Philadelphia Church of God

Friday, November 6, 2009

Don't trust the RCC!

Is the Catholic church a force for good in the world ?

The bloody Roman Catholic Cult is a plague politically and spiritually!

The bloody Roman Catholic Cult is the Babylonian Mystery religion in “Christian” drag! Any good they might do is merely meant to disarm and deceive the masses. They were and remain a wolf in sheep’s clothing folks would do well to beware.

Warning Jews

Pope's Evil Eye on Jerusalem!

Jerusalem's Betrayal and Rape

Rome rules the world - not NYC!

Israel must reject Vatican overtures for peace or lose Jerusalem!

Christian-Zionist Response to Shimon Peres' AIPAC speech

Plea to Diehard Catholics & Protestants to Repent

The Plain Truth Prevails!

Enemies have attacked http://www.davidbenariel.org/ but the plain truth of the Bible, history and currents events, as shared by David Ben-Ariel in his many articles, can be found in many other places throughout the Internet world. The plain truth prevails!

Jeremiah 15:10-21
10 Woe is me, my mother,
That you have borne me,
A man of strife and a man of contention to the whole earth!

http://www.davidbenariel.org

http://beyondbabylon.blogspot.com

http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/73354/david_benariel.html

http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=David_Ben-Ariel

http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/author.cgi?C=10267

http://rs39.com/davidbenariel/

http://www.pushhamburger.com/david.htm

Many YouTube videos, including
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDxc1ZTFGCk

Google David Ben-Ariel!

Gays, Homosexuals, AIDS, etc.

God and the Gays: To Be or Not to Be (Chapter 1)

God and the Gays: All that Glitters isn't Gold (Chapter 2)

God and the Gays: Once Gay, Always Gay? (Chapter 3)

God and the Gays: Of Vice and Men (Chapter 4)

God and the Gays: A Time to Heal (Chapter 5)

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Either the American Indians/Native Americans/Beringian immigrants are separate nations or they're not

Obama Says U.S. Must Reverse Course With Native Americans
Washington (AP) - Making good on a campaign promise to hold a yearly summit with American Indians, President Barack Obama told tribal leaders Thursday gathered in Washington that he is determined to reverse the federal government's history of marginalizing Indian nations...

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

Every one legitimately born in these United States is a Native American. The various warring Beringian immigrant tribes (aka as Indians) occupied these Lands of the Covenant (Artzot Habrit in Hebrew), this biblical territory promised to Manasseh the son of Joseph, until Manifest Destiny arrived and saw the British Israelites (specifically the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples) claim our God-given homeland from sea to shining sea.

Either the American Indians/Native Americans/Beringian immigrants are separate nations or they're not - quit trying to have it both ways! Take care of your own business, accept your own successes and failures and stop depending on people of white color to save you and do for you what you've failed to do for yourselves.

Reflections on Washita Battlefield National Historic Site

Israel in the Isles

Alternative to UN (YouTube Video)

Meir Kahane

The author, who worked closely with Rabbi Kahane for many years, shares little known memories and insights of the dauntless, ideological MK and leader of the Kach party on the 19th anniversary of his tragic murder.

In Memoriam: Rabbi Meir Kahane
by Shifra Hoffman

The Real Significance of Angela Merkel’s Speech to U.S. Congress

November 3, 2009 | From theTrumpet.com

By Ron Fraser

For only the second time since World War II, a German chancellor has addressed the U.S. Congress. Amazingly, the childish commentators from the popular press ignored the most momentous of Angela Merkel’s statements and zeroed in on a topic that the most astute of climate scientists are increasingly rejecting—the global warming hoax!

Manipulators of public opinion have had a field day using the global warming fear as a smokescreen behind which to hide their true globalist political agenda. This is a reality to which the press and mass media, with few exceptions, remain largely blinded.

It’s time to face up to reality. The real meat was in the main body of Merkel’s speech, not in the global warming smokescreen tagged on the end, though this got the most applause from the Democrat side of the House.

Chancellor Merkel’s address comes at a crucial time in transatlantic relations. The U.S. is in decline politically, economically and financially. The European Union stands on the brink of overnight becoming a giant imperial power, a global power in its own right. In fact, it is becoming the very power that will fill the increasing economic, political and military vacuum being created in the world through America’s decline.

The nation that stands in the lead of the European empire is Germany. As the day approaches for ratification of the treaty that will launch the EU, overnight, as a global player, it is perhaps both a fitting and most historic—let alone prophetic—occasion of huge importance that Washington witnessed today with the German chancellor’s address. Few in that audience would have garnered the truth of the reality America faces, reading between the lines of the chancellor’s speech.

The current year has set a record for the number of EU summits. It seems no sooner is one summit over and we are hearing of the imminent scheduling of another.

Why all the chat in this whirlwind of EU summitry this year? It’s simple. It is time! It’s time for the grand EU design to emerge from behind its facade and finally reveal its true reason for being. And the movers and shakers, the powerfully influential elites who have driven this postwar grand design for Europe thus far, want their enterprise to finally emerge as a powerful global player, not only economically, but politically and, believe it or not, militarily.

The frequency of EU summitry has hinged on the progressive building of a German-dominated imperial power, not by military aggression, but by treaty. Step by step, the European elites have constructed this rising empire by a series of treaties. Each treaty was designed to build upon its predecessor in a process that has taken a simple agreement on access to coal and steel (the treaty of Paris, 1951, that created the European Coal and Steel Community) to rebuild postwar European industry, to its inevitable outcome: a treaty enabling the launching of a powerful pan-European military industry underpinning a powerful imperial military force of global reach.

That old master of international relations, Hans Morgenthau, pointed to industrial capacity as being one of the most important factors underpinning the status of a world power. “[T]he competition among nations for power transforms itself largely into competition for the production of bigger, better and more implements of war,” he wrote in Politics Among Nations. Extrapolating the point, Morgenthau went on to state the logical outcome of this competition for global power. “[A] change in industrial rank, for better or for worse, should be accompanied or followed by a corresponding change in the hierarchy of power.”

The transfer of power that has followed the transfer of industrial capacity, changing the West into major consumers and the East into major producers of goods, is now witnessing a subsequent reduction in power of the previously dominant industrial nations, significantly the Anglo-Saxons, and the rise to power of the world’s major producers, in particular China, Japan, India and a resurrecting Russia.

Perhaps the least understood of all rising industrial powers is the European Union.

People will believe what they choose to believe, regardless of reality. Most choose to believe what is fed to them by the popular press. It has thus played to the huge advantage of the rising European imperial power that it is largely ignored by a poorly educated and largely blind U.S. media machine. While the press and mass media dance to the tune of the liberal socialists’ views on such high-profile stories as the Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan, economic “recovery,” and the ever-present, nauseating “celebrity” personalities of the day, the behemoth rises across the Atlantic.

So well-masked has been this resurrection of old “Holy” Roman/Teutonic power that when its reality hits, it will send a massive shock wave through North America in particular. Britain, being much closer geographically to Europe, and now beginning to stand aghast at the degree to which its economy, its political and judicial system have been wrecked by membership of the European Union, at least has an increasing number of sensibly aware voices clamoring for their nation to extricate itself from Brussels/Berlin. Sadly, it’s too late for even such action to have a positive bearing on the state of the British nation.

So drastic is Britain’s economic state (the United Kingdom now being Germany’s largest EU creditor), that its prime minister has announced the fire sale of prime national assets.

Pope Benedict xvi in his recent encyclical “Caritas in Veritate” called for a global order to address the world’s 21st-century challenges. Chancellor Merkel added her voice to that call today, declaring to the joint House of Congress that the solution to the world’s problems was a “global order … under global law.”

Germany and the Vatican have a history of operating in tandem under the facade of the European Union to advance their imperialist agenda for universal government. Now that Czech President Vaclav Klaus has signed the Lisbon Treaty, there remains no known bar to implementation of the imperialist European Constitution by December 1.

During her historic address to the joint houses of Congress in Washington today, Merkel called for the institution of a “global economic order” under “global law.” The request is timely, coming on the eve of the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty/EU constitution, which establishes the EU as a globalist imperial power.

Now that the European Union stands revealed for that which it was always destined to become—a global power—Chancellor Merkel gave more than a strong hint as to what will now become the new pretense under which Berlin and Rome will aggressively move forward in the drive for global economic order. She encouraged the U.S. to join the EU in using the G-20 to achieve this end, a reality that has leaped into focus since the G-20 began imposing its globalist EU-driven agenda on the world after the great Wall Street crash of September 2008.

Watch now for the full ratification of the EU constitution in its guise as the Lisbon Treaty to take place at yet another EU summit slated for either November 12 or 19, the subsequent announcement of the appointment to the newly created positions of EU high representative and the EU foreign minister, and the implementation of the EU diplomatic service on Jan. 1, 2010.

When all that is in place, watch then for the rapid development of the European military force, the most dramatic and most dangerous of all the institutions the new EU constitution embraces.

The world would do well to take warning that Chancellor Merkel’s call for a global order under global regulation is about to become a reality—under initiatives to be enforced by the very nation from which she hails!

As you watch this rapid-fire propulsion of the European empire to global power status, remember the words of Herbert W. Armstrong: “Watch for developments suddenly to speed toward European political and military union, through religious union! … [I]n very few years at most, it must start. And when it does, events will flash by with a lightning speed that will astound the world …. This sudden blitz toward union … once triggered will move so swiftly the whole world will be caught by surprise. Yes indeed! They shall wonder in amazement!” (Plain Truth, November 1965). •

http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=6698.5218.0.0

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

Pope seeks privileged status for the RCC in Europe

The Lisbon Treaty forges an empire, an emperor and an anvil for war!

The Rape of Europe: "No Means No"

http://www.davidbenariel.org/

Britain’s Iron Lady Was Right

From the Nov/Dec 2009 Trumpet Print Edition »
A voice of warning from 1989 is about to prove especially farsighted.
By Brad Macdonald

British newspapers jumped on the story when documents were released in September disclosing Margaret Thatcher’s vigorous opposition to German unification in 1989.

In one Kremlin transcript, the former prime minister was revealed as telling Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in off-the-record meetings in September 1989 that the “reunification of Germany is not in the interests of Britain and Western Europe.” While that might appear different from public pronouncements, she stated, Britain does “not want a united Germany.”

It’s not hard to justify the release of these documents as headline news. They shine added light on what was a turning point in modern European history when the Berlin Wall collapsed in November 1989. But the British media and government opted not to report on the most important angle: how Margaret Thatcher’s sober forecasts are actually being fulfilled.

Lampooned!

Among the nuggets the Times latched onto was Mrs. Thatcher’s “bombshell” off-the-record admission to Mr. Gorbachev that while she supported German unification in public, privately she held “deep concerns” about the “big changes” afoot. “Even 20 years later, her remarks are likely to cause an uproar,” wrote the Times.

“Mrs. Thatcher (as she then was) was wrong,” the Times haughtily blurted. “As Germany reaches two decades as a reunited country, its unshakable place within the Western family of democratic nations is cause for celebration. Apprehensions about a united Germany were misguided and have clearly been refuted” (September 11; emphasis mine throughout).

They have? Says who?

The Financial Times reported that the decision by Britain’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office to publish the documents was perceived as an “attempt by Britain to set the record straight and show that its diplomats were positive about reunification early on—in spite of Mrs. Thatcher’s personal misgivings” (September 10). This perception wasn’t inaccurate, as Patrick Salmon, chief historian at the British Foreign Office, confirmed: “What they do is they correct the impression that was around at the time, and later, that Britain was negative toward [German unification],” he said.

Such shallow and misleading representation of these revelatory papers in the British media, as well as by the British government, was a tremendous disservice to the British people, many of whom are upset and disturbed by the German-led EU’s growing impingement on British sovereignty.

The release of these documents provided British politicians and journalists an opportunity to investigate why Thatcher opposed German unification, if her reticence was justified, and whether or not her fears are coming to fruition. However, they used them to court Germany, even though it meant turning their back on their former stalwart leader.

German media picked up the same story line. Germany’s Spiegel Online reported that the “new documents reveal that [British] Foreign Ministry diplomats were considerably more far-sighted than Thatcher, who was led by her gut reaction against Germany” (September 11).

“The long-secret papers show that the British government played a far more constructive role in German reunification than had been previously thought,” Spiegel wrote. “Only one person had serious doubts about the change: Margaret Thatcher.” This is pure revisionist history that belies the concern shared by the most astute observers of Germany’s intentions to dominate Europe by using the European Union.

Thatcher’s Apprehensions

Before we prove whether or not Thatcher’s concerns were justified, we must first understand just what they were. And while the Times and its ilk reported on these documents as if Thatcher’s opposition to German reunification was blockbuster news, history shows it was no state secret.

Mrs. Thatcher openly, eloquently and extensively explained her viewpoint in her 1993 autobiography, The Downing Street Years. Written shortly after the Berlin Wall’s fall, the book gives context to her recently disclosed remarks, which were made in meetings that occurred between 1986 and 1990. Reading Thatcher’s explanation, it’s evident she was not the naive rogue, plagued by a lurking hatred of Germans and totally wrong in her views about German reunification, that some have spun her to be.

Throughout her illustrious political career, 11 years of which she stood tall as Britain’s prime minister, Mrs. Thatcher proved herself an avid student of human nature and an eager disciple of history. Mrs. Thatcher’s viewpoint on the “German question,” as it was known then, was informed by a firm grasp on both history and the human mind.

“I do not believe in collective guilt,” she explained in The Downing Street Years, “it is individuals who are morally accountable for their actions.” Contrary to what some believe, Mrs. Thatcher blamed Hitler primarily for World War II, not the collective German people. “But I do believe in national character,” she continued, “which is molded by a range of complex factors, [and] the fact that national caricatures are often absurd and inaccurate does not detract from that.”

Mrs. Thatcher opposed German reunification because she understood German history and the national character of the German people. “Since the unification of Germany under Bismarck,” she wrote, “Germany has veered unpredictably between aggression and self-doubt.” Study German history since the mid-19th century; it’s impossible to argue with the facts on this point.

The documents released in September also recount remarks Mrs. Thatcher made during meetings with French President François Mitterrand. Mrs. Thatcher had already recalled some of these meetings (and remarks) in her 1993 book. In one meeting in France in 1989, she writes, Mitterrand was “more concerned” about German reunification than she was. The reason for his concern?

“He observed that in history the Germans were a people in constant movement and flux.” Mitterrand’s concern, as well as Thatcher’s—as well as the recorded concerns of other historians, politicians and journalists—shows that, at the time, astute observers were leery of a repeat of German dominance in Europe.

Now notice Thatcher’s reaction to Mitterrand’s anxiety. At that moment, she writes, “I produced from my handbag a map showing the various configurations of Germany in the past, which were not altogether reassuring about the future.” Thatcher was so devoted to history as her tutor, she actually carried it around with her in her purse.

That’s what informed her opposition to German reunification!

Because she was familiar with Germany’s historical proclivity to dominate Europe, Mrs. Thatcher warned often that it would be dangerous to lock a reunited Germany into a federal Europe. “Germany is more rather than less likely to dominate within that framework,” she explained, “for a reunited Germany is simply too big and powerful to be just another player with Europe.”

Thatcher feared German reunification because she knew it would wreak havoc on Europe’s political landscape. “Germany is … by its very nature a destabilizing rather than a stabilizing force in Europe,” she wrote. This reasoning underpinned Thatcher’s remark to Gorbachev that “Britain did not want a united Germany.”

In her book, Mrs. Thatcher explains the apprehensions she had about German unification in three succinct points. First, a united Germany would rush Europe toward becoming a dominant federalist power. Second, although Europe might at first be led by a Franco-German axis, Germany would in time marginalize French leadership and become the unchecked leader of Europe. Third, a united Germany would facilitate the decline of America’s presence and influence in Europe.

The British press failed to do this in reporting this story, but you can: Consider the past 20 years of European history, and specifically that of the EU. Has Germany emerged at the vanguard of efforts to forge the European Union as a federalist superpower? Indisputably. Has Germany overpowered and outmaneuvered France to become the predominant, unbridled leader of Europe? Without doubt. And has America’s presence and influence in Europe deteriorated in the shadow of Germany’s mounting and formidable presence? Undeniably.

Historical fact refutes the Times’ assertion that Thatcher’s “apprehensions about a united Germany were misguided and have clearly been refuted.” In fact, Britain’s “Iron Lady” was spot on!

Vindication

If we view them objectively, the documents released in September vindicate more than condemn Mrs. Thatcher. That vindication, at least partially, comes with the knowledge that fellow world leaders had similar fears and opinions about German reunification.

The documents reveal President Mitterrand telling Thatcher that a united Germany could “make even more ground than had Hitler.” If Germany expanded, he said, then Europe would be in the same position that it had been in before World War I. He also said that reunification could turn Germans into the “bad” people they used to be.

They also show Nikolai Ryzhkov, the premier of the Soviet Union, telling Gorbachev that if Germany was allowed to reunify on its own terms, “then in 20 or 30 years Germany will start another world war.”

Jacques Attali, adviser to the French president, was equally concerned. He told a Gorbachev aide that French leaders questioned whether Russia’s lack of interference in the fall of the Berlin Wall meant that “the ussr has made peace with the prospect of a united Germany and will not take any steps to prevent it.” He said, “This has caused a fear approaching panic.” Attali later told Mitterrand that he was so fearful of a united Germany that, should it come to pass, he would “fly off to live on Mars.”

These documents reveal that Mrs. Thatcher was far from alone in her apprehensions; they actually justify her concerns as legitimate. It is true that these leaders mostly gave up their concerns after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Courageously, Britain’s Iron Lady didn’t. “You have not anchored Germany to Europe,” she warned America during a conference in Colorado Springs in October 1995. “You have anchored Europe to a newly dominant, unified Germany. In the end, my friends, you’ll find it will not work.”

As the Trumpet has explained extensively in recent issues, the “end” that Mrs. Thatcher mentioned is very nearly here. Germany is united and strong, and has cemented itself as the most powerful and dominant force, politically, economically and militarily, on the Continent. Soon, perhaps in a matter of months, Germany will impose its authority and power over Europe beyond what most people can readily imagine.

Prophecies in Daniel chapters 8 and 11 reveal that, in addition to revolving around Germany, end-time events in Europe will be heavily dominated by a single individual, and a man of German descent. This man will have a “fierce countenance,” which means he will be unyielding and merciless. The Bible says he will understand “dark sentences,” which, most commentaries agree, means he will conceal his true motives.

He will be skilled in intrigues, deceit, double-talk and double-dealing. He will rule with terrifying cruelty, just like his predecessor Antiochus Epiphanies, the second-century b.c. Greek king who slashed and slaughtered his way into Jerusalem before ransacking the Jewish temple and murdering Jews.

“Through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand,” Daniel writes, “and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand” (Daniel 8:25). The word craft means fraud. The expression “by peace he shall destroy many,” wrote Gerald Flurry, “means he is pretending ‘peace’ and friendship. Then suddenly comes the malignant shock! He destroys suddenly while his enemy is in this state of mind. This illustrates the deceitful malice practiced by this political tyrant” (Trumpet, June 1999).

Don’t be too quick to discount that forecast. It is rooted in historical fact and biblical prophecy. It will—together with Margaret Thatcher’s spirited warnings—be vindicated by the blood, sweat and tears caused by the soon-coming emergence of a German-led European empire. •