Archive

Archive for July, 2012

Video – David Stockman Interview – July 2012

July 26, 2012 2 comments

David Stockman is the former Budget Office Director under Ronald Reagan. 

This interview seemed particularly candid – although I question everything, particularly the motivation for someone like this to go on record.  Perhaps, one let’s his guard down a bit as one grows older.  Question everything.

David Stockman Interview (30 min)

What strikes me about this interview is the predictive value it provides for assessment of what will happen in our country or in the northern hemispher in general:

  • 4:45 mark – Austerity is not voluntary, it is a result of bankruptcy.
  • 8:55 mark – The great “Reset” or “Unwind” will occur from a loss of confidence in the US Treasury market – which is the “heartland” of the entire  global financial complex.
  • 14:00 mark – Our economy is run by a defacto politburo of 12 guys on the FOMC.
  • 19:09 mark – WWI was funded by the Fed which led to govt. defecit spending and the consequent roaring 20s – followed by the crash.
  • Interesting to note it took 13 weeks to triple the US debt

Conclusion:

  • The only way to conform America and it’s gun-toting populace is to bankrupt it.  Austerity is coming.
  • There is absolutely a central conspiracy – what he does not allude to is that the 12 FOMC members work for the private un-disclosed share holders of the Federal Reserve.  (more on that in separate post)
  • War is the next crisis upon which resultant money printing will occur – this is the cover needed to implement this step.  Martial law, capital controls and mass inflation is coming – maybe by 2014.
  • You do not reach positions of political or banking power in the Anglosphere without being an insider – this puts Bernanke and Stockman in the same category.

I think the US will see a bit of a reprieve for the next 1 – 2 years before the great “Reset” – possibly longer.  You can’t turn an oil tanker on a dime, it takes time.  You may even see artificially induced optimism – all of which reinforces normalcy bias, delays action and lures more into becoming debt slaves.  Get out of debt.

Next year (12/23/2013) is the 100 year anniversary of the Federal Reserve Act which established the communist central banking institution which was the instrument used to transform our country.  Bernanke’s term ends January 31, 2014.  That’s 39 days in between those events or 3 x 13 which is highly symbolic.  There is reportedly an astrological “Cardinal Grand Cross” involving mars from 12/23/13 – 1/1/14 which is highly symbolic.  Expect big things around that time and following soon after.

 

The Gentleperson’s Guide To Forum Spies & Disinformation Techniques.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. ~ Matthew 7:20

From:  http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

The Gentleperson’s Guide To Forum Spies


A sends:

The Gentleperson’s Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)

http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5

1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
______________________________________________________________________________________

COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..

There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a ‘uncontrolled forum.’

Technique #1 – ‘FORUM SLIDING’

If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum – it can be quickly removed from public view by ‘forum sliding.’ In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to ‘age.’ Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a ‘forum slide.’ The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a ‘forum slide’ and ‘flush’ the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then ‘replying’ to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting ‘slides’ down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.

Technique #2 – ‘CONSENSUS CRACKING’

A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) is ‘consensus cracking.’ To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made – but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger ‘evidence’ or disinformation in your favour is slowly ‘seeded in.’ Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then ‘abort’ the consensus cracking by initiating a ‘forum slide.’

Technique #3 – ‘TOPIC DILUTION’

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a ‘gossip mode.’ In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to ‘drive in the wedge.’ By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Technique #4 – ‘INFORMATION COLLECTION’

Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a ‘show you mine so me yours’ posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your ‘favourite weapon’ and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite ‘technique of operation.’ From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.

Technique #5 – ‘ANGER TROLLING’

Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes – without the requirement to ‘stage’ a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to ‘lead’ the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you ‘do not care what the authorities think!!’ inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

Technique #6 – ‘GAINING FULL CONTROL’

It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings – and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ‘ultimate victory’ as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a ‘honey pot’ gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.

CONCLUSION

Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
______________________________________________________________________________________

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just isn’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
______________________________________________________________________________________

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.

Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later — an emotional yo-yo.

With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game — where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.

b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to ‘get permission’ or instruction from a formal chain of command.

c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

______________________________________________________________________________________

How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)

One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?

1) The message doesn’t get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.

FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.

Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.

Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.

The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.

This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.

It is the agent’s job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.

In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:

“You’re dividing the movement.”

[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]

This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of “dedication to the cause.” Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she – being truly dedicated to the movement – becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that “on purpose.” It’s amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: “they did that unconsciously… they didn’t really mean it… I can help them by being forgiving and accepting ” and so on and so forth.

The agent will tell the activist:

“You’re a leader!”

This is designed to enhance the activist’s self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.

This is “malignant pseudoidentification.” It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist’s identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist’s vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.

Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.

The goal of the agent is to increase the activist’s general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist’s self-concepts.

The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of “twinship”. It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.

The activist’s “felt quality of perfection” [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim’s own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is “mirroring” them.

The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that “twinship alliances” between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally “lose touch with reality.”

Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be “helpers” endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.

Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist’s narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.

The agent’s expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.

It can usually be identified by two events, however:

First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being “emotionally hooked,” will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.

As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that “the play has ended, the curtain has fallen,” and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.

The fact is, the movement doesn’t need leaders, it needs MOVERS. “Follow the leader” is a waste of time.

A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.

Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:

1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.

Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.

Saboteurs

Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ….

1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
Cool Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone’s time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist’s work.

Provocateurs

1) Want to establish “leaders” to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.

Informants

1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.

Recruiting

Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.

Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.

Surveillance

ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.

At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!

Scare Tactics

They use them.

Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up “exposure,” they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.

This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.

If an agent is “exposed,” he or she will be transferred or replaced.

COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.

The FBI counterintelligence program’s stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. “National Security” means the FBI’s security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people’s civil liberties.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

1. Dummy up. If it’s not reported, if it’s not news, it didn’t happen.

2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the “How dare you?” gambit.

3. Characterize the charges as “rumors” or, better yet, “wild rumors.” If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through “rumors.” (If they tend to believe the “rumors” it must be because they are simply “paranoid” or “hysterical.”)

4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.

5. Call the skeptics names like “conspiracy theorist,” “nutcase,” “ranter,” “kook,” “crackpot,” and, of course, “rumor monger.” Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the “more reasonable” government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own “skeptics” to shoot down.

6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).

7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.

8. Dismiss the charges as “old news.”

9. Come half-clean. This is also known as “confession and avoidance” or “taking the limited hangout route.” This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal “mistakes.” This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.

10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.

11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster “suicide” note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven’t reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.

12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?

13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.

14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as “bump and run” reporting.

15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the “facts” furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.

16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges “expose” scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.

17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, “What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?” Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.


The Biblical View of Self-Defense

Summary:

  1. The Lord gives life.  Man is created in the image of God
  2. Life is precious.  Life is to be protected.  An assault on life is an assault on the Creator.
  3. Premeditated, vengeful or passionate taking of life is never permitted.
  4. Taking of life as a form of civil punishment, in war or self-defense is permitted.
  5. Weapons are tools. 
  6. Weapons are useful, necessary and wise to employ in certain situations.
  7. Violence is ultimately a condition of the heart.  Violence is to be shunned.
  8. The Lord is our Salvation.  There is no peace until the Lord returns – therefore act wisely.

http://www.biblicalselfdefense.com/
 

What does the Bible say about self-defense? What is the Biblical view of using lethal force for self-protection? Can a Christian own a gun? What about assault weapons? The Bible study below attempts to answer these questions using Scripture.
 

The Biblical View of Self-Defense

Introduction

This study examines the Biblical view of self-defense. We’re looking at questions such as, Is it right to employ lethal force to protect the life of yourself and others? Is it right to take measures that might kill an attacker who is wrongfully threatening your life or the life of another?

Self-defense here is defined as “protecting oneself from injury at the hand of others.” Self-defense is not about taking vengeance. Self-defense is not about punishing criminals. Self-defense involves preserving one’s own health and life when it is threatened by the actions of others. When we speak about using potentially lethal force in self-defense, we’re talking about using weapons to protect ourselves and others, even if the weapons used could kill the attacker.

Now why in the world would we take time to look at this subject? First, as Christians, we want to know how to apply the Bible to current issues in society. We live in a country with approximately 250 million guns and approximately 300 million people. Furthermore, in our country, it is estimated that law abiding citizens defend themselves using guns approximately one million to two million times a year. Almost 200,000 people in this state alone have a legal permit to carry a concealed handgun. What does the Bible have to say about that many guns actively being used for self-protection?

We live in a time where the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, current possibilities of economic and societal collapse, and crime have people buying guns and ammunition in large quantities for self protection. What does the Bible say about that? What does the Bible say about so-called “assault weapons”?

As always, we want our hearts and minds to be ruled and informed by Scripture–not by our emotions, not by our experiences, and certainly not by the World. And because the Scriptures have much to say about this topic, it is relevant and worth examining in the Church.

The focus of this study is specific. I am not dealing with whether lethal force can legitimately be used in wartime. I am not dealing with capital punishment. I am not dealing with Biblical principles involved in the American Revolution or the War Between the States.

This study is organized in five sections. First, we will look at the Biblical obligation to preserve life. Secondly, we will look at the Biblical view of bloodshed. Thirdly, we will look at passages dealing with the application of lethal force in self-defense. Fourth, we will look at what the Bible says about possession of weapons and skill in using weapons. Finally, we look at limitations and warnings about self-defense.

The Biblical Obligation to Preserve Life

We begin by first looking at the Biblical obligation to preserve life. The Bible clearly teaches that we must preserve life–our own lives and the lives of other people. 1 Corinthians 6:19f teaches that our bodies are not our own. Rather, our bodies belong to God. Our bodies are His property and so we are not permitted to treat or destroy them as we please:

19 Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own;  20 for ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body. (1Co 6:19-20 ASV)

Not only are we to take care of our bodies and the life contained. We have an obligation to preserve the body and life of other people. Psalm 82:4 even cites an obligation to protect those who are in danger:

Psalm 82:4 Rescue the weak and needy; Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked. 

Consider also Proverbs 24:11, which indicates we have a duty to preserve the lives of those who are harming themselves:

Proverbs 24:11 Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter.

Ezekiel 33 is a well-known passage:

Ezekiel 33 “… 6 ‘But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and a sword comes and takes a person from them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require from the watchman’s hand.’

If you know danger is coming to others, and you deliberately fail to warn the others of the danger, you are guilty of harming the victims. This is not to say that you can make people heed your warning. The surrounding verses also say that if the people refuse to heed the warning of the watchmen, the watchman is not guilty if they are harmed.

We also see principles in Mosaic law teaching that if we fail to guard the lives of others, we are guilty. In Deuteronomy 22:8, if someone falls from your roof, and you failed to install a safety fence around the edge, you would be held liable for the death of that person. Likewise, in Exodus 21:29-31, if a man has an ox which is prone to harm people, the owner is held liable if he fails to confine it and the ox harms or kills others. If the ox harms someone, the negligent owner is fined. If the ox kills someone, the negligent owner is to be put to death.

The principle could hardly be stated more forcefully: you must protect your life and the lives of others.

The Biblical View of Bloodshed

So we see we have a Biblical obligation to protect life. Now let’s look at the Biblical view of bloodshed. When we come to this topic, we enter an area that requires cultural re-calibration. As you read through the Old and New Testaments, it’s very clear that real blood, from animals as well as humans, has a significance not recognized in modern American culture. We must adjust our perception of blood to fit God’s view of blood.

Let’s look at some relevant passages and contrast them with what our culture thinks about bloodshed.

Genesis 9:5-6  

Genesis 9:5-6   5 And surely your blood, the blood of your lives, will I require; At the hand of every beast will I require it. And at the hand of man, even at the hand of every man’s brother, will I require the life of man.  6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: For in the image of God made he man.

These words come in the days of Noah. This is pre-Mosaic law. Don’t think this is obsolete thinking from the Mosaic law.

If a man was killed, the man or beast who caused the death must pay with his/its own life. God says here, “I will require the life of man.” Killing or bloodshed was not always wrong. But when it was wrong, the penalty was ultimate.

We learn here that there is sanctity to spilled blood. Why? Two reasons:

1) Life is precious, and the life is in the blood. When blood is shed, something precious is lost. You might not think blood is precious. We tend to consider blood to be just a “bodily fluid”. It is, however, precious to God.  

2) An attack on man is an attack on the image of God. At a trivial level, you’re messing with sculptures in God’s art studio. In God’s view of bloodshed, it is not merely a physiological event, but it is an assault on the divine image. Why is murder punishable by death? It says, “For in the image of God made He man.”

David

We learn more about God’s view of bloodshed from David. David is a man who loved God and who was loved by God. God raised him up to defend Israel. God sent David to physically fight to defend Israel. When David killed Goliath and Philistines in battles, it was at God’s command. They were righteous killings. Now, with that understanding, let’s look at a few passages:

1 Chronicles 28:3 “But God said to me, ‘You shall not build a house for My name, because you have been a man of war and have shed blood.’

1 Chronicles 22:8 But the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build a house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight.

David wants to build a house for the Lord. This is a good desire. But God says, “David, you are disqualified from doing this.” Why? Not because of the murder of Uriah. Not because of his adultery with Bathsheba. It is because of the wars, and because David had
“shed much blood upon the earth in my sight.” David had killed men in the sight of God, and that disqualified him from this spiritual service.

But wasn’t David obeying God in engaging in these wars? Yes. Did David sin in shedding this blood? No. But shedding blood is so significant to God that David was unfit to for certain “ministries”.

Killing someone is not a light thing. Our culture casually depicts killing. In television, movies, and video games, killing, whether it is legitimate or illegitimate killing, is portrayed with such a frequency that most people are relatively desensitized to it.

Here is the bottom line: Shedding blood, taking the life of another, is a big deal. Your life is forfeit if you wrongfully take the life of another. Even if you take life in a permitted manner, it is serious enough that it can disqualify you from certain types of spiritual service. Even if you are the “good guy”, you are “marked” in the eyes of God. I didn’t say you are guilty. I am merely showing that God viewed Godly David differently because David had killed men (though righteously).

Bloodshed must have the same significance to us. It is never a light thing, even if you are in the right, even if you do it righteously.

As we move on, I want to ask this question: Does the believer have an obligation to resist evil and to protect life? Think about it.

Having looked at the obligation to preserve life, and the Biblical view of bloodshed, let’s now look at passages dealing with self-defense and the use of lethal force.

Old Testament Passages on Lethal Force and Self-defense

We start in the Ten Commandments.

Exodus 20:13 

Exodus 20:13   You shall not murder.

Murder is wrong. This means the premeditated killing of others is wrong. Killing in a fit of emotion is also wrong and is prohibited here. But as we will see later, accidently taking the life of another is wrong. We must do all that we can to avoid it and stay as far away as possible from taking life.

Having stated this prohibition, let’s look at some of the qualifiers to this prohibition.

Leviticus 24:16-17

Leviticus 24:16-17  16 ‘And whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall certainly stone him, the stranger as well as him who is born in the land. When he blasphemes the name of the Lord, he shall be put to death.  17 ‘ Whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death.

From verse 17, we see that “killing” was a crime requiring capital punishment. “Killing” here is defined above. But note that not all killing is wrong. In the immediately preceding verse 16, there were times (such as in civil judgments) in which “killing” was commanded and sanctioned. Blasphemers were to be killed. Likewise, in verse 17 itself it commands that “whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death.” So we already see two qualifiers to the command “thou shalt not kill.”

Killing a man in capital punishment for murder or blasphemy was permissible.

We saw earlier in the examples of the ox and the roof that if you caused someone’s death through your negligence, you were also deserving of capital punishment. So, killing a man for causing negligent death was permissible.

Exodus 21:12-15, Numbers 35:6-34, and Deuteronomy 19:1-13

Exodus 21:12-15, Numbers 35:6-34, and Deuteronomy 19:1-13 give further qualifications to the prohibition to kill. Here the Lord deals with accidental killing where there is no negligence.

God defines accidental killing this way in Deut. 19:4: “…whoever kills his neighbor unintentionally, not having hated him in time past…”. It even gives an example: “as when a man goes to the woods with his neighbor to cut timber, and his hand swings a stroke with the ax to cut down the tree, and the head slips from the handle and strikes his neighbor so that he dies”.

These passages establish the cities of refuge. If you are not familiar with the system described here, I commend it for your study.

God says here, if you commit unintentional killing–that is, if you accidently kill someone, and it is not motivated by anger or hatred, and there is no negligence involved–then your life is forfeited.  You are guilty of killing and could be put to death by the avenger of blood, but there is a way of escape. If you committed accidental killing, and there was no negligence, you would not be put to death if you fled to one of the designated cities of refuge.

This is like house arrest. In fact, it is stronger than house arrest! Number 35:25ff says that if you wander out of the city of refuge, you may be put to death if the avenger of blood finds you. The person guilty of accidental killing had to stay in a city of refuge until the death of the high priest.  Then he was free to return home. (By the way, this is a beautiful picture of Christ’s work—Christ, the city of refuge in whom we must remain hidden! And Christ is the high priest whose death takes our guilt and sets us free.)

It shows that killing someone accidently, with no malice, without negligence, made your life forfeit. It was almost as serious as murder in God’s eyes. God makes a merciful provision, but it did not remove the fact that you were worthy of death for unintentional killing.

Premeditated, intentional killing, as well as killing in passion, was absolutely forbidden. Such a one had no protection in the cities of refuge and was to be handed over and put to death (Ex. 21:14f, Deut. 19:11ff, Num 35:16ff ).

This far, we see that killing someone out of 1) hatred, 2) negligence, or 3) sheer accident were subject to capital punishment. In the case of sheer accident without negligence, God established a network of cities of refuge which made merciful provision to spare the life of the killer. With that important background, let’s look at passages speaking about victims of crime.

Exodus 22:2-3

Exodus 22:2-3  2 “If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.   3If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed.

There are two cases here. In the first case, if someone breaks into your home at night, and you kill him, you are not held guilty of murder. You are not deserving of capital punishment. You do not need to flee to a city of refuge to preserve your life. The understanding is that at night, it is dark, and if someone has invaded your house, they do not announce if they are there merely to steal jewelry and tools. In the dark, you have no way of knowing if someone is coming to kidnap, to rape, or to murder. You are thus blameless if the criminal is killed in that situation. The passage does make it clear that if a man is breaking in at night with the intent of theft or worse (rape, murder, kidnapping, etc.), the defendant can righteously defend himself with lethal force to prevent the commission of the crime).  

In the second case, it says “if the sun has risen on him”, and you kill the intruder, you are guilty of his bloodshed.  The understanding is that in daytime, there is light, and you can discern the intentions of the home invader. The crime in question here is theft (“if the thief“). It is not legitimate to kill someone who is merely stealing your property. In creating civil laws, we see here that not all crimes are worthy of death.

In the daytime, it is assumed that the intention of the intruder can be discerned. If he is a thief, he may not be killed by the defendant. However, if the intruder is there to commit a different crime—assault, murder, kidnapping, rape, etc.—different laws/rules would apply. Though the crime of theft is not worthy of death, kidnapping was worthy of death (Exodus 21:16, Deut. 24:7) as was murder.

Matthew Henry writes: “…if it was in the day-time that the thief was killed, he that killed him must be accountable for it, unless it was in the necessary defense of his own life. … We ought to be tender of the lives even of bad men; the magistrate must afford us redress, and we must not avenge ourselves.”

Now let’s look at two examples of defending your own life against murderers.

Nehemiah 4:8-23

In Nehemiah 4, Israelites have been sent back from captivity to rebuild Jerusalem. They were rebuilding their lives with the sanction of the civil ruler, King Artaxerxes. This was not a wartime scenario. It was closer to a racial integration scenario where racists wanted to kill them. Think of the KKK threatening black homeowners and students. They are surrounded by people who hate them and want to kill them.

These were citizens, not soldiers. Nehemiah 4:13 says that people stationed “people by families” around the city. These were not trained soldiers or law enforcement officers. They were merely concerned residents and settlers—citizens, not professional soldiers or law enforcement agents.

Note that these families were armed, with “their swords, their spears, and their bows.” This is a situation where they are willing to apply lethal force to defend themselves.

Let’s briefly discuss swords, spears, and bows. Swords and daggers killed Ehud, Amasa, and eighty priests. At longer ranges, we know bows and slings killed men like Goliath, King Joram, and King Ahab. Spears killed men like Asahel, Absaolm, the Israelite man and the Midianitish woman, and many others. These are handguns, shotguns, and rifles. These are implements of lethal force. In fact, at close range, a sword is more deadly than a handgun.  These ancient weapons are as deadly as their modern counterparts.

Note that they are carrying these weapons for personal defense and civil defense, and that these are “assault weapons”, namely, the same types of weapons that armies would use for offensive purposes. And why wouldn’t they want assault weapons (for those weapons are the most effective weapons for defending oneself)? Why would you not want to use the best tools available for the task at hand?

Against what are they defending themselves? The crime of unlawful, racist murder. Hate crimes. They are defending their lives and their homes. Nehemiah 4:14 specifically says, “…fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your houses.” It is good and right to defend your family, even using lethal force weapons.

One final observation: In self-defense, these citizens did not merely own weapons. Rather, where they perceived a risk of harm to their persons, they carried their weapons with them, as many people legally carry weapons with them today, for the purpose of self-protection:

Nehemiah 417 Those who were rebuilding the wall and those who carried burdens took their load with one hand doing the work and the other holding a weapon.  18 As for the builders, each wore his sword girded at his side as he built, whilethe trumpeter stood near me. … 21 So we carried on the work with half of them holding spears from dawn until the stars appeared..  23 So neither I, my brothers, my servants, nor the men of the guard who followed me, none of us removed our clothes, each took his weapon even to the water.

If you live somewhere where you have reason to be concerned about crime, this would be similar to legally carrying a weapon to defend your family, even when running daily errands to the store.

Esther 8-9

The final Old Testament passage we examine is in the book of Esther. Here we have a historical example arranged by Divine Providence. In this account, the Jews are under threat of racial violence. The civil authority, King Ahasuerus, grants them legal permission to use lethal force in self-defense:

Esther 8:11-12  11 By these letters the king permitted the Jews who were in every city to gather together and protect their lives — to destroy, kill, and annihilate all the forces of any people or province that would assault them, both little children and women, and to plunder their possessions…

So they have legal sanction to “protect their lives” using ultimate force, much as we do in most parts of this country. They are allowed to “kill and annihilate” in order to “protect their lives.” Now, as people under obligation to obey God, not just stay within the civil laws of Ahasuerus, what do the Jews do with this legal freedom?

Esther 9:1-5…the Jews themselves overpowered those who hated them2 The Jews gathered together in their cities throughout all the provinces of King Ahasuerus to lay hands on those who sought their harm. And no one could withstand them, because fear of them fell upon all people. 5 Thus the Jews defeated all their enemies with the stroke of the sword, with slaughter and destruction,

We see that given legal sanction to defend their lives with lethal force, they do not choose non-violence. Rather, as it says in verse 11, to “protect their lives”, they use the “sword” (verse 5).  Here is another example of widespread use of weapons in self-defense—a non-wartime, non-law enforcement scenario.

New Testament Passages on Lethal Force and Self-defense

At this point, you may be thinking this is all relegated to Old Testament principles and thinking. Let’s turn to some passages in the New Testament dealing with lethal force and self-defense.

Buying and carrying a sword

Luke 22:35-39 And He said to them, “When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?” So they said, “Nothing.”  36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one37 “For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For the things concerning Me have an end.”  38 So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”  39 Coming out, He went to the Mount of Olives, as He was accustomed, and His disciples also followed Him.

Here’s the context. Picture this. Jesus and his disciples have just had communion. They are about to go to a time of prayer in the garden. Jesus says these words to His disciples, and it’s as if they are saying, “Look what we have with us, Lord. Two guns!” Jesus responds, “It is enough.”

If you read commentaries on this passage, there are a number of questions which are not clearly answered. There are questions about the applicability of this passage, of the intent of Jesus, of the meaning of His response.

Whatever your interpretation of this passage, there are a few broad-stroke observations we can make about this passage.

  1. Jesus expected them to have swords and anticipated a time when those without swords would need to acquire them.
  2. Among eleven disciples, they did have two swords–in almost a 1:5 ratio.
  3. Jesus expected them to carry the swords on their person as they traveled from the city to the garden prayer meeting.

It is difficult to make absolute claims beyond these observations, but the observations themselves have significance. Namely, among those closest to Jesus, some carried personal weapons in His presence with His consent to communion and to prayer meetings. We cannot make absolute claims as to the reasons, right or, wrong, for the carriage of these weapons. Perhaps it was in anticipation of trouble from the Jewish leadership. Perhaps it was protection against mere robbers. Paul in 2 Cor. 11:26 cites the “perils of robbers”. Though there are questions we can’t answer, we do know they possessed these weapons, that they carried these weapons, and that Jesus knew and consented. Furthermore, Jesus spoke of some time, present or future, when disciples would need to acquire personal weapons, even more urgently than garments.

The Garden of Gethsemene

Now, the next passage we come to follows these events. Jesus and the disciples are in the garden, and the men come to arrest Jesus. At least two of the disciples are armed, with the knowledge and consent of Jesus. Here is the question: Will they use the sword against the armed multitude which has come against Him? Let’s look at the three passages which recount this event.

Luke 22:49-53 (NAS) 49 And when those who were around Him saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?”  50 And a certain one of them struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his right ear.  51 But Jesus answered and said, “Stop! No more of this.” And He touched his ear and healed him. 52 And Jesus said to the chief priests and officers of the temple and elders who had come against Him, “Have you come out with swords and clubs as against a robber?  53 “While I was with you daily in the temple, you did not lay hands on Me; but this hour and the power of darkness are yours.”

Matthew 26:51-56   51 And suddenly, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword, struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear.  52 But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword53Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels54 “How then could the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must happen thus?”  55 In that hour Jesus said to the multitudes, “Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs to take Me? I sat daily with you, teaching in the temple, and you did not seize Me.  56 “But all this was done that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.”

John 18:10-11   10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.  11 So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?”

In these three passages, you get a sense that Jesus is saying, “Though we have a right to employ our swords in defense of this unrighteous arrest, we are intentionally putting aside our lawful right, and I am allowing myself to be taken without resistance.” See how this is expressed: “Lord shall we strike with the sword?” “No more of this.” “This is your hour, and the power of darkness.” “Put up your sword… or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father… all this was done that the Scriptures…might be fulfilled.” “Put your sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup…?”

Why Christ tells Peter to put up the sword:

  1. Christ is willingly laying down His life, though He has the right to use sword and angelic legions to deliver Himself from this unjust arrest (Luke 22:51, John 18:11).
  2. Those who are quick to resort to violence will die by violence (Matt 26:52). The Lord hates the one who “loves violence” (Psalm 11:5).

The sword is not always the appropriate response, especially in persecution for Christ.

There is greater protection than swords.

 

Possession of weapons and skills with weapons a good and useful thing

Having looked at a number of passages that deal with weapons and self-defense, let’s spend a little time discussing Scripture’s view of owning weapons and being skilled in their use. The imagery of weapon use and skill at weapons use is often employed in Scripture, and it is often portrayed as a positive or desirable thing. The Lord’s might is something good, and it is often depicted using martial terms (Zec. 9:14, Psa. 7:13, 18:14, 21:12, 64:7, Hab. 3:11, Deu 32:42, 2 Sam 22:15). The Scriptures are a sword (Eph. 6:17; Heb 4:12). A sword comes out of the mouth of Christ (Rev. 1:16, 2:16, 19:15).

Possession of weapons is never discouraged in Scripture. In fact, in 1Sam 13:19ff, it is negatively reported that no spears or swords were found in Israel because of the Philistines:

1 Samuel 13:19-22  9 Now there was no blacksmith to be found throughout all the land of Israel, for the Philistines said, “Lest the Hebrews make swords or spears.”…  22 So it came about, on the day of battle, that there was neither sword nor spear found in the hand of any of the people who were with Saul and Jonathan. But they were found with Saul and Jonathan his son.

Let’s look at two verses from the Psalms:

Psalm 144:1 Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:

Psalm 18:34 He teaches my hands to make war, So that my arms can bend a bow of bronze

Skill and ability to use weapons here, whether literal and/or metaphorical, is positively portrayed in these verses.

Further, we have accounts of David, not a soldier, not a law enforcement officer, but a youth, employing ranged weapons skillfully (with God’s help) against bears and lions. This is domestic use of lethal weaponry, non-military use, with non-military training. The weapons used by young David are not “kiddie” slingshots. They are powerful enough to kill a bear and lion–in today’s market, we’re talking about a .44 magnum, not a .22, in the hands of someone too young to be in the army.

We might be tempted to think that was just for dealing with animals that could threaten sheep. But aren’t humans worth even more protection than sheep?

We understand that according to Scripture, in matters not of worship or church government, whatever is not forbidden is permitted. I’m not making a claim that ownership of weaponry for the purpose of self-defense is required of the believer. It is not required, but it is permitted by Scripture.

Warnings

Now, let’s conclude with some warnings.

Trusting in the sword

First of all, it would be a mistake to leave this class trusting in the sword. Guns, knives, weapons… these are mere tools, and none of these things can guarantee protection, any more than owning a fire extinguisher guarantees that your house won’t burn down.

Psalm 44:6-7   For I will not trust in my bow, Nor shall my sword save me.  7 But You have saved us from our enemies, And have put to shame those who hated us.

We see in Nehemiah 4:14 that the people were armed and willing to use their weapons, but they were also trusting in the Lord:

 “Do not be afraid of them; remember the Lord who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your houses….  20 “At whatever place you hear the sound of the trumpet, rally to us there. Our God will fight for us.” 

Do not put your trust in weapons. They are tools that are useful, but they are only dead, inanimate tools, at the end of the day.

“…the LORD does not deliver by sword or by spear; for the battle is the LORD’s.” (1Sa 17:47 NAS)

Improperly resorting to the sword

Secondly, beware of improperly resorting to the sword. I would hope the passages dealing with the shedding of blood impressed on you the narrow limitations for when it is proper to employ lethal force. It is never to be in hatred, never in revenge, never in jealously. David in his pride nearly murdered Nabal, but Abigail restrained him. David would have killed Nabal…and regretted it.

1 Samuel 25:32 And David said to Abigail, Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Israel, who sent thee this day to meet me:  33 and blessed be thy discretion, and blessed be thou, that hast kept me this day from bloodguiltiness, and from avenging myself with mine own hand. 

Employing potentially lethal force out of anger, hatred, jealously, or revenge is always wrong and is condemned by Scripture.

Here is a warning: If you find that you have anger or self-control problems, owning weapons is unwise. The believer is to be “not soon angry, no brawler, no striker” (Titus 1:7). Lamech is an example of someone who should not own weapons (Gen. 4:23f).

When you are insulted or cursed, when your wife or your mother is insulted or cursed, you are not to resort to violence.

27 But I say unto you that hear, Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you,  28 bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you.  29 To him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and from him that taketh away thy cloak withhold not thy coat also.  30 Give to every one that asketh thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.  (Luk 6:27-30 ASV)

There are a lot of great virtues depicted in the classic westerns. The propensity to break into fistfights or gunfights when honor is insulted is not a virtue. The Lord, not you, is to take vengeance and set things right. An insulting slap in the face is something you can suffer as a Christian.

What if you are badly wronged? What if your wife or daughter is badly wronged? You must stop an attack that is in progress, but afterwards, you must not seek revenge. There is no room for vigilantes.

Rom 12:19 Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. 

A wrong admiration for the “man of violence”

Thirdly, do not admire the “man of violence”.

Proverbs 3:31-32  Do not envy a man of violence, And do not choose any of his ways.  32 For the crooked man is an abomination to the LORD; But He is intimate with the upright.

Those who resort to violence rather than Godliness are not to be admired. There are many similarities between David and Joab. Both were skilled at killing men, and both had killed many men. Were they both men of violence? Here is the difference: David, first and foremost, sought the Lord, trusted the Lord, and loved the Lord. Why didn’t he do violence against Saul? It wasn’t because Saul was his father-in-law. Rather, it was because Saul was the Lord’s anointed. It was because of David’s regard first for the Lord that he would not resort to violence.

On the other hand, Joab, over and over, resorted to the sword to deal with problems. Joab was a man of violence.

Proverbs 1:16 For their feet run to evil, And they make haste to shed blood.

Romans 3:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood;

Earth was destroyed in the day of Noah because “the earth was filled with violence” (Gen 6:11ff). God hates violence. There is a narrow scope in which it is applied righteously, but it is only because of sin that such skill is necessary.

Beware of influences in your life which would encourage admiration of a Joab rather than a David.

Perspective

Fourthly and finally, keep the right perspective on this. Though we see sanction and even a qualified directive from Christ to possess personal weapons, we must remember three points. First, in the remainder of the New Testament, we have no further examples of believers taking up the sword. Secondly, the emphasis in the remainder of the New Testament is decidedly not geared toward the issues of physical self-defense or righteous use of lethal force. Rather, we see more emphasis on Godly living, suffering affliction and persecution for Christ, and grasping the precious doctrines of Christ and the Gospel.  Thirdly, possession of weapons and acquiring the skill to use them in self-defense is permitted but not required by Scripture.

Believers should be conscious that personal self-defense is legitimatized by the Scriptures, just as the use of construction tools, cooking tools, transportation tools are legitimized by Scripture. And these matters of self-defense should hold in our minds and in our affections the same position as those other legitimate, but transitory, matters.

The tendency in some circles is to make the topic of self-defense of primary importance. Though heavenly beings do battle and render judgments with the sword, in the perfection pictured in both the garden of Eden and in the Heavenly city, the primary activities are fellowship with God, fellowship with His people, singing in worship, and living in peace.

That is our destination.


All rights reserved. This article comes from www.biblicalselfdefense.com and was written by MT. You are permitted to print and distribute up to 30 copies of this article so long as this paragraph is included and you notify us of your usage. To distribute more than 30 copies, you must first request permission.

So what’s the deal with August 12?

Doodling with numbers here, but numerology is significant when it comes to such things.  There seems to be – in my opinion – a lot of pertinent numerology that falls nicely on 8/12.  I’ve tried to list most of them here.  There was a so-called “Cardinal Cross” during 9/11/01.  Note also that August 2012 falls within some sort of astrological ‘square’ or something involving pluto (yes, I am really trying to make this date work folks).  The astrology sites I’ve searched are such utter rubbish that I couldn’t continue without becoming nauseated – besides that, one site is probaly responsible for corrupting my hard drive.  None-the-less, here’s what I’ve put together:

 

A little Olympic Math and relation to 9/11/2001 (in Masonic mulitples of 11 and 13):

London games and closing ceremony dates as well as important dates from Bush speeches:

  1. 1908 (4/27 – 10/31)
  2. 1948 (7/29 – 8/14)

v     1990 (9/11 – Bush Sr. NWO speech)

v     1991 (1/29 – Bush Sr. 1000 pts. of light speech) – 140 days later.

v     1991 (3/6 – Bush Sr. NWO speech) – 36 and 176 days later respectively.  [176/16 = 11]

v     2001 (9/11 – Terrorist attack)

  1. 2012 (7/27 – 8/12)

 

October 31, 1908 (All Hallow’s Eve): 

  • (4/27 – 10/31)  187 days [/13 = 17]

 

August 14, 1948:

Time between 1908 – 1948 games:  14,532 days or 2080 weeks

  • 2080 [/13 = 160]
  • August(8) 14 ===>  8 + 14 = 22
  • 1948 ===> 1 + 9 + 4 + 8 =  22 

 

September 11, 1990:

v     253 days since beginning of year (1/1/90) [/11 = 23]

v     1 + 1 + 9 = 11

v     9 + 1 + 1 = 11

 

September 11, 2001:

v     253 days since beginning of year 1/1/02 [/11 = 23]

v     9 + 1 + 1 = 11

 

Time since 9/11/1990

v     11 years

v     572 weeks [/11 = 52]  [/13 = 44]

v     4018 days ===> 4 + 0 + 1 + 8 = 13

 

August 12, 2012:

8/12 ===>   8 + 1 + 2 = 11

 

Time since 9/11/1990 – 8006 days or 1144 weeks

  • 1144 [/11 = 104]

Time from end of age 12/21/2012

  • 132 days [/11 = 12] (this one’s a stretch)

Time since 1908 closing ceremony (October 31, 1908)

  • 104 years [/13 = 8]
  • 5,408 weeks [/13 = 416]
  • 37,906 days [/11 = 3446]

Time since 1948 closing ceremony (August 14, 1948):

  • 23,374 days [/13 = 1798]
  • 63 years, 11 months and 29 days
  • 3,328 weeks [/13 = 256]  ====>   2 + 5 + 6 = 13

 

I’m sure there are many sites out there with more extensive or sophisticated numbering – just as I’m sure there will be a plethora following next month’s false flag event.

Again, other possible days are 8/10 and I suppose 8/11 since there’s an ’11’ in the date.  I’m sticking to 8/12 – makes the most sense numerically and in terms of finishing off the events (and garnering revenues from those events) before destroying everything.  We’ll see…

Categories: 2012 Tags:

Black Swan Event Horizon – London Olympic Games Closing Ceremony 8/12/12

Right on schedule and BY DESIGN . . .

The press is ramping it up about the so-called lack of Olympic security (note use of powerful language – “absolute chaos”; “shambles”; “shortfall”; “deeply sorry”; “shortages cast shadow”; “security crisis”). 

The engineered meme:  Inadequate security has led to this crisis.

The engineered answer:  Tougher security measures to the point of martial law.

See recent headlines:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-33747_162-57473130/olympic-security-shortfall-called-absolute-chaos/

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/olympic-security-boss-couldnt-plan-a-pigout-in-a-pie-shop-20120718-22ajn.html

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-07-17/lost-in-london-us-athletes-see-4-hour-bus-ride

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/17/sport/olympic-security-overview/index.html

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/07/17/security-in-shambles-for-london-olympics/

http://www.skynews.com.au/sport/article.aspx?id=772923

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/London+Olympics+security+woes+overshadow+questions+about+much+much+with+video/6947012/story.html

 

Categories: 2012

Deep Thoughts 2012

July 9, 2012 1 comment

The following are some of my thoughts about 2012 – the material is disturbing and very large in scope.  This material is not meant for just anybody and is not meant to be shared with others without purposeful intent, prayer and a strong foundation in the Scriptures.  (I have discovered the hard way that it is simply not beneficial for some).  In fact, I would encourage you to download the word file and then simply delete the original email since it serves no further purpose.

I send this to you because you are a reflective Christian who is able to discern all of this same information through general revelation, objective reasoning and persistent questioning.  (This is where God has been leading me since 2009 – among other things).  It is meant to be informative and to direct one towards the Scriptures as the foundation for truth, comfort, understanding – and to put one’s ultimate hope, trust and guidance in our Savior, who (according to His own words) will be coming in the not too distant future it seems.  It is my hope that we will look upon “that day” with much joy and excitement.  Remember that God’s victory is our victory, our assurance and our peace; and – as the Hebrews say – “May He come swiftly” . . .   ~ LateSleeper

 

 

“And the LORD, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.”

Deuteronomy 31:7-9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To have a proper understanding of the apparent chaos of macro-level world events:

  • Economics:  The term economics comes from the Ancient Greek οἰκονομία (oikonomia, “management of a household, administration”) from οἶκος (oikos, “house”) + νόμος (nomos, “custom” or “law”), hence “rules of the house(hold)”.  Economics is therefore a relational transaction that occurs between at least two parties – it is the expression of exchange.  In short, it is how one treats his neighbor and how one treats the weak.  The Lord uses this language to describe our relationships to each other and to Him.
  • Two Systems:  There is an ancient war occurring between two households; who is to manage it and how it is to be managed.  The bible can be viewed in a sense through the lens of economics (i.e. household management, debt, servitude, wealth, value, reward, etc . . . Gary North has written much on this subject) between two competing and opposing systems – one is genuine and the other is counterfeit or illusory. 

 

    • One system results in prosperity: (creative, free market, fair trade, community/family-oriented, “Austrian-school” economics, real investment, real growth, real wealth, real assets, supply and demand/(need), short-term deferment for long-term gain, manage resources wisely, respect for life, dignity, work satisfaction and freedom);
    • The other results in destitution: (destructive, controlled markets, trade imbalance, self/elite-oriented, “Keynesian” economics, speculative investment, zero/negative growth, debt, fiat currency, hoarding and neglect, short-term focus at expense of future, wasteful, manipulation of others, degrading, hopelessness and enslavement).
  • Commander and Chief:  No it’s not Obama – he is the wrestler in the blue trunks; nor is it Mitt Romney – he is the red wrestler.  Just as World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) manages their actors, so do the banking, corporate and government cartels manage theirs.  These various organizations are coordinated by the Anglosphere ultimately centered in three autonomous and independent city-states (independent from their host country) – Washington DC (political), City of London (financial), Vatican (religious).  Behind those entities allegedly are 13 families who are consolidating control of most of the planet; within whom their high priests facilitate direct and indirect guidance from a certain bright star – “In whom, the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not . . .” (2 Cor:4)
    I don’t know, but I think one of these two will be the next president, whichever is most convenient:

 

    • Red –  Romney will be a good choice for war with Iran which will occur at the end of the year – look for a large market drop this summer to signal the installation of the red president.  (This is the option that I think will be chosen).
    • Blue – Obama is a good choice for inciting domestic racial tensions.  He is devisive and is a good choice for imposing “temporary” draconian govt. laws in the face of crisis.  He is also symbolic of weakness and will indicate an American “loss” with any war involvement.  No significant market drop or a quickly ensuing strong rally will signal his installation.
  • One ring to rule them all:  It is presently ALL about dollar hegemony.  The dollar is now the defacto global fiat currency (formally as of the closing of the gold window by Nixon in 1971).  Before one can buy COMEX gold, wheat or oil – one must first buy dollars since these are all traded in dollars (the latter referred to as “petrodollars“).  All currencies are trending downward (being debased) alongside the dollar and based on the dollar.  Watch the dollar index as it tracks between 72 – 82 and it’s relative valuation particularly to the euro and the yen. When the euro was too strong, the Greek debt default meme surfaces to move money back into dollars.  When the dollar is too strong, the Fed buys bonds (quantitative easing – i.e. money printing) and devalues it further.  When the yen is too strong, earthquakes occur off the coast of Japan to decimate the economy (I won’t go into that); when the yen falls too far, central bank intervention pushes it back into parity.  When Iraq announces intentions to trade oil in euros or start a pan-arabian currency; when Libya similarly proposes a new gold-backed african currency – the terrorism meme surfaces and these countries get invaded.  IRAN is the next to fall.  (Interesting article).  When the dollar index falls below 72, we will very likely be at war.  (new BOOK on this – haven’t read it yet, but hear it’s very good)
  • Usury:  Economics and global credit/debt controls ALL macro world events.  Continued centralization/consolidation and acquisition of global assets, currencies and national sovereignties into the hands of the elite powers (who are transnational).  This is done through debt.  The elites control the money supply of a sovereign nation (the central bank) – that nation is forced into debt through credit issuance by that central bank – when the nation is on the verge of default, the ensuing rescue packages are simply liens prepared by the same elites (i.e. loansharking, predatory lending), which come with various austerity measures backed by the real assets of that nation – the assets get fleeced by the associated multinational corporations – that government is then eventually subsumed under the direction of a non-elected, elite-appointed figurehead (e.g. Greece and Italy in 2011).  When Libya and Iraq were invaded, the first actions were the establishment of a central bank.

 

    • The system is controlled through usury or debt generated by central banking or money changers.  (This video explains it very well)
    • The purpose is “globalization” – to consolidate wealth and power into the hands of the elite (creation of a transnational fiefdom now on a global scale).  (Read this Op-Ed piece by Janet Napolitano – substitute “New World Order” for “global supply chain”)
  • The Grand Chess Board:  To those in great power, Geopolitics is simply a euphemism for “global conquest”.  Ironically, world events (because they are initiated by the “gods” of this world) function as a kind of high stakes poker game between competing interests or confederacies in achieving the same goal – (see THIS BOOK which explains these relationships).  This game has been played for a long, long time.  One potential (and I think likely) end to this “game” – will be a transcendence of the game itself and a new “order” or realignment of the pieces – something that Zbigniew Brzezinski has termed “kick” the chessboard.  I think that there are competing interests among the elite groups to be the dominate player on the right side of that trade.

 

    • Bill Cooper explains the background of the NWO (note that although these sources contain errors and some contradictions – you must not throw out the baby with the bath water as it is practically impossible to construct a completely accurate picture.  The ultimate foundation is the bible, it is the measuring line and bedrock – I believe it supports in essence, much of what men like Bill Cooper are trying to communicate).  Like the press of Johannes Gutenberg preceding the protestant reformation, we find ourselves similarly on the cusp of an internet reformation that is the last remaining vestiage for access and dissemination of information. You can bet there will be draconian attempts to “secure” the internet under the auspice of crisis (i.e. cybersecurity as a response to some form of “terrorism”).

 

 

  • State of Fear:  Whether it be terrorists, global warming, economic destruction, ‘end of the world’ or UFOs – these are essentially ruses used to control the masses under a perpetual external threat. This is my opinion, but I would even submit to you that “Al Qaeda” (‘the base’) doesn’t actually exist in the way we are told – this is a nebulous, faceless (or covered by arabic garbs) enemy created by the CIA.  Even the term (‘the base’) is itself a joke as it refers to a CIA database, not a shadowy group of middle-eastern men.  Al Qaeda is therefore whoever the govt. wants them to be – very convenient.   See these quotes from Orwell’s 1984:

 

    • PERPETUAL WAR – “. . . the general hatred of Eurasia had boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war-criminals who were to be publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would unquestionably have torn them to pieces – at just this moment it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Eurasia was an ally.  Oceania was at war with Eastasia : Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”
    • CONSTANT THREAT – “The primary aim of modern warfare (in accordance with the principles of doublethink, this aim is simultaneously recognized and not recognized by the directing brains of the Inner Party) is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. . . The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labor […]. The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city, where the possession of a lump of horseflesh makes the difference between wealth and poverty. And at the same time the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival. (2.9.28, Goldstein’s Manifesto)”
    • PROPAGANDA –  “The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible.”
    • DIRECTED HISTORY – “And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed-if all records told the same tale-then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'”
    • CONFORMITY – “A nation of warriors and fanatics, marching forward in perfect unity, all thinking the same thoughts and shouting the same slogans, perpetually working, fighting, triumphing, persecuting – three hundred million people all with the same face.”
    • PURE POWER – “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.”
  • Death of the Dollar:  The planned destruction of the dollar is a certainty (see this brief snippet –  “We are going to kill the dollar”  (video 1 min). and will be replaced by a new transnational currency.  The only question is timing.  Dollars can be printed at will out of thin air by the US central bank (aka Federal Reserve).  Other countries technically cannot do this – they are therefore at the mercy of the US central bank and ultimately to the elites who run it.  This money printing is currently being done at an exponentially increasing pace (Bernanke just announced a continuation of the zero interest policy or “ZIRP” until 2014) – the result is a dilution of the currency supply which will lead to hyperinflation and an economic collapse (looking to begin in 2014).  12/2013 marks the centennial of the establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank – an entity established solely to serve the interests of it’s establishers.  (I point out such numbers and dates because numerology is very important to these people – again, the power behind our global economy is ultimately an ancient and defined faith system).  Dollar hegemony was built upon the foundations of western European imperialism (dominated by Britain and Germany), which was in-turn built upon the foundations of the Roman Empire (and prior to that, Greece, Medo-Persia and Babylon).  Historically all fiat currencies remit to their intrinsic value as a piece of worthless paper.  John Williams describes this ‘end of the world’ event.  Protection comes from:

 

    • avoiding debt since incomes will be at risk in the future (even though inflation technically benefits the debtor)
    • securing food sources and community networking (barter)
    • exchanging your fiat currency now for tangible assets – the most liquid and fungible being precious metals.  Interesting video about The Denarius.
    • note that I am increasingly weary about capital controls and government imposed taxation/confiscation when these events truly unfold. 
    • A new currency will eventually take it’s place – a regional gold-backed ‘Amero’ (not unlike the regional Euro) or direct issuance by the IMF (which is a US-created entity) in the form of SDRs (Special Drawing Rights).  This last option is the mother of all debt-based currencies coming with many hooks and conditions which will express themselves in austerity measures and ultimately abdication of sovereignty.

       

  • Gods of War:  Deficit spending, works programs and war are the three avenues by which government can prop-up the debt/credit system in the short term.  We are already at war with Iran (through economic sanctions and covert operations).  We have (3) carriers in the Arabian sea.  Watch for ever-escalating war drums to beat about Iran in both the mainstream (state) media, republican debates and even in entertainment in general (note the number of war-based video games, movies and advertisements to join the marines during the superbowl).  This is to condition the masses – this war has been planned for sometime (a very, very long time in fact).  It is a function of economics and a greater geopolitical plan, not because they pose any actual military threat but because they are a key player to providing energy (such as a Direct pipeline) to the only nations left (the BRIC and southeast Asian nations) that could conceivably consolidate against the Anglosphere.  Once Iran has been encircled, the elite will carry-out another spectacular false flag attack at the summer Olympic games in London in order to initiate the invasion of Iran.  (More on that below)  Numerous precedents have been set – this is termed “directed history” – (see a more recent example as discussed by Seymore Hersh in a short video – first 2 min).  It will be a repeat essentially of 2001 – which was itself a false flag event (see WTC7).
  • The Phoenix:  Out of the ashes of the old order (i.e. order out of chaos or ‘Ordo ab Chao‘ which is the motto of the 33rd degree Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry) is a plan to create a new “one world” man-made (counterfeit) global – tower of babel “2” – system that runs counter to the Judeo-Christian system in every way.  Exponential debt increase of all governments and nations – particularly as a result of war (which is really a debt generating scam as historically both sides are funded into debt obligations by the same central banks) – this will lead to further solidifying of “state-run” or govt.-run markets.  (There is technically no more global free market, as all market movements now depend upon the actions of central banks, governments, etc.  (The US stock market is probably about 70% run by computer algorithms from key banks and other elite-owned institutions).  A single government decision – based on any reason – can fundamentally change the economic landscape and access to your money and liberty (e.g. bank holidays, capital controls, a windfall 90% profit tax on gold, indefinite suspension of the constitution, etc . . . ).
  • The End of the Age
    • The end of the age is characterized primarily by unprecedented deception.  Ultimately, this plan – this “Big Idea” as Bush Sr. coined it, will fail – and will fail miserably.
    • Matthew 24

 1And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.  2And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
 3And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
 4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

23Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.  24For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.  25Behold, I have told you before.

  • Reading the “Signs”:  2012 will be a game-changer, just as 2001 was a game-changer.  It will be remembered for a spectacular event (“terrorist” attack) at the 2012 Olympic games in London.  I believe there are many sources of information pointing to this event (some are more obscure than others, all are deduced and/or inferred).  Perhaps surprisingly, the most “direct” support comes from (as strange as it seems) multiple Hollywood movies and an obscure role playing card game that came out in 1995.  Again, I’m just looking at what’s already there – you have to make your own decision about it.

 

  • 1995 card game – discontinued in 1997 (notice the 3rd image as it appears on Amazon).      Read on – (pay particular attention to the cards of the twin towers, pentagon and 5 people running from a falling clock).
  • Symbolism – (in my opinion) card interpreted as showing a false flag terrorist attack on Big Ben during the 2012 Summer games – it appears to occur late afternoon, possibly at night – (note the colors of the shirts worn by the people – and one black skinned man in white – are the colors of the Olympic rings).  The card describes “2” attacks – the pyramid suggests the Olympic stadium will also be blown-up as there are pyramids lining the outer roof (lighting). 
  • London 2012 – “Zion
    • Opening ceremony – 07/27/2012
    • Closing ceremony – 08/12/2012
  • I predict an attack on Big Ben and the Olympic stadium will occur to usher in a declared war of US/Israel against Iran.  I think it will happen during the 8/12 closing ceremony, or possibly on 8/10.  These dates are both important in masonic numerology.  I would expect it to occur during or after sunset, possibly to obscure whatever mechanism is used (missile, plane) and to emphasize the destruction.  Here is a somewhat interesting analysis of the Street Names surrounding the Olympic site.
  • I suspect it will be another plane attack for the sake of continuity with September 2001, and/or possibly explosives.  I have also noticed an increasing amount of circulating material relating to some sort of “UFO” agenda.  This is all nonsense in my opinion – disinformation designed to discredit anyone who would mention these things beforehand.  This would have the effect of simultaneously pegging the “conspiracy nut” while strengthening the case that it was a “genuine” terrorist attack.  Basically, whenever aliens, reptiles and the like are referenced, you can be sure that the material you’re reading is purposefully misleading (eventhough it can often contain numerous elements that are valid.  The effect is to encourage the reader to disregard the true elements along with the false elements).  I don’t see how anyone would truly think a UFO threat was credible, but I could be wrong – the public has already fallen for so much already.

 

 

 

The purpose is severalfold:

  1. To provide the justification for a pre-planned invasion of additional remaining sovereign countries (as happened in 2001).  Look for Syria and Iran to be targeted – the former would draw-in Russia whereas the latter would draw-in China.  Yemen has already been in a clandestine war for the last two years.  Look for MANY increased war drum articles like this one:http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/03/9910670-iran-warns-us-carrier-to-stay-out-of-persian-gulf
  2. To frighten the general populace into allowing more anti-constitutional, socialist laws to be passed which will never be repealed (a.k.a. the patriot act, gun control, Ministry of Homeland Security, TSA and NDAA).
  3. To institute martial law in London which will presage larger countries (such as the US – generally, whatever happens in London precedes later enactment in the US).  Remember they have been installing cameras on every corner in London since 2001.  Expect similar actions in major US cities.  Look for increased power and presence of the TSA to expand not only into all transportation (bus and train terminals, subways, random vehicle “check points” on highways), but also into stadiums, court buildings, etc . . .
  4. To simultaneously cause a global market drop which will allow insiders (banks and certain governments) to be on the right side of the decline and receive a massive wealth transfer from the general populace.  The price of gold/silver may drop significantly in the short term – but I believe this would only be reflected in the COMEX.  The actual physical market will decouple and either maintain prices or increase.  Gold will then spike – the COMEX would be at risk of default which would be a catastrophic economic event in itself.  Oil prices will spike – they will increase over the first half of the year:  http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2012/1/4_Pento_-_Expect_$7_or_$8_a_Gallon_Gasoline_if_Iran_Closes_Straits.html
  5. To control China’s economy through currency and market manipulation, control their access to oil which is needed for their growth and to use leverage to begin expanding central banking in China which is how you lead the populace and ultimately the nation/govt. into debt serfdom.
  6. To increase the perceived need for a shift towards global governance (expect blanket mass media language/terminology pushing for this – whether it is accepted or not, the terms will inevitably become part of the lexicon and therefore “reality” – e.g. “gay marriage”, “climate change”, “war against terror” are all engineered phrases based on false presuppositions but are now accepted as truth claims regardless of their origins or factual basis).  The memorial at ground zero is another example of directed history – the accepted story will be enshrined as fact over time.

 

 

 
Some interesting images out of Hollywood – (yes, some of this material is a little silly or just plain rubbish; however, some of it is striking and will make you think.  All of it (in the original movies/shows) is purposeful, meaning there was a great deal of effort on somebody’s part to design, develop and eventually incorporate these images into a film – try to be objective).
 

Hidden in Hollywood – Pt 1 (video)

 

Hidden in Hollywood and beyond – Pt 2 (video with 6 parts)

 

More on the cards (Video catalog)

 

So now what?  What does this mean?  Well, it means (particularly if these things come to pass) that we need to radically change our thinking about how this world works.  It means that you should no longer “conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” (Rom 12:2). 

It means there are preparations to be done, people to be talked to, communities to be formed and prayers to be offered.  It means being purposeful and directed with the time we have – because things are going to change.  Change can be good.  Turn off your TV! 

The war takes place in the mind.  

 6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. 7 Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you.

 8 Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. 9 Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings.

 10 And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. 11 To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.’  ~ 1 Peter 5:6-11.

 

Do not fear – Jesus has overcome the world.  Revelation 21  Praise God!

 

Who are the Jews? 
28For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:  29But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.  ~ Romans 2:28-29

 

Categories: 2012