Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Jewish replacement theology is anti-Semitic

The CONVERTS to Judaism in India and elsewhere don't bear a single biblical birthmark of fulfilled prophecy concerning Joseph as only the Anglo-Saxons do: - Manasseh was foretold to become a Great Nation (USA) and Ephraim (Great Britain) was destined to become a Commonwealth of Nations and we have, regardless of whether some remain blind or prejudiced to our identity or not.

Pretending Indians or Africans are Israelites while ignoring the legitimate claims of British-Israelites is an insult and worse. Such Jewish replacement theology is anti-Semitic. Thankfully, there is a growing awareness among Jews that the legitimate sons of Joseph are north and west of Israel, as prophesied, although Joseph's descendants (Joes) reach to the far ends of the Earth (as other prophecies prove).

Indian Jewish CONVERTS are not Menashe! And the Ethiopian CONVERTS to Judaism are not the Tribe of Dan, as the Chief Rabbinate said they were, IN PART - not even acknowledging them from the Tribe of Judah. They are descendants of Philistine converts from the biblical coastal territory of Dan most likely, according to Dr. Herman Hoeh of Ambassador College.

The REAL tribe of Dan is white and European. TRIBE OF DAN

Joseph stands before you!

Armstrong Williams questions Mitt Romney on race


Where Do You Stand Mr. Romney?
Armstrong Williams
June 8, 2007

I watched Mike Wallace's interview of presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney on 60 Minutes and was intrigued. I was amazed by how reasonable Romney sounded despite all the negative press he has gotten for his religion. See, Romney is Mormon. And most folks think Mormonism is some cult out in Utah where men practice polygamy. And most of the rest of us know it as one of the fastest growing religions in the world but, for some reason still cannot completely understand it ... (MORE)
***************

Dear Mr. Williams,

How would Mitt Romney prove himself to blacks? Attend some racist NAACP meetings and hypocritically denounce the Ku Klux Klan or other groups that seek to advance white people? Have photo-ops with black ministers? Promise to appoint a disproportionate amount of blacks into office in his administration? Aren't there any blacks who know him and could vouch for him or who have been the recipient of benefits from his leadership? Mind you, I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Sincerely,
David Ben-Ariel

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

The Secret Nazis Prepare Germany's Fourth Reich

The "Secret Nazis" were meant to remain that way, but the formerly top-secret document has been revealed, even though few are aware of it and others, ignorantly, dismiss its importance, failing to learn anything from history.

Reuters Arthur Spiegelman, wrote on May 10, 1996: "Realizing they were losing the war in 1944, Nazi leaders met top German industrialists to plan a secret post-war international network to restore them to power, according to a newly declassified U.S. intelligence document. The document...says an SS general and a representative of the German armaments ministry told such companies as Krupp and Rohling that they must be prepared to finance the Nazi Party...when it went underground."

Ella Steinberg, executive director of the World Jewish Congress stated: "Now that the Nazi secret plan has been confirmed, the central question is whether it has been carried out."

The Secret Nazis

Dave Emory on Fascism

Dave Emory comments on the rise of Fascism and its continuing influence throughout the globe

C. H. Spurgeon on Christmas

C. H. Spurgeon on Christmas

Spurgeon from a sermon preached by C. H. Spurgeon on Dec. 24, 1871:

We have no superstitious regard for times and seasons. Certainly we do not believe in the present ecclesiastical arrangement called Christmas. First, because we do not believe in the mass at all, but abhor it, whether it be sung in Latin or in English. Secondly, because we find no Scriptural warrant whatever for observing any day as the birthday of the Savior; and consequently, its observance is a superstition, because not of divine authority. 'Superstition' has fixed most positively the day of our Savior's birth, although there is no possibility of discovering when it occurred. ... It was not till the middle of the third century that any part of the Church celebrated the nativity of our Lord; and it was not till very long after the Western Church had set the example, that the Eastern adopted it. ... Probably the fact is that the "holy" days were arranged to fit in with the heathen festivals. We venture to assert, that if there be any day in the year, of which we may be pretty sure that it was not the day on which the Savior was born, it is the 25th of December. ... Regarding not the day, let us, nevertheless, give God thanks for the gift of His dear Son.

**********************************

AMEN!!!

Why I No Longer Celebrate Christmas

Christmas is About Giving - SAYS WHO?

Do You Prefer TRADITION Over Truth?

Will God Curse Our Countries for Christmas?

Plea to Diehard Catholics & Protestants to Repent

Ron Paul: We're not unpatriotic

Amnesty Opponents Are Not Un-American

Rep. Ron Paul / Texas Straight Talk:
Although action in the United States Senate this week has slowed passage of the amnesty bill, it is not yet dead as President Bush remains committed to this approach. That is why the President recently suggested that those of us who oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants are unpatriotic. Those of us who strongly oppose the new immigration reform bill before the Senate "don't want to do what's right for America," the president said. I reject that assessment as unfair and inaccurate.
**************
The North American Union is modeled after the Nazi-designed "European Union."
The industrialists supported Hitler, just like the globalists today (all members of the cult of CORPORATISM) are aiding and abetting Germany's Fourth Reich to secure its position throughout the world.

Will Germany have its way with Europe?

Merkel to present short ‘foundation treaty’ at summit to fast-track agreement by end of year

According to Welt, the outline of the new EU treaty is becoming clear, with Berlin preparing to present a short ‘foundation treaty’ of six to eight pages, listing the most important points of the new treaty. There are suggestions that Angela Merkel may split the original treaty in two. EU diplomats, are cited saying they hope “at least 75% of the work” should be finished by the June summit. Both treaties should then be ready for ratification in October, much earlier than originally planned. An intergovernmental conference will clarify details from July to December. The German Presidency is reported to see Britain and Poland as the biggest barriers to a new treaty, with Britain under Gordon Brown being seen as the tougher of the two.

The Sun and the Evening Standard report that Tony Blair yesterday came under pressure from Labour MPs not to sign away new powers at the 21-22 June summit. Austin Mitchell said “If there is any surrender of sovereignty there should be a referendum on it.” The BBC reports that former Europe Minister Dennis Macshane accused supporters of a referendum of having a “bigger agenda”, arguing that “They can't call for full withdrawal so the referendum on any new treaty is the next best thing.” He conceded however that "Europe is working well economically and frankly at times I wish the constitutional debate would go away, but unfortunately we do need a clearer rule book on Europe." The UK Government meanwhile denied being isolated in treaty negotiations.

The IHT reports that EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso yesterday said that the new EU treaty would probably revive controversial aspects of the rejected constitution, including a new permanent EU president, a foreign minister and a revamped voting system that would reduce national vetoes and diminish the power of countries like Britain to block proposals. Barroso said that allowing some opt-outs from certain parts of the treaty could be the only way to get it passed "As a rule, to have opt-outs is not good. But if it is the solution, I will not be against it." He accepted that the treaty could spur a public backlash, but warned that failure to get agreement would be “a real threat to the credibility of the EU."

Open Europe Director Neil O’Brien appeared on the BBC’s Daily Politics programme, arguing that the UK Government are “negotiating in secret – they’ve already said they won’t hold a referendum on the final text of it – and we think that’s incredibly undemocratic, because this ‘new’ Constitutional treaty really contains exactly the same things as the old one”.

Paul Stephenson from Open Europe has an article on Conservative Home, warning that the UK Government’s much-reported “red lines” are a distraction from the real concessions being made. “The story for domestic consumption is that although the talks are awfully tough, the Government is successfully handbagging its EU partners into submission in the negotiations… This is mostly baloney. By focusing the attention on a few of the more contentious issues, voters and the media lose sight of everything that the Government is giving up without a fight. Most notably: the creation of a powerful new EU President; a new EU Foreign Minister who would ‘automatically’ speak for us at the UN; and a new voting system which would reduce the UK’s voting strength by about 30%.” [emphasis mine]

Gideon Rachman, writing in the FT, argues “The words in the constitution will change. But the substance will remain the same.” He dismisses the arguments of those opposed to a referendum on the new treaty, writing that “If the French and Dutch had voted in favour of the constitution, there is no doubt that their verdict would have been hailed as a historic endorsement of political union in Europe. It is only a ‘No’ vote that was taken as a sign of deep confusion.”

He concludes that “The sceptics have always argued that the Union is elitist and undemocratic. By disregarding the voters and pushing on regardless, the EU will make their point for them. Such a course of action will merely deepen the crisis of legitimacy that the EU constitution was originally advertised as solving… The awkward squad of Poland, Britain and the Czech Republic will be accused of putting the Union in danger. But the real long-term threat will be posed by those who insist that the EU must press ahead with ‘ever closer union’, while blithely disregarding the increasingly obvious disenchantment of ordinary Europeans.”

Writing in the Independent, Simon Carr’s sketch picks up on Margaret Beckett’s performance before the EU scrutiny committee last week: “In the matter of the amending treaty that will replace the constitution she wouldn't say anything”, denying that there was anything to be discussed, claiming that there was “no debate” to comment on. For more, see Open Europe’s blog.

EUobserver Independent FT Rachman FT Peel IHT Conservative Home BBC Daily Politics (15 minutes in) BBC Welt

Open Europe research: “The new treaty: what will it mean, and do we need a referendum?

If you would like to sign up to receive Open Europe’s daily press summary, please register on our homepage: www.openeurope.org.uk

To see more of our recent research please visit:

www.openeurope.org.uk/research

Click here for our blog.

To contact Open Europe:

Tel: +44 (0)207 197 2333

Fax: +44 (0)207 197 2307

*************************

The EU is a German Ruse

Catholic Europe in Vogue?

Bavarian Pope Entrusts Germany To Lead Europe, Others Wary Of The Grand Inquisitor

Germany to Take the EU Bull by the Horns

Is Germany in Danger of Backsliding?

Germany's Fourth Reich Spreads Its Wings Over the World

Is a World Dictator About to Appear?

Will the Atlantic Times Address the German threat?

Germany Behind the Mask: Monster or Marshmallow?

The Intelligence Summit Misses the Mark: the German-Jesuit Threat to World Peace