Instability to Buy Control of Worldwide Babylon

Islamism - Connecting the Dots

Conspiracy Theory is that enigmatic concept in which an urban legend or a conclusion arrived by a series facts and fictions occurs.


I love Conspiracy Theory not as an avid believer in the conspiracy but in the intriguing mysteries that often read as good fiction.


However sometimes when a Conspiracy Theory is derived from verifiable facts, something may ring true or partially true. Even so the verifiable facts might be arranged to form a conclusion based on expectations rather than a realistic conclusion arrived by line upon line leading to a legitimate educated guess.


I am a man of faith so definitely I may fall prey to a conclusion based on expectations rather a true educated guess.


I wrote all that because I found an article I found on Prophecy Update. If you are unfamiliar with Prophecy Update, it is an InJesus Group that publishes a daily dose of news from various non-MSM outlets that point to the website’s view of Biblical prophetic writing.


So check this article out by Bill Wilson which I will post below. Is it a Conspiracy Theory or an educated guess?


JRH 1/6/08


Connecting the Dots — Prophecy of Jeremiah in Play as Islam Uses Terror, Instability to Buy Control of Worldwide Babylon


By Bill Wilson, KIN Senior Analyst

Posted at Prophecy Update

January 6, 2008


The War of Islamic Aggression is planning a surprise attack on all non-Islamic nations. In fact, the strategy is already in play, and the West has taken the bait. The surprise will be when the West wakes up to the fact that Islam has taken over the world by controlling the oil, the finances, the debt and the economic power of non-suspecting nations like the United States.


Islam has used terrorism to increase world instability, which has raised oil prices. The windfall from the oil price increases has been used to buy financial institutions, bail out major credit institutions, and increase holdings over government debt in enemy nations — the United States being the prime target.


The year 2007 saw some mighty obvious signs of this strategy. The purchase of a controlling interest in the London Stock Exchange by Islamic governments in Dubai and Qatar was just one leg in the strategy. But the purchase of the NASDAQ by Dubai was even more clever. When Dubai bought roughly 20 percent of the NASDAQ exchange, it sweetened the deal by affording NASDAQ a piece of ownership in the Sweden stock exchange, OMX.


The United Arab Emirates seized an opportunity to bail out Citigroup to the tune of $7.5 billion, and Citigroup will pay junk bond rates of 11 percent interest for the privilege. You see, Islam doesn’t charge interest on its own people, but the infidels get charged usury.


Moreover, the price of oil has hit record highs of over $100 per barrel — not because of supply limitations (experts say there is more oil on the market than ever), but because of world instability. And world instability is caused by Islam’s terrorist operations. The Bhutto assassination plus terrorist attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries all add up to major world unrest.


As world instability increases, prices of precious commodities increase. In the first trading day of the New Year, oil, platinum and gold reached record highs on international exchanges. Gold is often considered a hedge against instability because it is the basis of financial instruments.


Instability directly attributed to Islam benefits Islam. As oil prices rise, Islam has windfalls to buy assets. For example, the U.S. Treasury Department reports that OPEC members increased their holdings of U.S. Treasuries 12 percent through July to $123.8 billion. The U.S. Department of Energy estimated in October that OPEC’s share of U.S. debt is growing is based on the 31 percent rise in oil since December 2006, which raised OPEC revenue about 4 percent to $630 billion in 2007 and 9 percent to $688 billion in 2008.


Jeremiah 51:14 (NKJV) says, "Surely I will fill you with men as with locusts; and they shall lift up a battle cry against you." Don’t be surprised: The prophecy of Jeremiah may be unfolding before our very eyes.



Prophecy Update Details

The speech that CAIR didn’t want you to hear

Do you know who Robert Spencer is? As far as I am concerned he one of the preeminent scholars in the West willing to stand up and expose Islamism and many tenets of Islam/Mohammedanism as a Theo-political ideology which is bad news for America and the globes stable Western style Democracies.

Mohammedanism is not a religion of peace, particularly as it is manifested in the Middle East and Mohammedan dominated lands.

I have found a YouTube vid in which Spencer is billed as giving the speech the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) does not want you to hear. Spencer is a scholar because he backs up every exposition on Islam from Muslim sources about their Theo-political faith and jihad/terrorist connections via public records.

This vid has a bit of a lineage. I found at A New Dark Age is Dawning and its origins appear to be Robert Spencer himself operates a remarkable website called All these web locations have some form of anti-jihad posts and of course Spencer’s site is dedicated to it.

With this introduction it is time to watch “The speech that CAIR didn’t want you to hear.”


Technorati Tags: ,

Dangerous Indifference

David Frum 3

David Frum explains the reality, necessity and the danger America faces with an unstable Pakistan. An awesome insight!

JRH 1/1/08


Dangerous Indifference

By David Frum

Posted: Monday, December 31, 2007

American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy and Research

For weeks, the U.S. presidential campaign has been unfolding with truly disturbing indifference to the outside world and its dangers. That changed with the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Thursday.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been wrestling to determine whether her (non-existent) "experience" should matter more than his (self-invented) "identity."

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee has surged to first place in Iowa as a "Christian leader," despite repeated demonstrations of his utter unpreparedness in–and radical indifference to–world affairs. Now however the world has returned, and with a vengeance.

The Bhutto killing should force the candidates to confront some dangerously neglected facts:

1) Without Pakistan’s acquiescence, the NATO position in Afghanistan would be unsustainable. Yet Pakistan is a desperately unstable state, whose institutions are deeply penetrated by radical Islam.

2) Unstable Pakistan owns some dozens of nuclear bombs. For months, all eyes have been focused on Iran, for fear that the radical Islamic republic might become a nuclear-weapons state. Yet it is equally possible that the nuclear-weapons state of Pakistan might become a radical Islamic republic.

3) To fend off the Islamists, the U.S. and its allies have lent backing to the military regime of Pervez Musharraf. There are worse governments in the world than Gen. Musharraf’s. Tolerant of minorities, liberal in its treatment of the media, the regime has also presided over important economic reforms and impressive economic growth: an average of 6.5% per year since 2003. The World Bank reports that under Musharraf, poverty in Pakistan has declined "significantly."

On the other hand, alliances with unelected rulers are always devil’s bargains. Sooner or later, the strongman falls or dies, and when he does, his foreign supporters get the blame for his sins, real and alleged.

4) Many had hoped that Musharraf might bring about a transformation, not only of Pakistan’s economy, but also of Pakistani society. President Bush used to muse privately about Musharraf as a Pakistani "Ataturk"–paying homage to Kemal Ataturk, the modernizing ruler of Turkey in the 1920s and 1930s.

But Pakistan has seen modernizing strongmen before. Ayub Khan, the general who seized power in Pakistan’s first coup, in 1958, was also once hailed as a potential Pakistani Ataturk. Ayub Khan too presided over impressive economic growth. Ayub Khan likewise tried to haul Pakistani Islam into the modern age, suppressing both polygamy and the right of husbands to abandon their wives by pronouncing the formula, "I dismiss thee" three times. And in a final possible parallel, Ayub Khan’s regime ended in failure and a swerve back to fundamentalism.

5) Above all, the Bhutto killing should remind us of this grimmest reality: the force we call Islamic extremism–or jihadism–or, simply, "terrorism" is as much a function of the failure of Pakistan as it is of the troubles in the Arab Middle East or the scheming of the mullahs of Iran.

Minus Pakistan, there would have been no Taliban in Afghanistan. Minus Pakistan, no campaign of terrorism against India–a campaign that has claimed even more innocent lives than have been lost to Arab terrorism against Israel. Of all the Islamic communities in Europe, the Pakistani diaspora in Britain is far and away the most militant and violent.

More troubling still, Pakistani extremism is not a purely indigenous phenomenon. By one much-cited estimate, the Saudi government has spent US $70 billion since 1979 to spread Wahhabi Islam. The single largest destination for this money: Pakistan. Private individuals have donated uncounted billions more. Saudi money financed the Pakistani nuclear bomb program launched by Benazir Bhutto’s father, former prime minister Zulfikar Bhutto.

Nor is the threat posed by Pakistani instability a purely local one. Pakistan and India came to the verge of nuclear war in 1999 and again in 2002–the last narrowly averted by intense American diplomatic work. While Musharraf seems to have made a strategic decision in favour of peace, that decision may last only as long as he does–and he has been the victim of at least three serious assassination attempts, the most recent in July, 2007.

To date, the presidential candidates have offered only the haziest generalities about South Asia. The one exception to the hazy rule–Barack Obama’s July, 2007 suggestion that as president he might send U.S. troops into Pakistan’s tribal areas–got bad reviews. OK, it may have been a dumb idea. But at least it represented the beginning of thinking in an election year that demands more thinking than most–but has been hearing less.


David Frum is a resident fellow at AEI.

© 2005 (sic) American Enterprise Institute. All Rights Reserved.

There are Alternatives to Dividing Jerusalem!

Jerusalem Old Testament

This excerpt is from the One Jerusalem blog:

In an interview before President Bush’s trip to Israel, Prime Minister Olmert stated that Israel must come to terms with dividing Jerusalem and giving up more land in Judea and Samaria.

Olmert’s defeatist attitude is the clearest indication that he envisions Israel continuing the process of giving up precious land even though this tactic has only succeeded in bringing Israel’s enemies closer to Israel’s heartland.

Olmert’s mindset is defeatist and will further endanger the people of Israel.

One Jerusalem’s conclusion is based on a Jerusalem Post article.

The article has Olmert openly musing that it is not reality to keep Jerusalem and discharge control of (what the West calls) the West Bank. Olmert’s reasoning is based on Liberal thinking.

Olmert believes for there to be a viable Jewish State it must create a viable Arab state. The alternative being keeping control of the West Bank and Gaza and making the Mohammedan Arabs second class citizens as they demographically grow to out number people of a Jewish heritage (i.e. religious, secular or atheistic) in a one nation situation. That is the Western Left’s current accusation against Israel.

Another alternative Olmert finds unacceptable is to have one nation granting full citizenship to Mohammedan Arabs. Olmert finds this unacceptable because then the Jewishness of Israel (Eretz Israel) would be submerged again in demographics; i.e. the Mohammedan Arab population would be the majority population in a Western style democracy that would give Mohammedans the legal ability to end a Jewish Israel and eject the name “Israel” and replace it with Palestine. In essence this “Palestine” would be a Mohammedan land and Sharia Law would relegate Jews to second class citizens in their own land.

So for Olmert the only alternative to keep Eretz Israel (the Land Israel) is to disengage into a two State solution without a right of return for the Mohammedan Arabs that fled in 1948 believing that invading Arabs would eradicate Jews and restore them to their homes. At least Olmert is against the so-called “Right of Return.”

There is another solution that would be beneficial to Israel yet would bring an international uproar from the West and threats of war from Arab nations. That solution is based on what Egypt, Jordan and Syria as well as the unanimous vote of then Arab League: Create Arab refugees rather than repatriate them into the various losing Arab invaders thus creating a perpetual reason to war and find a way to terminate the Land of Israel.

Israel could unilaterally uproot the refugees that call themselves Palestinians by the brainwashing of their fellow Arabs and move them to a weak nation that could not stop such an uprooting. That nation is the current Lebanon. In justice the nations that should accept the full citizenship of the Arab refugees are the principle invading nations that created them: Egypt, Jordan and Syria. You know that is not going to happen because unofficially that would be a threat to the ruling elites of those nations and officially it would be branded as Israeli aggression against Arabs. Indeed the father of the current King of Jordan ejected the military wing of the Palestine Liberation Organization out of fear it would depose the Hashemite Royal Family. It was an actual battle between Arab entities for control of land in Jordan.

There are other alternatives for Olmert to take to keep Jerusalem (the city of David) as one under Jewish/Israeli rule.

The splitting up of Israel to accommodate Mohammedan Arabs will lead to another war to eradicate Israel anyway. Olmert (or another tough minded Prime Minister) just needs the cajones to move the Arabs out as King Hussein of Jordan did in 1970.

Huckabee says Romney owes him apology

Mike Huckabee

Remember to vote for Fred in ’08. That being said and knowing the current polls in Iowa seem to favor Huckabee, Romney and McCain and not my man Fred; I have to talk about the political war between Romney and Huckabee.

Do you recall at the end of one the Republican Debates Huckabee came up to Romney to apologize about an interview that would appear in the NYT Magazine that be construed as publicly criticizing Mormonism yet that was not the intent? And that Romney accepted that apology with a brandishment that one’s religion should not be an issue among legitimate issues in the electoral process.

Now Huckabee is saying that Romney owes him an apology for the negative campaign ads that blatantly are lying about Huckabee and making claims for Romney that are outrageously untrue.

JRH 12/31/07

The Savage and CAIR Legal War

Michael Savage

You know I am not really a Michael Savage fan. He is kind of a Conservative shock jock that makes Ann Coulter (a person I admire) seem tame. I have even had rumors that allege Savage is not a real Conservative as much as he is an entrepreneur marketing himself as a shock Conservative jock as a living. Thus based on what second hand knowledge and not direct hearing or reading I have not taken Savage seriously.

Now here is the thing that has got my attention about Savage: the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has been running an active PR campaign to get Savage fired by talking his sponsors into dropping him.

If CAIR feels threatened by Savage, then regardless of Savage’s motives, he has become a person of favorable interest to me. CAIR is an evil organization that publicly passes itself off as a moderate Islamic human rights watch dog for American Muslims; however the twist is CAIR has had members and leaders convicted for ties to Islamist Terrorists of which Hamas seems to be the primary benefactor. Friends that is neither moderate nor American to support psycho-Islamist terrorist suicidal and homicidal murdering terrorists. O and I forgot to mention racist, for Hamas where it controls education in schools or Mosques incessantly teaches hatred of Jews that would warm the corpse of Adolf Hitler with glee.

Apparently Savage has talking up the CAIR mud and CAIR has decided to throw its money into silencing Savage. In which case Savage responded with a civil suit of copy right infringement in CAIR using skewed editing radio snippets of Savage to make him look bad.

Savage is taking the legal war between himself and CAIR to the next level. Savage is amending his law suit:

The amended lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Northern California, also charges CAIR with using extortion, threats, abuse of the court system, and obtaining money via interstate commerce under false and fraudulent circumstances – calling it a "political vehicle of international terrorism" and even linking the group with support of al-Qaida. (WND)

Although I am not a Michael Savage fan I say, SICK’EM BOY!


Fred Thompson TV Ad: “Substance”

Thompson has the best Conservative plan to lead America’s future as opposed to the Democrats of tax and spend and moral socialism. Or Ron Paul who will cause America to go down in flames as he disable the military.

Technorati Tags: ,