"The righteousness of the perfect shall direct his way: but the wicked shall fall by his own wickedness."
Proverbs 11:5

Righteousness Of The Perfect

Dear Friends,

      Greetings! Every time you look at the news these days it seems something is "breaking". Just like extreme weather is the new "norm" it now seems like "emergency after emergency" is the new norm.

      Of course, there is a reason for this, as the second article below suggests, "Global economy at the tipping point". Many of the articles we are including, focus on two major events taking place in the world today, the global economy and what looks to be an upcoming possible war between Iran and Israel.

      Whatever the case, it would certainly seem that we are rapidly moving closer and closer to prophesied 'End Time' events with the collapse of the world's economies, the mark of the beast, and sides lining up for the final great war, the battle of Armageddon.

      If you are unfamiliar with how this all plays out, please do visit our "Studies" section on this web site, to be encouraged at the real happy ending to these Endtime events. And for those who know Jesus there will be an eternity of love, joy, and happiness with Him for ever after.

The Extinction Protocol: 2012 and beyond

2012 and Earthchanges News events

November 7, 2011 - LONDON - The world will not end in 2012 though before it's over, for many, it may well feel like it. Nearly every dramatic event from social unrest to the crisis in the Middle East appears to be converging in the coming year. Solar activity, though low by previous solar cycles, is starting to increase. NASA said the solar maximum in 2012-2013, when the Sun is expected to reach peak activity, may be the strongest since 1958. 2012 is also expected to be the year of the return of the Mesoamerican pagan deity Quetzalcoatl - setting the stage for the potential appearance of many other entities, and beings also claiming divinity and that they are here to guide humanity through the corridors of this planetary crisis. Geopolitics: According to senior intelligence officials in the U.S. and Israel, 2012 is the year Iran is supposed to be near nuclear weapons capability. Will this be the year of a military action in Iran? Israel is already comtemplating a potential military strike to halt Iran's nuclear program. 2012 is the year President Putin returns to power just as Russia is undergoing a strong surge in nationalism, is modernizing its nuclear arsenal, seeking closer ties with China, and beefing up its military presence across the globe. Russia has warned the West and Israel that a military strike on Iran would have grave consequences.  

The rise of the Dragon- 2012 is the year of the Dragon according to the Chinese calendar. The dragon has long been considered a symbol for China as well as for Satan in the Bible according to the 12th and 13thchapter of Revelation. Will China's rising economic and military clout collide with western nation's military intervention in Iran or SE Asia in 2012? A decisive election in Taiwan is also occurring in 2012 that will determine the country's future relationship with the Chinese mainland. Will Taiwan's destiny be decided by this election? Many U.S. government observers think so. Disasters: Earthquakes and natural disasters are increasing. There is also growing unrest at some of the planet's largest volcanic systems. Will 2012 bring even more ominous threats from mother nature? 2011 is already one of the costliest years for natural disasters on record. Food production and distribution is also under growing threat from natural disasters and extreme weather events, just as the planet's population exceeds 7 billion people. Economic crisis: The Eurozone and U.S. sovereign debt crisis is expected to grow dramatically worse in 2012 as debt levels among Western nations continues to soar. As bad as 2011 was, 2012 may push the world into even more adverse uncharted economic territory. Japan, the Eurozone, and even the U.S. is struggling with massive deficits as the economy deteriorates, unemployment rises, and natural disasters increase. The U.S. federal debt could exceed $17 trillion dollars by the end of 2012. Anarchy: Social unrest is unraveling absolutism in the Middle East and installing theocracies in its place just as the Eurozone debt crisis is deposing prime ministers in Europe. Sectarian violence and civil war is also likely to increase in Muslim countries where the the power structure is under threat from fundamentalist insurgency. Also expect even more civil unrest around the world in 2012 as governments crumble, scandals increase, and austerity measures begin to take bite to save countries from economic ruin.


Global economy at the tipping point

By Annalyn Censky @CNNMoney November 9, 2011

"The global economy has entered a dangerous and uncertain phase," IMF head Christine Lagarde said in Beijing Wednesday.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Europe is heading for recession. China is battling its own economic demons. And with the United States also facing problems at home (9% unemployment anyone?), it's hardly in a position to help.

Without a white knight (The antichrist?) to step in and save the day, will we all go down together? - -

(Problem-Reaction-Solution is a variation on the classic Machiavellian fabricated external-enemy strategy for manipulation of public opinion and society, usually by the government. [1] The general theory is based on the Hegelian Dialectic method thesis, antithesis, synthesis. -

Definition - - Problem-Reaction-Solution is defined as the strategy of creating a crisis (the problem), waiting for a call for action to resolve the crisis (the reaction), then taking action (the solution), supposedly in response, which actually furthers a hidden agenda, usually gaining power. - - This is often cited as: - - 1. The government creates or exploits a problem, blaming it on others. - 2. The people react by asking the government for help, willing to give up their rights. - 3. The government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis.) -

"The global economy has entered a dangerous and uncertain phase," cautioned International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde this morning in Beijing.

"If we do not act, and act together, we could enter a downward spiral of uncertainty, financial instability and a collapse in global demand," she said. "Ultimately, we could face a lost decade of low growth and high unemployment."

Some evidence shows we could already be past that point.

Tuesday, the Conference Board warned world economic growth will remain below its potential for many years to come. Growth is likely to slow to just 3.2% next year, then pick up slightly for a few years, before falling to just 2.7% per year between 2017 and 2025.

"I think Lagarde is being optimistic," said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist for IHS Global Insights. "We're headed for a lost decade anyway."

Even China and India, which have recently enjoyed rapid economic growth, are worried. Following their fifth so-called financial dialogue on Wednesday, the two countries issued a strongly worded statement diagnosing the global economy as in a "critical phase" and urging "strengthening of international policy."

Two weeks ago, European leaders agreed to boost the lending power of the region's bailout fund. But that's done little to boost confidence. Since then, Italy's borrowing costs have surged and Greece's debt crisis has remained in the spotlight, forcing prime ministers of both countries to agree to resign from their positions down the road.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is still struggling to recover from its own financial meltdown three years ago. While company earnings have bounced back, Americans are seeing little relief amid 9% unemployment and a still-slumped housing market.

As headlines focus on the bickering between presidential candidates, Congress has yet to pass a meaningful jobs bill and the Super Committee is fast approaching its deadline to agree on $1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

Though most economists are not predicting another recession for the United States, not enough is known about American exposure to Europe's debt crisis.

"If we learned anything in 2008, it's that we don't know what we don't know about the linkages," said Carl Weinberg, chief economist for High Frequency Economics. "We think that American banks are adequately capitalized to withstand any shock from Europe, but we are also watching for those unexpected results."

The one bright spot in this mess seems to be China's still robust economic growth. But even the world's second largest economy is not insulated completely from external shocks.

Weaker demand from abroad is already hurting Chinese exports and is expected to continue to weigh on their manufacturers. Meanwhile, the Chinese government continues to struggle with a delicate balance of letting the air out of its real estate market, without stifling growth.

The silver lining here, is that new data out Wednesday show inflation has started to cool in China. That could give policymakers more leeway to focus their efforts on stimulating their economy in the event of a global slowdown.

But don't expect the Chinese to rush to everyone else's rescue.

"China is not going to bail out Europe. It's not going to bail out the U.S.," said Behravesh.

If leaders in Europe and the U.S. can't swiftly solve their own problems, how can anyone expect agreement across the continents?

"You should not expect miracles in international coordination," said Bart van Ark, chief economist of The Conference Board.

London Telegraph

Eurozone collapse 'will send continent into depression'

Bruno Waterfield

November 11, 2011

The collapse of the eurozone would cause a crash that would instantly wipe out half of the value of Europe's economy, plunging the continent into a depression as deep as the 1930s slump, the president of the European Commission has warned.

José Manuel Barroso issued his chilling warning as France began diplomatic overtures to create a eurozone vanguard, potentially with fewer than the 17 existing members of the single currency.

Mr Barroso said that if the euro area of the 17 member states or the wider - 27-country EU broke apart the estimated initial cost would be up to 50 per cent of European gross domestic product. "It would jeopardise the future prosperity of the next generation. That is the threat that hangs over us," he said.

In a speech in Berlin aimed at tackling any support for a smaller elite eurozone comprised of the EU's strongest economies, Mr Barroso warned that the consequence of a split would be a million lost jobs in Germany.

The Guardian

Germany and France begin talks to break up eurozone

Larry Elliott, Heather Stewart and John Hooper - - November 10, 2011

Fears that Europe's sovereign debt crisis was spiralling out of control have intensified as political chaos in Athens and Rome, and looming recession, created panic on world markets.

Reports emerging from Brussels said that Germany and France had begun preliminary talks on a break-up of the eurozone, amid fears that Italy would be too big to rescue.

Despite Silvio Berlusconi's announcement that he would step down as prime minister once austerity measures were pushed through parliament, a collapse of investor confidence in the eurozone's third-biggest economy sent interest rates in Italy to the levels that triggered bailouts in Portugal, Greece and Ireland.


Compared to this, Greece was just a sideshow. Italy could blow Europe to pieces

By Daniel Hannan

10th November 2011

Watching the cost of servicing Italy's debt surge past the level that triggered bailouts in Greece, Ireland and Portugal, I found one of Kipling's verses forming in my mind:

This is midnight -- let no star - Delude us -- dawn is very far. - This is the tempest long foretold -- - Slow to make head but sure to hold.

Italy is the third-largest economy in the EU, and the eighth largest on the planet. Its outstanding debt of €1.9 trillion (£1.6 trillion) accounts for 25 per cent of all the debt in the eurozone.

Too big to fail? Italy is the third-largest economy in Europe

The Greek crisis was never a serious threat to Europe. Greece accounts for less than two per cent of the EU's economy. A default by Athens could be managed as a controlled explosion. A default by Rome, on the other hand, would blow the European economy to smithereens.

The calamity now overtaking Italy was ordained when the euro was launched. In order to qualify, governments were supposed to have brought their total debts below  60 per cent of GDP; Italy's was 114 per cent.

Several economists pointed out at the time that admitting the Italians would be like inviting an elephant into a coracle but, as usual in the EU, political dreams trumped economic reality.

For several years, markets pretended that all debts in the eurozone were equally safe -- that Italian and German debt, for example, were interchangeable. Eventually, though, the realisation sank in: the Italian economy was not growing, which meant its debt, in relation to its GDP, was as high as ever.

The loans that had been pressed on the Italian treasury over decades suddenly looked vulnerable.

Yesterday, panic set in. Those who have lent money to Italy are no longer confident that they will get it back. Naturally enough, they demand a higher interest rate to compensate for the risk of losing their loans. Their fear thus risks becoming self-fulfilling, as Italy is unable to afford the interest rate. The prospect of Italy defaulting on its debts looms.

Those commentators who imagine that we Eurosceptics are enjoying our told-you-so moment couldn't be more wrong. The eurozone takes 40 per cent of Britain's exports, and comprises our friends and allies. A recession there will mean another downturn here.


There are no good outcomes now, only gradations of failure. We can at least, though, pick the least bad of the three available options.

Option One is a disorderly default. Italy is beginning to experience a run on its banks as its citizens, anticipating a devaluation, move their savings abroad. The government might find itself unable to meet basic costs, and so have to welch on its outstanding debts.

Since no one would then lend it money, it would have to print lots of lira very quickly to pay the salaries of its soldiers, policemen and other vital public servants. The knock-on consequences for the eurozone and, indeed, for everyone else, would be disastrous, setting off a chain of bankruptcies across Europe

Option Two is a controlled departure. Italy would leave the euro and devalue its currency. Goods and services would become cheaper, boosting Italian exports and helping the economy to grow again.

Toppled: George Papandreou was forced to back down on his promise of a referendum on the Greek bailout package

This option might involve Italy writing off some of the debt it owes, but the default would be partial. If, by contrast, Italy remains in the euro, a full default -- that is, writing off all debts -- is hard to avoid.

Option Three is to struggle on as now. The rest of the eurozone will keep flinging money at Rome, the European  Central Bank will purchase even more Italian bonds, and the IMF will step in with a loan. Option Three is the worst, because it prolongs and magnifies the problem. For more than two years, now, EU leaders have pursued this course, forcing new loans on to countries that couldn't meet their existing liabilities, treating the debt crisis with more debt.

When their strategy fails, they accelerate it. What was initially sold as a bridging loan to tide Greece over for a few months has become a runaway train: bailout-and-borrow, bailout and-borrow, bailout-and-borrow.

So determined are EU leaders to pursue this course that they are prepared to remove elected prime ministers who stand in the way. When George Papandreou dared to suggest allowing the Greek people to vote on the loans-for-austerity package, he was toppled. The same thing happened to Silvio Berlusconi when he declared, six days ago, that 'since the euro was adopted, most Italians have become poorer'.


His statement was, of course, true. But Brussels functionaries understood Berlusconi's game. What he was effectively saying was: 'I don't especially care whether we leave the euro; if you Eurocrats want to save it, you come up with the cash.'

Five days later, he had announced his resignation. The leader who had survived allegations of tax fraud, procuring underage sex, corruption with Mafia links, who had shrugged off investigations by 789 prosecutors and magistrates (by his own count), was brought down by the EU machine.

That's how much the survival of the euro matters in Brussels.So why is the EU bent on pursuing a policy which is impoverishing its peoples? Why is it inflicting deflation, destitution and emigration on its southern members? Why is it lumbering its northern states with massive tax rises?

Resignation: Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi will leave his post after austerity reforms have been passed

Because, for supporters of the single currency, this was never about economics. As the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, told her MPs last week: 'If the euro fails, Europe fails. We have an historical obligation to protect by all means Europe's unification process begun by our forefathers after centuries of hatred and bloodshed.'

Put in those terms, of course, the issue is literally beyond argument. If you oppose the euro, according to Mrs Merkel, you're in favour of war.

By any objective measure, though, the euro is stoking rather than soothing national antagonisms. The relationship between Greece and Germany is now worse than at any time since -- well, since World War II.

What should the EU do instead? It should oversee the phased unbundling of the single currency.

Supporters of the project insist a euro break-up would be technically unfeasible, but this is nonsense. All the countries in the single currency have recently managed to change their currency: that's how they joined the euro in the first place.

It works just as well when leaving a currency union. I asked a Slovakian economist how his country had managed the transition when it divorced the Czech Republic in 1993.

'Very easily,' he replied. 'One Friday, after the markets had closed, the head of our central bank phoned round all the banks and told them that, over the weekend, someone from his office would come round with a stamp to put on all their banknotes, and that, until the new notes and coins came into production, those stamped notes would be Slovakia's legal tender. On the Monday morning, we had a new currency.'

The protestations that it cannot be done will strike British ears as familiar: it's precisely what we were told about the Exchange Rate Mechanism, a forerunner of the euro in which a basket of European currencies shadowed the Deutschmark and which Britain joined in 1990.


Remember how the Establishment lined up to tell us that leaving the ERM would wreck our economy? Remember John Major's claim that it would be 'the inflationary option, the devaluer's option, a betrayal of the future of our country'?

In the event, our recovery began on the day we left it in September 1992 after two years' membership, and continued for a decade-and-a-half before Gordon Brown blew it away.

Members of the eurozone are, of course, free to make their own mistakes. If they are prepared to pay in order to keep the project going -- or, more precisely, to make their peoples pay, since Eurocrats are exempt from national taxes -- that is their right. What is unaccept-able is to send Britain the bill.

We are already on the hook for £12.5billion in the Greek, Irish and Portuguese bailouts -- a sum equivalent to £500 for every household in the land. If we pursue the same failed policy in Italy, the sums will be far higher. We could end up contributing the £40 billion the Treasury plans to commit to the IMF.

All to prop up a currency which we didn't join. We surely should not pay for the privilege of impoverishing our neighbours.

Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP for South East England


Barclays Says Italy Is Finished: "Mathematically Beyond Point Of No Return"

Zero Hedge - Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Euphoria may have returned briefly courtesy of yet another promise for a resignation that will likely not be effectuated for weeks or months, if at all, and already someone has done the math on what the events in the past several days reveal for Italy. That someone is Barcalys, the math is not pretty, and the conclusion is that "Italy is now mathematically beyond point of no return."

Summary from Barclays Capital inst sales:

  1. At this point, it seems Italy is now mathematically beyond point of no return -

  2. While reforms are necessary, in and of itself not be enough to prevent crisis -

  3. Reason? Simple math - growth and austerity not enough to offset cost of debt -

  4. On our ests, yields above 5.5% is inflection point where game is over -

  5. The danger:high rates reinforce stability concerns, leading to higher rates -

  6. and deeper conviction of a self sustaining credit event and eventual default -

  7. We think decisions at eurozone summit is step forward but EFSF not adequate

  8. Time has run out - policy reforms not sufficient to break neg mkt dynamics -

  9. Investors do not have the patience to wait for austerity, growth to work -

  10. And rate of change in negatives not enuff to offset slow drip of positives -

  11. Conclusion: We think ECB needs to step up to the plate, print and buy bonds -

  12. At the moment ECB remains unwilling to be lender last resort on scale needed -

  13. But frankly will have hand forced by market given massive systemic risk

the Daily Kos

Why Iceland Should Be in the News, But Is Not

By Deena Stryker

An Italian radio program's story about Iceland's on-going revolution is a stunning example of how little our media tells us about the rest of the world. Americans may remember that at the start of the 2008 financial crisis, Iceland literally went bankrupt.  The reasons were mentioned only in passing, and since then, this little-known member of the European Union fell back into oblivion.

As one European country after another fails or risks failing, imperiling the Euro, with repercussions for the entire world, the last thing the powers that be want is for Iceland to become an example. Here's why:

Five years of a pure neo-liberal regime had made Iceland, (population 320 thousand, no army), one of the richest countries in the world. In 2003 all the country's banks were privatized, and in an effort to attract foreign investors, they offered on-line banking whose minimal costs allowed them to offer relatively high rates of return. The accounts, called IceSave, attracted many English and Dutch small investors.  But as investments grew, so did the banks' foreign debt.  In 2003 Iceland's debt was equal to 200 times its GNP, but in 2007, it was 900 percent.  The 2008 world financial crisis was the coup de grace. The three main Icelandic banks, Landbanki, Kapthing and Glitnir, went belly up and were nationalized, while the Kroner lost 85% of its value with respect to the Euro.  At the end of the year Iceland declared bankruptcy.

Contrary to what could be expected, the crisis resulted in Icelanders recovering their sovereign rights, through a process of direct participatory democracy that eventually led to a new Constitution. But only after much pain.

Geir Haarde, the Prime Minister of a Social Democratic coalition government, negotiated a two million one hundred thousand dollar loan, to which the Nordic countries added another two and a half million. But the foreign financial community pressured Iceland to impose drastic measures. The FMI and the European Union wanted to take over its debt, claiming this was the only way for the country to pay back Holland and Great Britain, who had promised to reimburse their citizens.

Protests and riots continued, eventually forcing the government to resign. Elections were brought forward to April 2009, resulting in a left-wing coalition which condemned the neoliberal economic system, but immediately gave in to its demands that Iceland pay off a total of three and a half million Euros.  This required each Icelandic citizen to pay 100 Euros a month (or about $130) for fifteen years, at 5.5% interest, to pay off a debt incurred by private parties vis a vis other private parties. It was the straw that broke the reindeer's back.

What happened next was extraordinary. The belief that citizens had to pay for the mistakes of a financial monopoly, that an entire nation must be taxed to pay off private debts was shattered, transforming the relationship between citizens and their political institutions and eventually driving Iceland's leaders to the side of their constituents. The Head of State, Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, refused to ratify the law that would have made Iceland's citizens responsible for its bankers' debts, and accepted calls for a referendum.

Of course the international community only increased the pressure on Iceland. Great Britain and Holland threatened dire reprisals that would isolate the country.  As Icelanders went to vote, foreign bankers threatened to block any aid from the IMF.  The British government threatened to freeze Icelander savings and checking accounts. As Grimsson said: "We were told that if we refused the international community's conditions, we would become the Cuba of the North.  But if we had accepted, we would have become the Haiti of the North." (How many times have I written that when Cubans see the dire state of their neighbor, Haiti, they count themselves lucky.)

In the March 2010 referendum, 93% voted against repayment of the debt.  The IMF immediately froze its loan.  But the revolution (though not televised in the United States), would not be intimidated. With the support of a furious citizenry, the government launched civil and penal investigations into those responsible for the financial crisis.  Interpol put out an international arrest warrant for the ex-president of Kaupthing, Sigurdur Einarsson, as the other bankers implicated in the crash fled the country.

But Icelanders didn't stop there: they decided to draft a new constitution that would free the country from the exaggerated power of international finance and virtual money.  (The one in use had been written when Iceland gained its independence from Denmark, in 1918, the only difference with the Danish constitution being that the word 'president' replaced the word 'king'.)

To write the new constitution, the people of Iceland elected twenty-five citizens from among 522 adults not belonging to any political party but recommended by at least thirty citizens. This document was not the work of a handful of politicians, but was written on the internet. The constituent's meetings are streamed on-line, and citizens can send their comments and suggestions, witnessing the document as it takes shape. The constitution that eventually emerges from this participatory democratic process will be submitted to parliament for approval after the next elections.

Some readers will remember that Iceland's ninth century agrarian collapse was featured in Jared Diamond's book by the same name. Today, that country is recovering from its financial collapse in ways just the opposite of those generally considered unavoidable, as confirmed yesterday by the new head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde to Fareed Zakaria. The people of Greece have been told that the privatization of their public sector is the only solution.  And those of Italy, Spain and Portugal are facing the same threat.

They should look to Iceland. Refusing to bow to foreign interests, that small country stated loud and clear that the people are sovereign.

That's why it is not in the news anymore.

Stryker is an American writer that has lived in six different countries, is fluent in four languages and a published writer in three. She looks at the big picture from a systems and spiritual point of view.



Israel may launch strike on Iran as soon as next month to prevent development of nuclear weapons

Senior Foreign Office figure: 'We're expecting something as early as Christmas, or very early in the new year'

By Tim Shipman

10th November 2011

Israel will launch military action to prevent Iran developing a nuclear weapon as soon as Christmas, intelligence chiefs have warned.

A report by a UN watchdog into Iran's nuclear ambitions 'completely discredits' the Islamic nation's protestations of innocence, according to Foreign Secretary William Hague.

The International Atomic Energy Agency found that Iran is developing a nuclear test facility, nuclear detonators and computer modelling for a nuclear warhead that would fit on an existing missile.

Sources say the understanding at the top of the British Government is that Israel will attempt to strike against the nuclear sites 'sooner rather than later' - with logistical support from the U.S.

A senior Foreign Office figure has revealed that ministers have been told to expect Israeli military action, adding: 'We're expecting something as early as Christmas, or very early in the new year.'

Officials believe President Barack Obama would have to support the Israelis or risk losing vital Jewish-American support in the next presidential election.

In recent weeks, Ministry of Defence sources confirmed that contingency plans have been drawn up in the event that the UK decided to support military action.

But the source ruled out direct British support, adding: 'Of course we are not in favour of Iran developing a bomb - but do we think they'd use it: no.

'The bigger concern is it will be impossible to stop Saudi Arabia and Turkey from developing their own weapons.'

Mr Hague said Britain would push for more sanctions against Tehran when the IAEA committee meets later this month.

Meeting the masses: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad waves to supporters while visiting the city of Shahrekord, of Tehran. He vowed that Iran will not retreat 'one iota' from its nuclear programme


Russia issues stark warning against attack on Iran

IAEA expected to say that Iran is nearing nuclear capability, according to report


Russia and Iran warned the West against a military strike on the Islamic Republic Monday, saying an attack targeting its nuclear program would lead to civilian casualties and create new threats to global security.

The separate remarks by foreign ministers Sergei Lavrov of Russia and Ali Akbar Salehi of Iran coincided with speculation about a potential Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear sites ahead of the release of a U.N. watchdog report expected to cast more light on suspected military aspects to Iran's nuclear activity.

"This would be a very serious mistake fraught with unpredictable consequences," Lavrov told a news conference in Moscow when asked about reports that Israel was preparing for a possible pre-emptive military strike.

In St. Petersburg, Russia, Salehi said Iran "condemns any threat of military attack on independent states."

Salehi spoke alongside Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and other ministers from nations in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a regional grouping dominated by Russia and China in which Iran has observer status.

Germany's Foreign Ministry also rejected military action against Iran, suggesting that the dispute should be resolved through diplomatic pressure instead. "This continues to be the key way to move forward in dealing with this threat to regional and international security," a spokesman said.

Foreign assistance - New disclosures in the IAEA report provide details on an apparent secret research program that was more ambitious, more organized and more successful than commonly suspected, The Washington Post said.

The paper said the report's findings provide new details on the role played by a former Soviet weapons scientist who allegedly tutored Iranians on high-precision detonators of the kind used to trigger a nuclear chain reaction.

Technology linked to Pakistani and North Korean experts also helped Iran advance its capabilities, the officials and experts told the paper.

The report says the intelligence also supports concerns that Iran continued to conduct weapons-related nuclear research after 2003, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Iran halted the research in response to international pressure.

"The program never really stopped," David Albright, a former IAEA official who reviewed the agency's findings, told the paper.

"After 2003, money was made available for research in areas that sure look like nuclear weapons work but were hidden within civilian institutions," Albright told the paper.

Western powers believe Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear energy program.

Tehran denies wanting atom bombs, saying it is enriching uranium only to power reactors for electricity generation.

The United States, the European Union and their allies have imposed economic sanctions on Tehran for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment program.

The United States and Israel have repeatedly hinted at the possible use of force against Iranian nuclear sites, eliciting threats of fierce retaliation from the Islamic Republic.

Based on the intelligence the U.N. agency has concluded that Iran "has sufficient information to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device" using highly enriched uranium as its fissile core, Albright said.

Albright described some of the highlights at a private conference of intelligence professionals last week, the newspaper said, adding that it had obtained slides from the presentation and a summary of Albright's notes.

Russia and China grudgingly supported four previous rounds of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. But the two veto-wielding U.N. Security Council members have made clear any new sanctions would be an extremely tough sell.

Moscow is calling for a step-by-step process under which the existing sanctions would be eased in return for actions by Iran to dispel concerns over its nuclear program, which Tehran says is purely peaceful.

Russia, which has built Iran's first nuclear power station, has vociferously opposed any military action.

"There is no military solution to the Iranian nuclear problem as there is no military solution to any other problem in the modern world," said Lavrov.

"This is confirmed to us every day when we see how the problems of the conflicts around Iran are being resolved -- whether Iraq or Afghanistan or what is happening in other countries in the region. Military intervention only leads to many times more deaths and human suffering."

Reflecting regional fear of blowback from any attack on Iran, a government official in Kuwait said the Gulf state would not let its territory be used to launch attacks on any of its neighbors. Kuwait was a launchpad for the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and lies a short distance from Iran across the Gulf.

Salehi echoed Lavrov's words hours later.


Why Iran's Top Leaders Believe That the End of Days Has Come

By Joel C. Rosenberg

Published November 07, 2011

Why would Iran authorize a major terrorist operation on American soil? Skeptics say the much-discussed "foiled" Iranian plot makes no sense. We will know soon enough if the Feds have sufficient evidence related to this specific plot. But Iranian leaders may, in fact, have a motive to accelerate direct attacks on the U.S.: Shia Islamic eschatology, or "End Times" theology.

Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are convinced that the End of Days has come. They believe the Shia messiah known as the "Twelfth Imam" or the "Mahdi" will appear soon to establish a global Islamic kingdom known as the caliphate. 

What's more, they believe the way to hasten the coming of the Twelfth Imam is to annihilate Israel (which they call the "Little Satan"), and the United States (which they call the "Great Satan"). We should not, therefore, be surprised that Iran is probing for weaknesses in American intelligence and homeland security.

Khamenei told Iranians in July 2010 that he personally met with the Twelfth Imam. He also claimed to be the personal representative of the Mahdi on earth, and said all Muslims must "obey him." Meanwhile, Western intelligence agencies say he continues to work with Ahmadinejad and the Iranian military to develop nuclear warheads and the ballistic missiles to deliver them.

Much of the media has focused on Iran's threats to wipe Israel "off the map." But journalists have generally ignored the fact that the Iranian regime is equally determined to destroy the United States. 

On October 26, 2005, for example, Ahmadinejad said, "God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism." 

On June 2, 2008, Ahmadinejad said, "Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come, and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started."

Iran's leaders actually believe that the destruction of the U.S. is foreordained, just as the Soviet Union's implosion was predetermined. They see U.S. economic weakness as a sign that the end of America is near. 

Other signs include President Obama's political weakness in the polls and his unwillingness to use force against Iran even after the Iranian murder of Americans in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon over the years.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sees the gravity of the situation. "The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons," he told The Atlantic magazine in March 2009. "You don't want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs," Netanyahu said of the Iranian leadership. "When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran."'

Unfortunately, Netanyahu hasn't seen the Obama administration strengthen the American economy or take decisive measures to stop Iran from getting the Bomb, and he is getting anxious. "The international community must stop Iran before it's too late," Netanyahu warned in his United Nations speech last month. "If Iran is not stopped, we will all face the specter of nuclear terrorism, and the Arab Spring could soon become an Iranian winter....The world around Israel is definitely becoming more dangerous."

To truly understand how just how dangerous Iran's regime really is, American leaders need to better understand Shia eschatology.

The Twelfth Imam was a real, flesh-and-blood person who, like the eleven Shia leaders who went before him, was an Arab male, a direct descendent of the founder of Islam, and was thought to have been divinely chosen to be the spiritual guide and ultimate human authority of the Muslim people. His actual name was Muhammad Ibn Hasan Ibn Ali, and it is generally believed by Shias that he was born in Samarra, Iraq, in AD 868.

At a very young age, however, Ali vanished from society. Some say he was four years old, while others say five and some say six. Some believe he fell into a well in Samarra but his body was never recovered. Others believe the Mahdi's mother placed him in the well to prevent evil rulers from capturing him and killing him, and that little Ali subsequently became supernaturally invisible. This is where the term "Hidden Imam" is derived, as Shias believe that Ali is not dead but has simply been hidden from the sight of mankind - Shias refer to this as "occultation" - until the End of Days, when Allah will reveal him once again.

Shias believe the Mahdi will return in the last days to establish righteousness, justice, and peace. When he comes, they say, the Mahdi will bring Jesus with him. Jesus will be a Muslim and will serve as his deputy, not as King of kings and Lord of lords as the Bible teaches, and he will force non-Muslims to choose between following the Mahdi or death.

By most accounts, Shia scholars believe the Mahdi will first appear in Mecca and conquer the Middle East, then establish the headquarters of his global Islamic government--or caliphate--in Iraq. But there is not universal agreement. Some believe he will emerge from the well at the Jamkaran Mosque in Iran and then travel to Mecca and Iraq. Some say that he will conquer Jerusalem before establishing his caliphate in Iraq. Others believe Jerusalem must be conquered as a prerequisite to his return.

None of this is actually written in the Kuran, and Sunnis reject this eschatology. 

But one thing that is fairly well agreed upon among devout "Twelvers" is that the Mahdi will end apostasy and purify corruption within Islam. He is expected to conquer the Arabian Peninsula, Jordan, Syria, "Palestine," Egypt and North Africa, and eventually the entire world. During this time, he and Jesus will kill between 60 and 80 percent of the world's population, specifically those who refuse to convert to Islam.

Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini, a professor at the Religious Learning Centre in Qom, wrote a noteworthy book entitled, Al-Imam al-Mahdi, the Just Leader of Humanity, describing the connection between Shia eschatology and Iranian foreign policy. "Those who persist in their disbelief and wickedness shall be killed by the soldiers of the Mahdi," wrote Amini. "The only victorious government in the entire world will be that of Islam, and people will devotedly endeavor to protect it. Islam will be the religion of everyone, and will enter all the nations of the world. . . .The Mahdi will offer the religion of Islam to the Jews and the Christians; if they accept it they will be spared, otherwise they will be killed. . . . It seems unlikely that this catastrophe can be avoided. . . . Warfare and bloodshed [are] inevitable. . . The Imam of the Age and his supporters will overcome the forces of disbelief and godless materialism by undertaking jihad."

In light of such End Times theology, we shouldn't be surprised that the Iranian regime is taking a more aggressive posture towards the U.S. and Israel. Instead, we should be taking decisive measures to prevent Iran from blind-siding us in the not-too-distant future with a nuclear terrorist attack or even an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack.

Unfortunately, most of Washington and the world's leadership is asleep to the prospect of this gathering storm. It is time to wake up, before it's too late.


Iran Threatens 'Street War' in U.S. If Attacked

Gavriel Queenann - Arutz Sheva - November 8, 2011

The head of the Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission said on Tuesday that Iran would start a 'street war' in Tel Aviv if its nuclear program was attacked.

"Israel is not big enough to launch a military strike on Iran, but if it takes such a foolish decision, the Iranian military will fight with the Zionist soldiers in Tel Aviv streets... and will force them out of the Palestinian soil," Seyed Hossein Naqavi said.

Naqavi also warned, should Tehran's nuclear program be attacked, the battlefield won't be in Iran, but "the entirety of Europe and the US."

"Iranian forces will fight with the enemies with maximum might and power all throughout the European and US soil, if Iran comes under attack," he reiterated.

Naqavi also responded to reports Britain might strike Iran's nuclear sites, saying "a look at the history reveals that the British regime has been using threat, intimidation, terror and colonialism all throughout the last 500 years."

"Now a country with such a long record of crimes and colonialist actions should know very well that the Islamic Republic enjoys a high military capability today," he added.

Naqavi's remarks have become a part of Tehran's mantra of threatening counter-strikes as international criticism of its nuclear aspirations continues to mount.

A recent indictment by the United States of two members of Iran's foreign covert action Quds force for allegedly plotting the assassination of the Saudi Arabian ambassador to Washington has served to fuel efforts to isolate the Islamic Republic.

Also, the International Atomic Energy Agency has released a report asserting that Iran is not only on the verge of being able to build an atomic bomb, but cited western and Israeli intelligence reports Tehran had actively sought nuclear weapons technology.

Tehran's bellicose rhetoric has reached a new zenith, however, amid reports both Britian and Israel were considering independent strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.

"Iran does not stand alone in the struggle against Israel," Naqavi insisted, "Israel will be destroyed by the allies of the Islamic Republic if she so much as tries to attack us."

However, despite Iran's threats of a 'street war' in Tel Aviv, Tehran's ability to strike Israel directly is limited. While the Islamic Republic does possess a small number of long-range missiles capable of striking Israel, its air force and army would have to move through other countries in which large US and western forces are operating.

Additionally, tensions between Shiite Persian Iran and the predominantly Sunni Arab world - especially Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies - have limited Tehran's strategic latitude. Analysts say Iran would have to strike Israel by proxy, relying on Syria, Hizbullah, and various terror groups like Hamas who are at war with Israel.

Observers note, however, that Iran may not be able to rely on its regional allies to take significant action on its behalf.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is occupied with seven months of unrest and a growing armed resistance to his regime; while Hizbullah has found itself under increasing fire from Lebanon's main street for maintaining its arms and militia's in the name of  'resistance' - which has drawn Beirut into costly wars with Israel.

Even terror groups in Israel that Iran has sought to turn into proxies by funding their operations may prove unreliable. Hamas, a primary Iranian beneficiary, has consistently sought to avoid a serious Israeli incursion into its Gaza stronghold - which analysts say would be the likely result of meaningful action taken on Tehran's behalf.

War With Iran - Webster Tarpley


The Barnes Review

1972 Plot to Genocide the Irish


The plan would have ordered the forcible removal of 200,000 to 300,000 Irish Catholics out of Northern Ireland and into the Republic of Ireland. Protestants would also be forced to migrate. A total of one-third of Northern Ireland's population would be shuffled around.

The appendix states categorically that such a plan could not be accomplished peacefully and would require complete ruthlessness "in the use of force."

  - The document, Redrawing the Border and Population

Transfer, was signed by Sir Burke Trend, Heath's cabinet secretary (in office from 1963 to 1973). It was written jointly by representatives of the foreign secretary, the defence secretary and the British secretary for Northern Ireland, among others.

Evidently, the British rulers did not bother consulting with Ireland's prime minister, Jack Lynch (served 1966-1977), about the drastic measure, nor with Catholic or Protestant leaders.

The officials advised Heath: "We have, as requested, considered the possibility of redrawing the border with the republic and effecting compulsory transfers of population within Northern Ireland or from Northern Ireland to the republic."

Under the terms of this scheme, which the drafters said should be considered only in case of an "extremely grave emergency," London's ruling class intended to cede some territory on the border to the Irish Republic, from which land some 200,000 Protestants would then be moved into what remained of British Northern Ireland. At the same time, some 300,000 Catholics would be forced into the Republic of Ireland.

British officials noted that "military planning [was] well in hand" for the purpose of effecting the dual transfers, but recognized that there was the possibility of "outrage from the United States and other British allies" and that the scheme would be problematic in terms of implementation.

However, the fact remains that the so-called "democratic" government of Britain was actually considering such a plan. The only reason the plan was rejected was due to practical grounds, rather than any principled objection to the forced resettlement of half a million people.

Had the plan been carried out, both the Irish Catholics and the Irish Protestants could have charged the British government with genocide under the terms of the international Genocide Convention. Genocide is defined in the convention as the commission of any of a number of enumerated acts "with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group."

The acts specifically cited in implementing legislation for the convention include killing, inflicting serious bodily injury, or causing mental impairment through torture or drugs of members of the group.

Also cited is the subjection of the victimized group to conditions of life designed to bring about its demise, restricting births within the group or transferring, by force, children of the group to another group.

Certainly, the forced and forced transfer of the Irish people would therefore constitute the crime of genocide.

It is interesting to note that in 1999, the Tony Blair government of Britain faked "outrage" over allegations that the Yugoslavian government of Slobodan Milosevic had drawn up a plan to forcibly relocate Kosovo's ethnic Albanian population.

No evidence of this claimed plan, designated "Operation Horseshoe," was ever presented.

Yet the British ruling class asserted that the very possibility of the existence of such a plan justified NATO's ensuing bombardment of Yugoslavia, which inevitably killed at least 500 civilians (some sources say 1,200 to 5,700).

There has been no call by the present British government for the 1972 British genociders to be held to account.


1. Incidentally, 1972 was the bloodiest year of Northern Ireland's 25-year civil war. On "Bloody Sunday," January 30, British troops shot 27 unarmed civil rights protesters in Derry, 14 of whom died.

MICHAEL COLLINS PIPER is a prolific author, journalist, media critic, talk show host and marketing professional residing in Washington, D.C. He has been active in the Revisionist movement for 28 years.



Rising from beneath the waves: A new Canary Island emerges as underwater volcano hits the surface

Volcano off El Hierro is just 70metres away from the surface and is spewing magma 20metres into the sky

Nearby town is evacuated and ships banned from travelling to the area as strong smell of sulphur fills the air

Explosive plumes and jets have been spotted coming from the volcano for the last month

10th November 2011

A brand new Canary island is emerging from the sea as an underwater volcano bubbles to the surface.

Magma off the Canary Island of El Hierro has been spewing 20 metres high as the sea boils with a smell of sulphur.

As it grows and gets closer to the surface, more and more debris such as stones start to shoot out of the volcano which, until now, has only shown its explosive power below the surface.

It is now just 70 metres from the surface and islanders are already trying to come up with a name for the new island. It is quite close to El Hierro and if it continues to erupt it could eventually meet up with the mainland.

A new island emerges from the sea along the La Restinga's coast off the southern Spanish coast in the Canary Islands

The sea around the volcano is heating up and, at times, has reached as much as 35C

Homes have been evacuated and roads closed on the southern-most Canary Island following a government-issued warning about a possible volcanic eruption while shipping has been banned in the area.

The southern tip of El Hierro was shaken by a 4.3-magnitude quake late on Saturday as the underwater volcano just off the coast started spewing. The island, which has 500 volcanic cones, has already experienced more than 10,000 tremors in the past four months.

Renewed fears of an eruption came as vast quantities of magma - the molten rock from just under the earth's crust - began bubbling into the sea off the port of La Restinga.

Debris was thrown up two 60ft into the air from the area close to the Canary Islands which has had more than 10,000 tremors in four months

It looks like a new island has been formed, but actually this is just molten rock that is being spewed into the air by the exploding volcano

Witnesses said that explosive plumes and jets could be seen on the ocean surface from the underwater volcano which began erupting last month. Some of the material is being ejected as high as 60ft into the air.

The regional government of the Spanish Canary Island issued a 'yellow' volcanic eruption alert - the second on a four-level scale. La Restinga's 600 residents were evacuated last week after the volcanic activity began.

Now new evacuations have been called for people living along the southern end of the island. Authorities have also shut down access to La Restinga.

Ships have been ordered away from waters around the port and aircraft have been banned from flying over the island's southern tip. The regional government of the Canary Islands says scientists have detected airborne volcanic fragments called pyroclasts rising from the sea off La Restinga.

The government said it awaited scientific reports on the danger posed by pyroclasts, but a research vessel that was collecting samples there has been ordered to stop.

Fears of an eruption have been going since the end of July, when El Hierro experienced the first of what has become more than 10,000 tremors - collectively known as an earthquake 'swarm'.

Residents were evacuated from some areas at the end of September when volcanic activity increased to more than 150 tremors in 24 hours. The army was put on standby for a mass evacuation.

Volcano expert Juan Carlos Carrecedo said at the time: 'There is a ball of magma rising to the surface producing a series of ruptures which generate seismic activity.

'We don't know if that ball of magma will break through the crust and cause an eruption.'

But he warned an eruption was possible 'in days, weeks or months'. The last eruption on El Hierro was in 1793 and lasted for a month while the last one in the Canary Islands as a whole took place on the island of La Palma in 1971.

Danger: The dark brown magma off El Hierro, with the town of La Restinga visible on the coast. The town has been evacuated and ships have been banned from the area.

(Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming. Isaiah 14:9)


     "From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?

     Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.

     Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts." (James 4:1-3)

    "War is a racket.  It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope.   It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. It is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes." "WAR IS A RACKET" (Published 1935) By USMC Maj. Gen. Smedley D. Butler (1881-1940)

      No matter what reason they give for making war, whether it is to protect innocent unarmed civilians from their ruthless governments, and dress it up in patriotic fervor, or to make the world safe for democracy, the real reason remains the same as stated above.

      The only true and just government the world will ever know is coming soon, ruled by the Prince of peace, Jesus Christ. Then "they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea." (Isaiah 11:9)

Until next week...

Almondtree Productions

"Riches profit not in the day of wrath: but righteousness delivereth from death."
Proverbs 11:4