different entrance than Young, she was taken aside by staff members and told to wait for someone from the Secret Service. Young passed his security check and was seated. Meanwhile a White House staff member named Michael Casper came and told Leslie Weise she had been "ID'd" and told her that if she tried any "funny stuff" she'd be arrested. Why? Because they had found a bumper sticker on the back of Weise's car that read "No More Blood For Oil." Anyway, after that chilling warning they allowed Ms. Weise and a friend with her to go in and sit. But, Casper went to consult with two people from Gregory Jenkin's office, and they told him to expel both Weise and Young, whereupon both them and their friends with them were shoved out the door none too politely.


That incident is legally documented here: http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/freespeech/rank_v_jenkins_complaint.pdf , and an article about the resolution won by the Ranks can be read here: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/31331prs20070816.html . And you can read page 8 of http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/freespeech/presidential_advance_manual.pdf to find out how our highest elected official in the land avoids hearing anyone who is against his point of view during public appearances.

A Pennsylvania man named Bill Neel, an opponent of President Bush's policies, has encountered "free speech zones" several times since 2001, finding it virtually impossible to approach a Presidential appearance as an opposing peaceable demonstrator without being herded away out of sight of the President and his supporters every time he has tried, and finally getting arrested after protesting the very concept of "free speech zone" to the Allegheny Police at a protest of Bush, well outside of a Presidential speech. You can read about it here: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/11418res20030923.html .

And there was a man named Michael Tocher, who was arrested by the Santa Barbara, California police for disturbing the peace after reading 400 of the then 1200 names of those killed in the Iraq War into a megaphone on Veteran's Day, 2004, what he intended as a gesture of respect to our nation's fallen heroes. The lawsuit arising from this case ended up costing the city $17,000 in damages payable to Mr. Tocher and Santa Barbara is now required to exercise constitutional caution before arresting anyone conducting an assembly. Why aren't all cities, states, and the Federal Government required to do so? You can read about that here: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/29287prs20070405.html .