The newly appointed EU President Herman Van Rompuy, a Saint in his native Belgium?

l have decided to reproduce the attached article specifically for the mannerisms that the newly appointed EU President Herman Van Rompuy has described himself as possessing in order that those that read it may find any agreement, or otherwise disagreement, with the comments that l have made relative to the article in question.

For beginners, there is nothing at all that is at all startling about this article except for the fact that Herman Van Rompuy himself has mentioned that he considers himself to be a saint in his native Belgium.

Now that may sound like quite an innocent sort of a statement, when it is taken in the contrast with the Bible Prophecies there maybe some quite serious consequences relative to it, even though it sounds naive enough.

That either sounds to me like he thinks a great deal of himself or he honestly does consider himself to be a saint or a God like type of figure alive, and walking here on the earth?

If that were the case then there may be a possibility of him being either the False Prophet or the Antichrist, with the former being the more likelihood of the two suggested scenarios.

l make this statement mostly because he has described himself in a manner that seems to indicate that he has been somewhat downtrodden all of his life or that he is as meek as a lamb just as the prophecies of Revelation Chapter 13 said would be the case relative to the False Prophet.

If that is the case then we could then more than likely consider his side kick as being the EU Commission President, Jose Manuel Barrasso as being the Antichrist?

Although l still get the distinct impression that there is some form of power play that is being acted out between the two aforementioned figures and either one of these two could yet still prove to be the Antichrist, only time will tell which way that is going to work out even if either one of the two names mentioned above are as l suggested they may be?

After having read the article what do the readers of these comments think of that evaluation?

Quote: At Europe’s Helm, a Steady Hand With Little Pomp

WHEN a visit to the United Nations was cancelled abruptly last month, the European Union’s new president, Herman Van Rompuy, headed instead for somewhere he says he feels really at home: Affligem Abbey, a Benedictine monastery in the countryside here, founded in 1062.
Mr. Van Rompuy spent a day in a simple room, attending services and eating in a cavernous hall where monks listen to readings from a library of 70,000 books. And he also likes the beer, one of Belgium’s most famous, now brewed under license from the monks.

At 62, Mr. Van Rompuy (pronounced ROM-poi) is suddenly a prominent man, the head of the council of 27 government leaders who make up the real spine of the European Union. It is a task requiring subtlety, manipulation and the ability to cajole everyone from big countries and small — with combustible personalities like President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and more stolid sorts like Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, none of them with small egos — to agree on agendas and policies.

He got good marks for handling the leaders during Europe’s existential crisis this year over Greek debt and the crash of the euro. “If the euro zone had fallen apart,” he said in a long interview in his office here, “it would have been the end of the European Union.”

A Roman Catholic, Mr. Van Rompuy often seems to be fighting to conquer the sin of pride — in his manner, his dress (he favors brown) and his lack of affectation. But it is a struggle he sometimes loses. He is a man who feels inferior, it can be said, to few, and he is convinced that the modest and back-room fashion in which he is guiding Europe — and quietly expanding his influence — is the only possible way to do it.

Asked if he saw himself as “maître d’ ” to the heads of government, Mr. Van Rompuy bristles. He has been called a “gray mouse” too, he said, and “a damp rag” by one British legislator. “All my career it’s been like that. But there are those who know better and have another opinion.”

Then he laughs a little and says: “I’m a saint in Belgium these days!”

Those who wanted a major charismatic figure to speak for Europe — Tony Blair openly campaigned for the job — were making a grave error, Mr. Van Rompuy said.

“Trying to be the first man in Europe and no one else around you would be a real catastrophe,” he said. “If you want to be the president of Europe with a high profile, you immediately come into conflict with other European institutions and member states. There are nuances, of course, depending on your ego, but there is only one way to do it: with a mixture of leadership and giving others the way to play their role.”

He said: “I call myself a facilitator.” Then he said: “You cannot govern Europe against the member states.”

MR. VAN ROMPUY, an economist and former center-right prime minister of Belgium, is more or less the antithesis of the modern politician, about as far from Mr. Blair or Mr. Sarkozy as possible. He has been married for 33 years to a biologist, and he has four children and two grandsons.

Bookish and unassuming, he writes haikus, utters no sound bites, spins little and seems happy to discuss how he lost his faith in God at 12, as he prepared for communion, and then suddenly regained it in his mid-20s. “I fell in love, and it is a lifelong love story,” he said.

“I regularly ask myself what happened,” he said. “But faith is not a question of rational arguments.”

He is a classic European Christian Democrat, who keeps his religion out of politics but believes in ethics and social justice. He was even, he admits, a rabid republican as a teenager, wanting to dump the Belgian monarchy, but he had a strong relationship with King Baudouin I and now with King Albert II, “so I left my republican ideas a long time ago.”

Most strikingly, he insists he never wanted most of the top jobs he has held, presenting his rise as a series of unfortunate but unavoidable political accidents. When he was pressed to become the president of the European Council, he had led Belgium for less than a year and was virtually unknown abroad.

But since he left the post of prime minister, Belgium has lurched from crisis to crisis, still without a stable government. And he has impressed many with his handling of the euro crisis, his managing of deep French-German differences and his ability to extend his influence in a manner that has sometimes threatened the European Commission and its president, José Manuel Barroso.

Mr. Van Rompuy stands out because he seems to have a modest but coherent strategy for the European Union. Without revitalizing its economy, he argues, Europe cannot afford its cherished way of life, and national leaders must take collective responsibility for the larger economy, and not just their own. He has played an important role in efforts to toughen rules governing the euro, so that national economies are more tightly monitored and wayward nations face sanctions.

“His overall approach is one of solid intellectual analysis and modesty about what he can achieve,” said Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform, a research institute. “He has analysed where Europe is and where it needs to go. He doesn’t always get his way, but he is respected by many heads of government.” End of Quote

"RAPTURE! PROPHECY OR HERESY"

is a book by Colonel H. Speed Wilson (Daring Publisher). Since 1989, he has offered a $10,000 reward to anyone who can prove scripturally that the Saints are taken OUT OF THE WORLD.

The following is taken from the back cover of the book. "The Rapture theology has been one of the most controversial topics among Christians since the early 1800s to the present. The most commonly addressed questions in the popular books, pamphlets and sermons is WHEN will the Rapture occur? WILL the Rapture be pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, or post-tribulation? And...WILL it be a secret and silent removal of Christians or a glorious return of JESUS?

As an astute Bible Scholar, Speed Wilson now raises a question in his thought-provoking book he feels is the most important and even critical question of all, IS THERE REALLY TO BE A RAPTURE?

Topics in Speed's book include Rapture Support Arguments, Origin of Rapture, What May Happen, What We Must Do, Consequences of the Rapture Doctrine, and, finally, Your $10,000 Challenge!

Speed is offering this $10,000 reward to anyone who can, after reading his book, reference any scriptures that clearly state that the Saints (Holy Ones, Righteous, Church, Body, Bride, Wheat...etc.) Are taken out of the world! Details as to how to receive this reward are presented in the book. The publisher, Daring Books, will give a $1,000 reward to the bookstore that sells the book to the person who qualifies for the $10,000 reward!"

This book has been updated in June 2010, and is now called "RAPTURE - A DANGEROUS DECEPTION" - 261 PAGE PAPERBACK - available at Amazon.com and other places.

The Third Horsemen of the Apocalypse - the Black Horse

Cost of saving river basin revealed
By Gabrielle Dunlevy
The cost of saving the Murray-Darling Basin has been laid out for the first time - $3 billion in water buybacks, and the loss of $805 million in agricultural production a year and at least 800 jobs.

Farmers are outraged, predicting a wide scale walkout from rural Australia if the water cutbacks go ahead.

They warn the economic modelling in the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's (MDBA) guide is way off, and the true cost in both production and jobs will be much higher than predicted.

The MDBA, the independent body working out how to restore balance to the food bowl, released a guide to its controversial plan on Friday in Canberra.

While farmers and conservationists agree the amount of water currently taken out of the river system for human use is unsustainable, they are divided on how to solve the problem.

The clawback of 27 to 37 per cent of water amounts to an additional 3000 to 4000 gigalitres of surface water annually.

It could have gone as high as 7700 gigalitres, but MDBA chairman Mike Taylor said the social and economic costs would have been "beyond management".

The authority predicts the cuts would reduce irrigated production by 1.1 per cent in the long term, with a loss of about 800 full-time jobs.

But Mr Taylor admitted more work was needed to better predict the economic and social effects.

"We do not think those economic models are satisfactory for dealing with what localised impacts are likely to be," he told reporters in Canberra.

"They are likely to be quite significantly higher than the sorts of numbers that come out of those general equilibrium models."

National Irrigators Council chief Danny O'Brien said the guide spelt "disaster" to Australian agriculture.

"To say that you can take out 30 per cent of the main input to irrigated agriculture in the basin and cost just 800 jobs or one per cent (of production) does not pass the laugh test," he said.

"That is a joke. The authority needs to go back to the drawing board and do more work on the social and economic modelling because it simply doesn't stack up."

The modelling underpinning the guide was not released on Friday, but is expected to come out by the month's end.

But models by the NSW Irrigators Council show it would cost 17,000 jobs in NSW alone, with a $2.4 billion annual loss to the economy.

The National Farmers Federation says the fate of the plan ultimately is in the hands of federal Water Minister Tony Burke, who must now engage with the producers of 40 per cent of the nation's food.

Spokesman Laurie Arthur said the government, with its new focus on regional Australia, would have to reconcile that with the new plan.

"A lot of people will conclude that they won't be able to go forward, so there's a real anomaly between investing in our rural communities and pulling the wealth out of them," he said.

The regions expected to suffer the worst economic impact are Murrumbidgee in the southern basin, and Moonie and Gwydir in the northern basin.

The federal government has committed to buying back the water needed to meet the target, which could cost more than $3 billion.

The authority estimates the gap, based on water purchased by state and commonwealth governments to June 30, at 2295 to 3295 gigalitres.

They could also invest in capital works to recover the water.

The plan in its current form would send a long-term average flow of up to 7700 gigalitres through the Murray mouth compared with the 5100 gigalitres expected now.

The mouth would be open between 90 and 92 per cent of the time, compared with 64 per cent under current arrangements.

Declining populations of water birds would stabilise, river red gums would be healthier, as would native fish such as the Murray cod.

The Australian Conservation Foundation's Dr Arlene Harriss-Buchan would prefer the upper end of the range, 4000 gigalitres, targeted.

"A re-allocation of 3000 gigalitres, there would be only a low probability of meeting all of our environmental targets and objectives all of the time," she said
.
"It's also premised on looking at a future climate scenario which is in the wetter range of likelihood."

The proposed basin plan will be released later in 2010 or early in 2011, the guide says, with consultation before and after. End of Quote

What is the overall plan?
FOOD CONTROLLED BY THE ANTICHRIST
There was one stage that the spokesperson for the NWO, Henry Kissinger, had said that if you control energy you control nations and if you control food you control individuals.

The nation's energy has been sold overseas so that is gone forever, and we are being controlled from overseas for our energy requirements, meaning that they are able to charge us whatever they like for the essential services such as gas, water and electricity, as they are now doing.

So what's next that needs to be brought under total subversion so that the nation and its individuals could be totally controlled from the cradle to the grave.

The answer to that is relatively simple, the food, or the food supplies.

That is what the Murray River Basin plan recently unveiled by the Federal Government is all about - controlling the food so that the planners behind the World Government can control individuals.

What will be the result of this plan?
All of what l have mentioned forehand will be handed over to the Antichrist and that plan together with his microchip implant will mean that he will have total control over the entirety of mankind.

After all when our food is being supplied from the EU and he controls the EU he effectively controls the nation.

THE BLACK HORSE
Revelation Chapter 6 and Verses 5 to 6
And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand." "And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and [see] thou hurt not the oil and the wine".
The Third Seal: A Black Horse - Rampant inflation - a common aftermath of war - Famine is suggested by John's words, "A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not harm the oil and the wine."

After the large war mentioned in Revelation Chapter 6, Verse 3 - the red horse - the Antichrist takes control of the food and dishes it out to those that he wishes to live at the same time denying it to those that he wishes to perish, more than likely the Christians?

This could be a message of hard times for all of mankind. "black" symbolizes:
woe
mourning
terrible times
famine, physical or spiritual
evil
opposite of goodness
everything that opposes God

There will not be a rapture until the seven years of tribulation have passed so Christian Saints will be saved IN the famine and not FROM the famine. Noah was saved IN the flood, not FROM the flood. God can rain manna from heaven if necessary. I believe God will set up places of refuge where believers can run, so they can have physical and spiritual food.

God will not forsake the righteous.

Bernanke Tells the Truth: The United States is on the Brink of Financial Disaster

Yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered a speech before the the Annual Meeting of the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council in Providence, Rhode Island. In the speech, he warned about the current state of the government finances. His conclusion, the situation is dire and "unsustainable".

It is remarkable that mainstream media has given this speech no coverage. I repeat, the central banker of the United States says in his own words:
Let me return to the issue of longer-term fiscal sustainability. As I have discussed, projections by the CBO and others show future budget deficits and debts rising indefinitely, and at increasing rates. To be sure, projections are to some degree only hypothetical exercises. Almost by definition, unsustainable trajectories of deficits and debts will never actually transpire, because creditors would never be willing to lend to a country in which the fiscal debt relative to the national income is rising without limit. Herbert Stein, a wise economist, once said, "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop."9 One way or the other, fiscal adjustments sufficient to stabilize the federal budget will certainly occur at some point. The only real question is whether these adjustments will take place through a careful and deliberative process that weighs priorities and gives people plenty of time to adjust to changes in government programs or tax policies, or whether the needed fiscal adjustments will be a rapid and painful response to a looming or actual fiscal crisis.

This is as close as you are ever going to see a central banker admit that his country's financial situation is so dire that it could breakup at any time.

Here's more from Bernanke's remarkable speech:
The recent deep recession and the subsequent slow recovery have created severe budgetary pressures not only for many households and businesses, but for governments as well. Indeed, in the United States, governments at all levels are grappling not only with the near-term effects of economic weakness, but also with the longer-run pressures that will be generated by the need to provide health care and retirement security to an aging population. There is no way around it--meeting these challenges will require policymakers and the public to make some very difficult decisions and to accept some sacrifices. But history makes clear that countries that continually spend beyond their means suffer slower growth in incomes and living standards and are prone to greater economic and financial instability.

Now, get this, he warns that it is not only the Federal government that has financial problems, but also states and local governments:
Although state and local governments face significant fiscal challenges, my primary focus today will be the federal budget situation and its economic implications.

Does Bernanke see the tsunami hitting or what?

Then, he put things in historical perspective:
The budgetary position of the federal government has deteriorated substantially during the past two fiscal years, with the budget deficit averaging 9-1/2 percent of national income during that time. For comparison, the deficit averaged 2 percent of national income for the fiscal years 2005 to 2007, prior to the onset of the recession and financial crisis. The recent deterioration was largely the result of a sharp decline in tax revenues brought about by the recession and the subsequent slow recovery, as well as by increases in federal spending needed to alleviate the recession and stabilize the financial system. As a result of these deficits, the accumulated federal debt measured relative to national income has increased to a level not seen since the aftermath of World War II.

Then, he explains the deterioration and the problems it will create for the entire economy:
For now, the budget deficit has stabilized and, so long as the economy and financial markets continue to recover, it should narrow relative to national income over the next few years. Economic conditions provide little scope for reducing deficits significantly further over the next year or two; indeed, premature fiscal tightening could put the recovery at risk. Over the medium- and long-term, however, the story is quite different. If current policy settings are maintained, and under reasonable assumptions about economic growth, the federal budget will be on an unsustainable path in coming years, with the ratio of federal debt held by the public to national income rising at an increasing pace.2 Moreover, as the national debt grows, so will the associated interest payments, which in turn will lead to further increases in projected deficits. Expectations of large and increasing deficits in the future could inhibit current household and business spending--for example, by reducing confidence in the longer-term prospects for the economy or by increasing uncertainty about future tax burdens and government spending--and thus restrain the recovery. Concerns about the government's long-run fiscal position may also constrain the flexibility of fiscal policy to respond to current economic conditions.

Then, he tells us how powerful the negative trends are and how the aging population and Obamacare are going to make things worse:
Our fiscal challenges are especially daunting because they are mostly the product of powerful underlying trends, not short-term or temporary factors. Two of the most important driving forces are the aging of the U.S. population, the pace of which will intensify over the next couple of decades as the baby-boom generation retires, and rapidly rising health-care costs. As the health-care needs of the aging population increase, federal health-care programs are on track to be by far the biggest single source of fiscal imbalances over the longer term. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the ratio of federal spending for health-care programs (principally Medicare and Medicaid) to national income will double over the next 25 years, and continue to rise significantly further after that...he aging of the U.S. population will also strain Social Security, as the number of workers paying taxes into the system rises more slowly than the number of people receiving benefits. This year, there are about five individuals between the ages of 20 and 64 for each person aged 65 and older. By 2030, when most of the baby boomers will have retired, this ratio is projected to decline to around 3, and it may subsequently fall yet further as life expectancies continue to increase. Overall, the projected fiscal pressures associated with Social Security are considerably smaller than the pressures associated with federal health programs, but they still present a significant challenge to policymakers.

Then he goes back to warn that the financial mess also exists at the state and local level:

The same underlying trends affecting federal finances will also put substantial pressures on state and local budgets, as organizations like yours have helped to highlight. In Rhode Island, as in other states, the retirement of state employees, together with continuing increases in health-care costs, will cause public pension and retiree health-care obligations to become increasingly difficult to meet. Estimates of unfunded pension liabilities for the states as whole span a wide range, but some researchers put the figure as high as $2 trillion at the end of 2009.5 Estimates of states' liabilities for retiree health benefits are even more uncertain because of the difficulty of projecting medical costs decades into the future. However, one recent estimate suggests that state governments have a collective liability of almost $600 billion for retiree health benefits. These health benefits have usually been handled on a pay-as-you-go basis and therefore could impose a substantial fiscal burden in coming years as large numbers of state workers retire.

Bernanke then breaks the news that the problem is global:
It may be scant comfort, but the United States is not alone in facing fiscal challenges. The global recession has dealt a blow to the fiscal positions of most other advanced economies, and, as in the United States, their expenditures for public health care and pensions are expected to rise substantially in the coming decades as their populations age. Indeed, the population of the United States overall is younger than those of a number of European countries as well as Japan.

Bernanke then re-emphasises, the damage this will do to the overall economy:
Failing to address our unsustainable fiscal situation exposes our country to serious economic costs and risks. In the short run, as I have noted, concerns and uncertainty about exploding future deficits could make households, businesses, and investors more cautious about spending, capital investment, and hiring. In the longer term, a rising level of government debt relative to national income is likely to put upward pressure on interest rates and thus inhibit capital formation, productivity, and economic growth. Larger government deficits increase our reliance on foreign lenders, all else being equal, implying that the share of U.S. national income devoted to paying interest to foreign investors will increase over time. Income paid to foreign investors is not available for domestic consumption or investment. And an increasingly large cost of servicing a growing national debt means that the adjustments, when they come, could be sharp and disruptive. For example, large tax increases that might be imposed to cover the rising interest on the debt would slow potential growth by reducing incentives to work, save, hire, and invest.

He then states that we do not know how much time is left before all hell breaks loose:
It would be difficult to identify a specific threshold at which federal debt begins to pose more substantial costs and risks to the nation's economy. Perhaps no bright line exists; the costs and risks may grow more or less continuously as the federal debt rises. What we do know, however, is that the threat to our economy is real and growing, which should be sufficient reason for fiscal policymakers to put in place a credible plan for bringing deficits down to sustainable levels over the medium term.

From there,Bernanke goes into a bit of wishful thinking by identifying ways Congress can rein in spending and make the tax system more efficient. Good luck with all of that.

The real important part of Bernanke's speech is the first half where he warns of the financial crisis just ahead

Global Cooling and the New World Order

By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: September 26th, 2010 - from The Daily Telegraph, London.

Bilderberg. Whether you believe it’s part of a sinister conspiracy which will lead inexorably to one world government or whether you think it’s just an innocent high-level talking shop, there’s one thing that can’t be denied: it knows which way the wind is blowing.

At its June meeting in Sitges, Spain (unreported and held in camera, as is Bilderberg’s way), some of the world’s most powerful CEOs rubbed shoulders with notable academics and leading politicians.

They included: the chairman of Fiat, the Irish Attorney General Paul Gallagher, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Dick Perle, the Queen of the Netherlands, the editor of the Economist…. Definitely not Z-list, in other words.

Which is what makes one particular item on the group’s discussion agenda so tremendously significant. See if you can spot the one I mean:

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 – 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations.

Yep, that’s right. Global Cooling.

Which means one of two things.

Either it was a printing error.

Or the global elite is perfectly well aware that global cooling represents a far more serious and imminent threat to the world than global warming, but is so far unwilling to admit it except behind closed doors.

Let me explain briefly why this is a bombshell waiting to explode.

Almost every government in the Western world from the USA to Britain to all the other EU states to Australia and New Zealand is currently committed to a policy of “decarbonisation.” This in turn is justified to (increasingly sceptical) electorates on the grounds that man-made CO2 is a prime driver of dangerous global warming and must therefore be reduced drastically, at no matter what social, economic and environmental cost. In the Eighties and Nineties, the global elite had a nice run of hot weather to support their (scientifically dubious) claims. But now they don’t. Winters are getting colder. Fuel bills are rising (in the name of combating climate change, natch). The wheels are starting to come off the AGW bandwagon. Ordinary people, resisting two decades of concerted brainwashing, are starting to notice.

All this, of course, spells big trouble for the global power elite. As well as leading to food shortages (as, for example, it becomes harder to grow wheat in northerly latitudes; adding, of course, to such already-present disasters as biofuels and the rejection of GM), global cooling is going to find electorates increasingly angry that they have been sold a pup.

Our fuel bills have risen inexorably; our countryside, our views and our property values have been ravaged by hideous wind farms; our holidays have been made more expensive; our cost of living has been driven up by green taxes; our freedoms have been curtailed in any number of pettily irritating ways from what kind of light bulbs we are permitted to use to how we dispose of our rubbish. And to what end? If man-made global warming was really happening and really a problem we might possibly have carried on putting up with all these constraints on our liberty and assaults on our income. But if it turns out to have been a myth……

Well then, all bets are off.

The next few years are going to be very interesting. Watch the global power elite squirming to reposition itself as it slowly distances itself from Anthropogenic Global Warming (”Who? Us? No. We never thought of it as more than a quaint theory…”), and tries to find new ways of justifying green taxation and control. (Ocean acidification; biodiversity; et al). You’ll notice sly shifts in policy spin. In Britain, for example, Chris “Chicken Little” Huhne’s suicidal “dash for wind” will be re-invented as a vital step towards “energy security.” There will be less talk of “combatting climate change” and more talk of “mitigation”. You’ll hear enviro-Nazis like Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren avoid reference to “global warming” like the plague, preferring the more reliably vague phrase “global climate disruption.”
And you know what the worst thing is? If we allow them to, they’re going to get away with it.

Our duty as free citizens over the next few years is to make sure that they don’t.

Al Gore, George Soros, Bill Gates, Carol Browner, John Holdren, Barack Obama, David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Tim Yeo, Michael Mann, Ted Turner, Robert Redford, Phil Jones, Chris Huhne, John Howard (yes really, he was supposed to be a conservative, but he was the man who kicked off Australia’s ETS), Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, Yvo de Boer, Rajendra Pachauri….The list of the guilty goes on and on. Each in his own way – and whether through ignorance, naivety idealism or cynicism, it really doesn’t matter for the result has been the same – has done his bit to push the greatest con-trick in the history of science, forcing on global consumers the biggest bill in the history taxation, using “global warming” as an excuse to extend the reach of government further than it has ever gone before.

It is time we put a stop to this. In the US, the Tea Party movement is showing us the way. We need to punish these dodgy politicians at the ballot box. We need to ensure that those scientists guilty of malfeasance are, at the very least thrown out of the jobs which we taxpayers have been funding these last decades. We need to ensure that corporatist profiteers are no longer able to benefit from the distortion and corruption of the markets which result from green regulation.

We need a “Global Warming” Nuremberg.

Is the newly appointed president of the EU Council handing his authority over to the EU Commission as per the prophecies of Revelation Chapter 13?

Herman Van Rompuy announces a new 'reverse majority rule' to get around the national veto.

What is the legal basis of this latest power grab?
Herman Van Rompuy, the President of Europe, wants a new mechanism to enforce sanctions against member states which borrow too much. Fair enough, you might say: of the 27 member states, only three currently meet the EU’s debt and deficit rules.

What’s alarming is the mechanism Mr Van Rompuy intends to use:Whenever possible, decision-making rules on sanctions should be more automatic and based on a reverse majority rule, implying a Commission proposal is adopted unless rejected by the Council.

The reverse majority rule?

I’m one of those few sad souls who has waded through the entire text of the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty, and I can’t remember any such procedure.

I have spent two days asking around in Brussels, and no one there knows what it is, either.

So here is an innovation which would substantially shift power from the national capitals to the Commission, and which concerns an issue of major importance (levying fines), but which seems to have no legal basis.

I know that a number of Eurocrats read this blog, and occasionally post remarks under amusing noms de plume. Perhaps one of them can enlighten me? On the basis of what article is President Van Rompuy arrogating these new powers? Is the EU – yet again – making up the rules as it goes along? End of Quote

In the dual EU presidency of Jose Manuel Barrasso and the newly elected EU president of the Council of Ministers, Herman Van Rompuy, the world may have seen the coming together of the Antichrist and the False Prophet.

That being said, l had found it quite difficult to determine who was who relative to the aforementioned Satanic duo?

However if we read the above quotation quite carefully and then refer to the Holy Scriptures themselves we may be able to find a glue to the answer to that question.

The chapter that l am referring to is Revelation Chapter 13.
In that Chapter we are told of the two beasts mentioned above; however, it is not the first beast that has drawn my attention to the article above but the second beast, and in particular the part in the chapter that says even though the second beast does not seek authority for himself he hands his authority over the first beast.

To my way of thinking that sounds exactly like what Van Rompuy is doing relative to the EU Commission (or Barrasso) as he appears to be handing more and more power over to Barrasso.

There are now going to be some that are going to say that l am jumping at shadows relative to the above conjecture, but we still need to remember that what we are dealing with here is not the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty, but the Lisbon Treaty.

As that is the case it still needs to be remembered that Barrasso was the Prime Minister of Portugal before he became the 11th EU Commission President -- and that Lisbon is a very much a part of Portugal.

Therefore what that effectively means is EU Constitution Lisbon Treaty should have more correctly been named the Barrasso Treaty.

Instead of handing the preponderance of power over to the newly appointed Council President the power for the complete running of the EU has been handed over to Barrasso; thereby seemingly making him the first beast of Revelation Chapter 13.

Yet we still need to remember that the second beast is more dangerous and deadly than the first beast.

Of course there maybe some that are reading this that are going to say that the opposite is applicable and that all of the power for the running of the EU is going over to Van Rompuy; or yet still, they may have other ideas relative to the suggestions that l have made above? If that is the case l would like to hear of them with their ideas.

Revelation Chapter 13 and Verses 11 to 18 referring to the second beast - the False Prophet.
11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

‘Palestine new UN member in 2011 if talks succeed’

By Jordana Horn
In his address to the UN General Assembly Thursday, US President Barack Obama called for a continuation of the settlement freeze and expressed the hope that by next year, current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations will have resulted in “an independent, sovereign state of Palestine.

“We believe that the moratorium should be extended. We also believe that talks should press on until completed,” Obama said, adding later that “now is the time for this opportunity to be seized, so that it does not slip away.”

Deeming the Israeli-Palestinian conflict “as old as this institution,” Obama told the General Assembly that both Israel and the Palestinians must espouse “genuine reconciliation” rather than resorting to familiar tropes of intransigence.

“This time, we should draw upon the teachings of tolerance that lie at the heart of three great religions that see Jerusalem’s soil as sacred,” Obama continued. “This time, we should reach for what’s best within ourselves.

“If we do, when we come back here next year, we can have an agreement that will lead to a new member of the United Nations – an independent, sovereign state of Palestine, living in peace with Israel,” Obama said to applause from the General Assembly.

Obama also affirmed the United States’ support for Israel.

“Those who long to see an independent Palestine must also stop trying to tear down Israel,” Obama said. “After thousands of years, Jews and Arabs are not strangers in a strange land. After 60 years in the community of nations, Israel’s existence must not be a subject for debate.

“Israel is a sovereign state, and the historic homeland of the Jewish people,” the American president continued. “It should be clear to all that efforts to chip away at Israel’s legitimacy will only be met by the unshakeable opposition of the United States.

“And efforts to threaten or kill Israelis will do nothing to help the Palestinian people,” he added. “The slaughter of innocent Israelis is not resistance – it’s injustice.”
Obama made a special point of praising Mahmoud Abbas’s leadership.

“And make no mistake: The courage of a man like President Abbas, who stands up for his people in front of the world under very difficult circumstances, is far greater than those who fire rockets at innocent women and children,” he said.

Characterizing the current era as “no ordinary time for our people,” Obama said he has “had no greater focus as president than rescuing our economy from potential catastrophe.”

He also alluded to America’s “refocused” fight against al- Qaida, and gradual withdrawal from the conflict in Iraq.

“As we pursue the world’s most dangerous extremists, we’re also denying them the world’s most dangerous weapons, and pursuing the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons,” Obama said.

The president made clear that Iran will suffer consequences should it continue to violate the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.

“The United States and the international community seek a resolution to our differences with Iran, and the door remains open to diplomacy should Iran choose to walk through it,” Obama said. “But the Iranian government must demonstrate a clear and credible commitment and confirm to the world the peaceful intent of its nuclear program.”

The Israeli delegation was not in the hall to hear Obama’s speech, as it was the first day of Succot and it is Israeli government policy not to work or travel on Jewish holidays. Contrary to his initial plans, President Shimon Peres intended to stay in New York at least until Friday, sources told The Jerusalem Post Tuesday.

The absence of the Israeli delegation, however, was apparently not immediately understood by the secular public. The New York Times reported that “in an odd turn, the Israeli delegation did not appear to be in the hall of the General Assembly to hear [Obama’s] words. Thursday is a Jewish religious holiday – Succot – and it was possible that the Israeli envoys were honoring it.”

Heaven or Hell?

When deciding whether Hell exists, don't listen to people who make up their beliefs based on what they think God should do, or people that twist scripture to disprove Hell, when scripture so clearly warns us of it. The warnings of eternal punishment were repeatedly spoken of by the Old Testament prophets, by Moses, by Jesus, by the Disciples, all throughout scripture, and by the prophets today. God has given us clear warning of Hell and nobody can claim ignorance!

Philip Stott: Global Warming: the Death of a Grand Narrative

Grand narratives - those overarching, dominant systems of socio-political thought so beloved of post-modernists - come and go. Some, such as major religions, can persist, through shape-shifting, for millennia; others last for centuries, while most survive for mere decades.

The death of a grand narrative is often protracted and largely unnoticed, until, one day, its metalanguage, its corpus of words of magic, its ‘points de capiton’, to use the phrase proposed by the Freudian psychoanalyst, Jacques Lacan (1901 – 1981), which for so long have kept people sub-consciously in its thrall, eventually lose all of their power and meaning, and prove no longer relevant to the lives of the majority. Such is the fate of mainstream Christianity in Britain today. For other grand narratives, by contrast, the collapse may be unexpectedly swift and dramatic, as with the tearing down of the Berlin Wall in 1989. The work of the ‘mauerspechte’ can thus take centuries, but it may also be accomplished within days or months.

Such is the current fate of global warming, the grand narrative that human greed and profligacy are changing the world’s climate apocalyptically, a sin that can only be appeased through public confession and self-sacrifice to the Goddess, Gaia. Since the farcical conclusion of the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference last December, it has been fascinating, as an independent academic, to witness the classical collapse of this grand narrative, as if social and philosophical theories are being played out before our gaze. From Australia to the US, both the public and politicians are rowing back from the dangerous weir of trying to constrain economic growth in the name of achieving a utopian, low-carbon economy. The pursuit of carbon footprints is proving a ‘yomp’ too far.

Of course, the metalanguage of global warming continues to be employed by certain politicians, including the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, by some of the media, including parts of the BBC, and by green activists, but one can already sense the power of its ‘points de capiton’ draining away daily. ‘Sustainability’ is becoming an increasingly unsustainable concept. Indeed, newspapers like The Times, which rather belatedly jumped onto the global warming bandwagon, have had to resort to reheating old stories of fossil-fuel funding and other wearied tropes, even putting these bizarrely on the front page in a pathetic bid to revive flagging interest. More characteristically, however, there are now an increasing number of days when none of global warming’s words of power even feature in the press or over the airwaves, and, when they do, they are often employed mechanically, without thought, conviction, or meaning.

Meanwhile, as ever, protean capitalism remains piously pragmatic, employing the old language where it can glean money thereby, as with wind farms and food miles, while already adjusting to whatever might come next. Slowly, but inexorably, a new set of metalanguages is arising, relating to food security, energy security, human genetic choices, but above all to adaptation and to flexibility in the face of normal change.

To understand a little of what is happening to the global warming grand narrative, we should turn to psychological theory, to what is generally known as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. This was first developed by the humanistic psychologist, Abraham Maslow, in his 1943 paper, A Theory of Human Motiviation, and fully expounded later in his 1954 book, Motivation and Personality.

Basically, Maslow proposes a hierarchy of five levels of basic human needs. Beyond these needs, higher levels of need exist. These include needs for understanding, aesthetic appreciation, and purely spiritual needs. In the levels of the five basic needs, the person does not feel the second need until the demands of the first have been satisfied, nor the third until the second has been satisfied, and so on. His hierarchic theory is often represented as a pyramid, with the larger, lower levels representing the lower needs, and the upper point representing the need for self-actualization.

A recent ‘Newsletter’ (‘Only one crisis at a time’, July 23, 2010) from the Scientific Alliance cogently analyses the present situation in Maslowian terms:

“We can also see this partly as another dimension of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. As our basic needs are fulfilled and life gets more secure, so we place more emphasis on higher tiers. This rationalises our increasingly rights-based culture and the rise and entrenchment of environmentalism in everyday life. Subsistence farmers or poor labourers have more pressing needs to fulfil. But the obverse of this is that, as short-term, pressing threats are lifted, we have time to focus on longer-term or less urgent ones.

By this reckoning, there would need to be some fairly significant changes for the present obsession with climate catastrophism to be replaced. The economic crisis has already played some part: it is virtually impossible to deliver radical and expensive policies at a time when painful cuts are being made in spending on basics such as welfare and education. A hypothetical contact with an alien civilization could at some stage again shift our focus.

But there is another crisis which is almost upon us. The chances are that energy insecurity will hit us in the next few years. Ignoring the Peak Oil arguments for now, there is a looming gap in electricity generating capacity as ageing coal- and nuclear- powered stations are decommissioned and at least part of the slack is unrealistically expected to be taken up by a large expansion of renewable power generation.”

It appears that, the higher we move up the Maslow pyramid, the greater is our need for theoretical, manufactured, future ‘catastrophes’. ‘Global warming’ thus comprised the classic ‘need’ of the ‘loads-of-money’ generation. But, we are now plunging back to reality, so that we no longer require this particular ‘catastrophe’ for our psychological fulfilment. Of course, new ‘catastrophes’ will surely arise to replace it, and they are already doing so, in the guise of food and energy security, and genetic choices, among many others.

Likewise, climate will continue to change, as it has always done. We must only hope that we have not undermined our ability to adapt to these changes, as and when they arise, and that science has not been too damaged by the Lysenkoistic grand narrative of global warming.

By contrast, I predict that global warming will now suffer a lingering death, as with so many other grand narratives that have gone before it, although there will always be a rump of adepts speaking in its tongues and propounding the faith, especially, I suspect, in the UK and its universities.

Emeritus Professor Philip Stott of the University of London is on the Academic Advisory Council of The Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Who Is Watching You? Nine Industries That Know Your Every Move

Don't kid yourself. Real privacy no longer exists in this country.

We've long had government organizations collecting data that paints a pretty clear picture of what we do with our time. The Tax Office knows everything about what you earn and any major transactions you make. It can access every bit of information it needs to determine how much money you should be sending on April 15.

The most important gatherer of personal information in the country are the Federal Police. They keeps a database of over 20 million fingerprints, which can be accessed by other law enforcement agencies. It also has an extensive database of DNA, the most specific marker of personal identity. The agencies ability to collect information expanded following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It now tracks a large portion of mail, cell phone traffic and Internet activity of people it deems suspicious.

Thanks to advances in technology, however, there are also now numerous private enterprises that track and record your every move. Although they don't usually give out this information, there are often worrisome leaks and security breaches where they inadvertently release sensitive information about their customers. Taken together, these industries have data on where you are, who you are communicating with, how you are earning your money, how you are spending that money, as well as the hobbies and interests you are pursuing.

We examined a large number of organizations to find the most intrusive firms and industries. Here they are, ranked by the number of people they track:

1) Credit Rating Agencies
With each firm having files on over 200 million people, the three credit bureaus -- Equifax (EFX), Experian (EXPGY), and TransUnion -- know not only your credit history, but also have the data to project your credit future. The companies collect a history of all credit use by an individual, including payment of bills, mortgages, and credit cards. The agencies also track the frequency with which a person applies for credit. That information is used to determine a person's credit risk through a credit score. These scores are produced using secret algorithms, ensuring that the bureaus know much more about you than you know about them.

2) Cell Phone Service Providers
As cell phone popularity has increased and technology has evolved, cell phone companies have come to possess a wealth of information about their customers. Covering over 90% of the Australian population, cell phone providers can tell who you call, when you call, how often you call certain people and what you say in your text messages. With GPS, they also now know where you are whenever you have your phone. As smartphones become the equivalent of miniature computers, cellular companies can also track personal behavior, such as use of multimedia and wireless e-commerce transactions.

3) Social Media Companies
In its ascent to Internet superpower, social enterprise Facebook has amassed an enormous amount of user information. Who your friends are, what you like, and what photos you are in are all information that the company has access to. That, however, is not the full extent of it. Facebook also tracks which profiles you view, who you communicate with most often, companies and causes you support, your personal calendar, and a great deal of personal information about your friends and family. Perhaps most surprising, Facebook can access much of the information you may have deleted, including photos and status updates, from their servers.

4) Credit Card Companies
There are currently 100 million credit cards owned by Australian consumers. In an economy dominated by credit, the amount of power held by credit card companies, such as Visa (V), MasterCard (MA) and American Express (AE), should not be surprising. They know their customers' credit scores, credit histories, what they buy, when they buy, and when they are likely to default on their payments. The interest rates charged for credit fluctuates based on their analysis of individuals' ability to pay back the debts they incur. Some of the information kept by credit card companies can help consumers, however. Algorithms that study buying patterns, for instance, are used to detect fraud.

5) Search Engines
Every search you perform on Google (GOOG) goes into the Internet giant's database, which it uses to keep a profile of your habits and interests. The search engine also keeps track of which links you click on during your search and which advertisers you visit. Google uses your interest profile and search history to place targeted ads in your browser. Perhaps most disturbingly, Google uses its Gmail service to monitor the content of your email in order to place targeted advertising in your email account. Google also keeps records of account and credit card information for everyone who uses their "Checkout" service, tracks which videos people watch on YouTube, where people are planning to visit, and what they plan to do there. Google's location-based map systems also allow the search company to know where people are in real time through the use of smartphones and other GPS-enabled devices.

6) Retail Chains
Kmart (WMT) uses data-mining services to collect and store information for all its customers in a central location. This allows it to determine the purchasing behavior of people who shop in its stores or on its website. It also optimizes inventory distribution by determining which products people are most likely to buy in the future. In August, Kmart began installing Radio Frequency Identification Devices (RFID) in their underwear and jeans, which lets them track items and customers around the store. This means they are able to determine how much time someone who buys a specific pair of pants spends in each aisle. Kmart plans to use this data to reorganize displays and further control inventory. The retail giant also sell this information to thousands of other businesses, who use consumer profiles for advertising and demographic research.

7) Casinos
Casinos like the Wynn Resorts (WYNN) are increasingly using "loyalty cards" to monitor the behavior of their patrons. The Wynn "red" cards are used in place of tokens, and allow the casino to keep track of which machines and tables each gambler visits on a regular basis, the path they take during their visits (using RFID chips), and even how often and how much they are willing to lose before giving up. When a slot machine in Wynn detects a gambler is close to his breaking point, it will issue a small payout in order to keep him spending money.

8) Banks
Large banks, such as the National Australia Bank, the Commonwealth Bank and Westpac, have access to customer account information, which includes savings, employer payroll deposits, and the time and date of ATM and teller visits. They track transfers made by account holders to third parties. A bank also knows your income, your salary, and your balance, moment-by-moment. Perhaps among the most confidential data a bank keeps is how often people move money in and out of accounts. Banks know how much you save each month, and often exactly how those savings are invested. Banks use this information to assess the risk of giving you a mortgage or loan, and they are legally allowed to use data-mining companies to check your website activity.

9) Life Insurance Companies
About 18 million households currently have life insurance. In order to apply for life insurance, applicants generally must disclose their health history. This includes incidence of heart disease, height, weight, smoking habits, and often includes full records from your doctors. Perhaps more invasive, life insurers seek disclosure of hospitalization for mental illness, use of illegal drugs, and whether or not you have had to file for bankruptcy. Insurance companies use a national prescription database to determine whether or not you have ever been prescribed medication. And certain high-risk professions and hobbies usually have to be disclosed.

Australia's Fibre Optic Broadband Network -- Towards the Mark of the Beast?

Carlos Slim sees a good wireless network is a preferred solution.

Being the world's richest man may never be enough money, and so one has to ask what is the motivation for the Brazilian communications guru, Carlos Slims, recent visit to Australia, particularly in the light of the re-election of the Labor Federal Governments and their commitment to build a 43 billion dollar broadband network, certainly he is not here for his health?

Mr Slim says that Australia is paying too much for a national broadband network.

"Is not necessary to invest so much money because technology is changing every time. I think to connect, seven thousand (dollars) per house is too much," he said. Mr Slim says fibre is extremely important but so is mobile capacity. "You need to have a good network of wireless, that you can connect it with thousand of places with wi fi service," he said.

Perhaps he would like to increase his estimated his $US55 billion dollars of worth of assets and has some designs on trying to sell Australia a communications system of his own? If the statement he has made above is any sort of an indicator, it would seem that he would be able to do so for a lot less than the amount the government has accosted the project at their estimated $41.6 billion.

But that raises the question of cost and if we were to suppose that Slim were able to come into this project and build a broadband network for less than the cost mentioned above why would the Federal Government - or anyone for that matter - want to squander unnecessary funds on a project when it could be done a lot cheaper than the estimated cost, one that our Mr Slim may have on his mind to offer for sale to Australia, that is the burning question?

There may be only one answer to a question of that magnitude and that this is not about broadband at all and that there is a lot more involved with this than the simple building of a fibre optic broadband network. Why then this expense and what is this really all about?

As the suggested system seems to be the most stable and reliable personally l think the planners behind the world government see fibre optic cable as the best way to go to put into place the infrastructure for the Mark of the Beast money system for buying and selling involving a microchip implant under the skin.

Because the Australian economy is supposedly going so well it may be that we have been chosen to build the first ever system that is entirely suited to the system of buying and selling, mentioned above involving the implant?

Now here is the verse that describes the Mark of the Beast; notice that the prophet uses the term mark. When he was shown the what to write down by the angels and he saw the microchip he did not know what he was looking at and so he simply called it a mark.

Revelation Chapter 13
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

There are other considerations to be taken into account other than the obvious cost involved with the construction of a national broadband network, such as the probability of adverse weather conditions coming into play should we happen to become entirely reliant on satellites and Hi Fi.

Accordingly as this system involves buying and selling, or the economy of the nation, there must be a system that is put into place that will last the test of time and stand up against all outside influences and that seems to be the only reason that l can personally think of to spend the amount of money involved.

Climate Change, Carbon Tax and a World Government...

It is a real pleasure to have lived as long as l have to the majority of the Bible prophecies come to an almost complete realization in my lifetime.

Over the past few years l have seen what was formerly a proud and great nation Australia once was, brought down to its very knees and under the control of the most evil men and women that the world has ever brought forth; and all in the name of bringing the preponderance of the world's population under the control of the Global Elitists as they go about setting up their insidious World Government.

That's the bad news, the good news is that they will never ever finish the gargantuan task they have set out to bring forth in setting up a NWO.

The planners behind the world government maybe treating us like some form of moronic imbeciles if they think that by feeding us these small tip bits of information here and there that we will simply succumb to their whims and fancies, and that we are then going to say there is nothing that we can do to stop this madness.

In that respect they are sadly mistaken?

l for one am not going to accept a world government for to do so would be to swear an allegiance to the Antichrist; something that l am never be prepared to do, not now or not ever.

However, as the results of the last Federal election testify to, planners are at least partially right as the preponderance of the Australian population have absolutely no idea what is going on, as almost half seem to have fallen for the clever ploys?

l think that may be due to the fact that the majority of the population are non Bible readers may have a lot to do with it; in fact l am certain it has everything to do with it.

Certainly, the average person in the street knows something is wrong and that all is not right.
However, most people can't put their fingers on what is really amiss with most not having any idea at all what is going on simply because they cannot see the all over picture, for the reason mentioned above.

Oh sure, they know they are being lied to if they are told one thing before an election and then almost immediately after the election their elected representative does a complete back flip, and everyone should know l am talking about when l make that statement. The person that l am referring to can only be the Fabian Socialist Julia Gillard, our supposedly newly elected Prime Minister. However, that only means that before the election the politicians are simply saying anything to get into, or retain their seats of power, and that after the election they are nothing more than actor puppets for their political masters.

Now they seem to be further insulting the intelligence with this nonsense about climate change by trying to introduce this wicked carbon tax - and as most of you are more than likely aware they have even set up a ministry of Climate Change with, and get this, with the former head of the ACTU (the peoples representative in the Union Movement) Greg Combet as the Minister in charge of that portfolio. How hypocritical can that appointment be?

How absurd is the allocation of a Ministry of Climate Change into the Australian Government when there is no climate change that mankind can ever have had any input into.

Simply put, there is nothing whatsoever that humans can do to the planet to effect the climate of the earth either by overheating it or overcooling it?

The Carbon Tax is inaptly named; rather it should have been named World Government Tax because that is what it is all about raising a tax under the pretext of climate change so that the money can be ciphered off to go towards setting up a World Government, and they are getting the average Australian tax payer to fund their wickedness.

Don't despair just yet though as the worst is still yet to come, (and l am not trying to scaremonger here) but once there is some form of a seven year climate change treaty signed - something along the lines of Copenhagen - and confirmed by one of the two, or both, of the presidents of the EU then there maybe some reason to be concerned. [There is a very strong possibility that these two men are the two beasts out of Revelation Chapter 13 and they could be the Antichrist and the False Prophet? Once this treaty is signed the final seven years of mankind's history here on the earth begins.]

Basically, if there happened to be any form of a Climate Change Treaty that were ever signed off on then effectively what they are signing off on is a World Government.

To anyone reading this, right about now you may be thinking that this guy is some kind of religious nut? But before you prejudge wait and see what the immediate future holds, as you may find that l was right all along?

Please read the following as it may help to explain my point of view a little clearer.

British admit: Copenhagen Population Control World Government

The official British two-pronged policy for the Copenhagen Conference is now out" in explicit language. It consists of: 1) massive population genocide" on a scale that would make Adolf Hitler blush" and 2) the establishment of a world government with policing powers to cap carbon emissions" to tax every advanced sector nation to the extent of two per cent of GDP per year" and to impose a global levy on all global financial transactions" among other draconian provisions.

Regarding the genocide" the Fabian Society's London School of Economics" the anchor of the Fabian Gordon Brown government (the chief organiser of the Copenhagen Conference)" has produced a study for Copenhagen" released by the British government-backed Optimum Population Trust (OPT)" calling for the reduction of world population by between three to five billion people between now and 2050. This flagrant call for mass extermination is based on the argument that the single greatest cause of (non-existent) global warming is overpopulation" and that the most "cost-effective" cure for global warming is radical population reduction.

This is not just the "opinion" of one way-out nutty group: The Copenhagen conference is itself being sponsored by the U.N." and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) tapped the OPT's director" Roger Martin" to present the UNFPA's own State of World Population 2009 report on the 16th November" in the lead-up to Copenhagen.

Former Thatcher government adviser Lord Christopher Monckton blew the whistle on the proposed World Government on the Alex Jones radio show on 9th December. Monckton" who is in Copenhagen attending the UN climate summit" said that when he attempted to obtain a copy of the 180-page current draft of the negotiating text agreement" he was initially rebuffed before he threatened an international diplomatic incident unless the document was forthcoming. "I insisted" and it took about 10 minutes and they consulted each other with three or four of them arguing over it"none of them would produce the document " I said I know this treaty exists because this is what the conference is all about"" said Monckton.

Monckton went on to elaborate precisely how the 180-page treaty draft would establish a world government" replete with around 700 separate bureaucracies" and powers of taxation" inspection and enforcement over individual nation-states. Developed nations" for instance" will be taxed to pay the World Bank to fund developing nations" but such funds will only be forthcoming for those developing nations if they meet stringent criteria. The treaty also outlines" said Monckton" "penalties or fines for non-compliance"" in developed countries" and the creation of an international police force to "enforce its will by imposing unlimited financial penalties on any countries whose performance under this treaty they don't like"" adding that that it amounted to a total global government takeover on an "unimaginable scale".

Briefed on Monckton's findings" American statesman and physical economist Lyndon LaRouche charged" "What this 180-page document represents is a policy worse than Hitler" which is the policy behind the Copenhagen summit. And the people who are proposing this" therefore" are subject to trial for genocide. Anybody who proposes this" becomes subject to a subsequent trial for genocide" by a future Nuremberg proceeding. Beware! Do not propose this; you may be subject to a future Nuremberg proceeding!"

LaRouche further called on China and India" who are coming under excruciating pressure to capitulate" to stick to their positions going into Copenhagen and to walk out if faced with mandatory emissions restrictions: "Stick to what they agreed to; stick to it! Don't worry about the differences; stick to it! Screw this thing up! Destroy it now" and get rid of it!

"The issue here is that some governments are in a sense ducking the issue" pretending to accept conditions which they intend to defy in fact. But the point is" then they will become targets for destruction on that basis. It's better to defy than to try to evade. Defiance promotes unity; compromise promotes destruction."

Is There Life After Death - the Near Death Experience....

There are some that have the daring to say that there is no such thing as life after death with those said same people also having the audacity to say that there is no Hell and that everyone, including the worst sinners imaginable do not go to Hell; or worse still, there is no Hell at all, and that everyone goes to Heaven and in turn inherits eternal life.

Sadly, amongst the group mentioned above there are also those who wrongly believe that there is no Hell simply because after having had one Near Death Experience and after having been shown Heaven they mistakenly believe they are going to return there a second time, even though they have never sought to get themselves right in the eyes of God by the repentance of sin upon returning back to life...

If that were the case then my saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, would have come into the world for nothing, and that He is not the Son of God, and that the Bible is not the word of God, and that everything that Christians have suffered and died for over the centuries has been for nothing but a lie.

However the opposite is applicable: the Lord Jesus Christ has not come into the world for no real reason and He is the Son of God who came into the world to save mankind from its sins, and the Bible is the Holy and infallible word of God, and Christians have not suffered and died for centuries for no real cause.

It would seem that God has allowed certain people to experience the Near Death Experience so that they could recount their journey into the unknown so as to warn others what was on the other side before they also had the NDE and before it was too late.

Accordingly, l have decided to post this DVD here by those who have had the Near Death Experience and have come back to this world to recount their experiences that there is Life After Death, thereby making the word of God correct.

EU wants the Pope as head of New World “peace movement” or World Religion.

There never was, nor will there ever be, a man more subtle and cunning than what the Biblical Antichrist is, and will be.

The president of the EU Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, wants the current head of the worlds six million Roman Catholics, Pope Benedict XV1, to head the World Peace Movement which is simply another way of uniting the world's religions together under a common banner simply known as World Religion.

The Bible makes very clear mention of a World Religion.

Based in Rome and under the authority of the current Pope, whoever he happened to be at the time, Revelation Chapter 17 calls it the Whore of Babylon simply because it combines all of the religions in the world together under a single banner and says that the Lord Jesus Christ is not the only way to Heaven but that through all religions a man may enter the Kingdom of God.

As there is only one way to Heaven and that is through the Lord Jesus Christ of course a statement such as that is nothing more than sheer heresy and blasphemy.

Quote: The European Union wants to adopt the Pope of Rome’s teaching on “Caritas in Veritate”.

Catholic EU head wants the Pope to take the Chair and lead the Global peace movement.

This is the pontiffs ideas on perspective of politics, economics and theology.

To learn more from the Pope, the EU Parliament has arranged several seminar’s. The last one was organized by the European People’s Party along with the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community (COMECE).

The EU Parliament has also made it a traditions to arrange for an annual meeting with all top religious leaders in Europe. This event is also inspired by the Bishop of Rome, and his ecumenical effort of bringing together people of all faiths into a global peace movement.

These annual meetings was started by the Portuguese Catholic President of the EU Commission Jose Manuel Barroso in 2005.

Since 2007, the representatives of the churches and faith communities are received by the three presidents of the European institutions.

How was their last meeting?

Lets read a report from the Catholic news agency, Zenit.

This was the appeal of Bishop Adrianus van Luyn, President of COMECE, to the EU leaders on the occasion of the 6th annual meeting of the EU Presidents with the Religious leaders in Europe, which was held on July 19 at the European Commission.

The meeting was hosted by José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission and co-chaired by Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council and Jerzy Buzek, President of the European Parliament. It was dedicated to the fight against poverty and social exclusion.

Around twenty senior figures from the Christian, Jewish and Muslim religions as well as from the Sikh and Hindu communities – coming from fourteen Members States – met to discuss the importance of combating poverty and social exclusion from the perspective of European governance.

The best way to explain what is going on, is to present the list of the guests to the European Union's “ecumenical” dinner party.

Lets take a look.

Presidents of Commission and Parliament discuss combating poverty and social exclusion with European faith leaders on 19 July 2010

Participants’ list

ANGLICAN CHURCH:

The Right Reverend Christopher HILL,

Bishop of Guildford

CHURCHES OF THE REFORMATION:

Hochwürdigen Herrn Prälat Dr. Bernhard FELMBERG,

Bevollmächtigter des Rates der Evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland bei der Europäischen Union,

His Excellency Peter Skov-Jakobsen

Bishop of Copenhagen, The Evangelical, Lutheran Church in Denmark

His Excellency Miloš Klátik,

Bishop of the Evangelical Church of Augsburg Confession in Slovakia

Monsieur le Pasteur Docteur Guy Liagre

Président du Synode de l’Église Protestante Unie de Belgique

CONFERENCE OF EUROPEAN CHURCHES:

Son Eminence Métropolite Emmanuel de France

Président de la Conférence des Églises européennes

ISLAMIC COMMUNITIES:

Dr. Dalil Boubakeur

Recteur de la Grande Mosquée de Paris

Imam Bekir Alboğa

Türkisch Islamische Union der Anstalt für Religion

Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra

Assistant Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain

Imam Yahya Pallavicini

Vice-Presidente de la Comunità religiosa Islamica

HINDU COMMUNITIES

Maharaja Sivarama Swami

Governing Body Commission of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness

SIKH COMMUNITIES:

Bhai Sahib Mohinder Singh

Chairman of the Guru Nanak Nishkam Sewak Jatha

JEWISH LEADERS:

Son Excellence Grand Rabbin Gilles Bernheim

Grand Rabbin de France et Vice-président de la Conférence des Rabbins Européens

Son Excellence Grand Rabbin Albert Guigi

Vice-président de la Conférence des Rabbins Européens

His Excellency Chief Rabbi Michael Schudrich

Chief Rabbi of Poland

Dayan Yonoson Abraham,

Judge of the Rabbinical court of the Chief Rabbinate of the United Synagogue of the UK and the Commonwealth

ORTHODOX CHURCHES:

His Beatitude Ieronymos II

Archbishop of Athens and All Greece

His Eminence Simeon

Metropolitan of Western und Central Europe.

Orthodox Church of Bulgaria

Son Eminence le Métropolite Joseph

Représentant de l’Eglise Orthodoxe Roumaine auprès des Institutions européennes

His Lordship

Bishop Porfyrios of Neapolis

Representative of the Orthodox Church of Cyprus to the EU

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH:

His Eminence Cardinal Péter Erdö

Archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest

His Excellency Monsignor Stanislas Zvolenský

Archbishop of Bratislava

His Excellency Monsignor Adrianus van Luyn

Bishop of Rotterdam

President of the Commission of the Bishops’ Conference of the European Community (COMECE)

Dama Flaminia Giovanelli,

Sotto-Segretaria dello Consiglio Pontificio della Giustizia e della Pace

For further information on the event: please see IP/10/967

President Barroso looks for a Global leader that can unite all religions and make "World peace".

King James Version: Revelation Chapter 17

1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:

2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.

8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.