Soros Plots USA's Demise

Consider the following posted online at biggovernment.com

What would you think if George Soros were organizing his fellow anti-American, globalist, neo-Marxist “thought leaders,” in pursuit of globally governed banking and finance, in a second Bretton Woods conference?

Would you consider that their goals include dragging American influence and incomes down, while confiscating much of our personal finances and giving them to other nations (and yes, the age-old financier network behind them) in the name of “communitarianism?”

Would you find their goal is to replace the bad influences of the IMF and the World Bank, with a much worse, more powerfully controlling, post-American global apparatus?

What would you think, if that meeting were being held this April 8th through 11th?

I got an email, last week; it was Tuesday the 22nd. It was from George Soros. To hear as straight from the dragon’s mouth as feasible, I had subscribed. In this emailed article, he lamented the inequities of wealth among the nation-states of Europe, under the strains of their continuing insolvency crisis. He warned of the dangers of national interest. Rather, he proposed, not surprisingly, a further blowing of the global insolvency bubble, so the more indebted European nations may get along owing, while their lending nations get along being owed — all the while, blending and worsening the financial and monetary crises and spreading this yeasty recipe further throughout the world, especially to America.

That was quite provocative.

Please be patient to let this article be a rather personal narrative and a kind of portal, and follow its links. Then, follow the links within the those articles. Perhaps, even one more layer. That will limit the redundancy involved and inform you as well as a book might, but in much less time. To begin, here are my observations upon receiving his email, “Oh. My. George. Soros on Europe’s Worsening Banking Crisis & the Most Evil Plan Yet.” Go ahead. Big Government will generously wait.

“’Most evil plan yet,’ was that an overstatement?” I wondered. No, knowing what one may see about Soros, it was not hyperbole and the statement was well with my soul. The next day, confirmation came from Dan Gainor of Business & Media Institute and Media Research Center, by his “Unreported Soros Event Aims to Remake Entire Global Economy,” first published in Business & Media Institute and at Fox News.

If you read nothing else stemming from this introduction, do peruse that. There, Gainor puts this iniquitous plan into context and elucidates. Nope, not going to excerpt, nor even quote. Just read it if you have not by now, please.

It was my privilege to interview Dan last Monday night, for about a half-hour. That discussion may be found here.

Again, no reiterations offered, except that I will repeat that the documentation shows we were raped by European banks, in their own, deep insolvency trouble in 2008, using us at exactly the time it hurt us the most — during the Mortgage Meltdown’s peak, right before the general election. You know how that went. (It was also swept along as in the sport of curling, by peculiarly timed internal operations, including those of Soros comrades, Herb and Marion Sandler, and Senator Charles Schumer’s tongue. One must not distract further, by going on about the Community Reinvestment Act(s), Franklin Raines and Fannie Mae, the Pelosi Congress and their shoot-to-miss regulations, Goldman Sachs and friends, etc.)

That being our reminder of how they operate, what may we expect from our nation’s finances being thoroughly and systematically controlled by a megacartel of despotic foreign interests?

For further reading

Just presented by colleague, Kelleigh Nelson:
“Klaus Warns Euro Pact will Lead to Full Political Union,” in euobserver.com, 3/29/2011

See the observations of compatriot blogger, Maggie Thornton and the related articles she links at the bottom of her piece:
“George Soros Bretton Woods II Conf: Changing Finance World-Wide — New World Order: God’s Gonna Cut You Down…”

And three caveats about this subject matter

1. Yes, this is anti-American and grossly evil. It is warfare against our People. America has been given us at great sacred cost, to preserve and pass along our freedom to our progeny. Just as our Constitution rests squarely upon our Declaration of Independence, our freedom rests upon our personal, intra-national, and national sovereignties. There is no exception to this rule, whether it is assailed by any seemingly altruistic ideas and ideals of global governance, or of global finance. And even the most generous offerings of internationalism require its antecedent, nationalism.

2. One must neither be taken with, nor be deterred by any coincidences of ethnic heritage, when studying banking, globalism, and collectivism. While antisemites will at times present lies and distortions as facts, facts by their nature, can not be prejudiced nor bigoted. Each individual is a free and ontologically equal, moral (and immoral) agent, all are sinners, all are offered redemption.

3. Come, let us be conspiracy investigators, regardless of the connotations and prior concoctions. I suggest you start, or start afresh, with the startling and paradigm shifting research led by a gentleman named Norman Dodd, an energetic but humble young banker from the prior century, who eventually found himself going to Washington and working for Congress. (Much of the records of the Reece Committee have been destroyed, hidden, or buried, but they are still preserved.) If you saw Glenn Beck’s TV program last Friday the 25th, about the Federal Reserve, you will recognize Mr. Dodd’s interviewer.

One reason there are so many wild claims in this subject matter is that not enough people of discipline and sound epistemology engage in it. But remember your Alinsky and do not be intimidated by ridicule. There is a vast, worldwide conspiracy shown a few inches from your nose right now and many near the core of it meet next week in New Hampshire.

Boy Genius. Playing Beethoven at age 2. College Grad at age 12.

This 12 yr old boy genius has more smarts than the entire political brain dead leaders of our country combined.

Welfare State and Bureaucrat Economics

A well documented video on the egregious waste that is the United States Federal Government. Consider these two facts and take a peek at this thought out video.

• California has more than 15,000 Bureaucrats getting pensions worth more than $100,000 a year.

• 6 of the nation's 10 richest communities are suburbs of DC.

Consider the following article posted on this economic blog:

Here is a link in case the above video does not play: There Are too Many Bureaucrats and They Are Paid too Much

I met Dan Mitchell last week at the Kauffman Foundation. Every year, Kauffman holds a conference for economic bloggers. It's a lot of fun and I have participated 3 consecutive years.

I am a big fan of the Cato Institute. They stand for Individual Liberty, Free Markets, and Peace. Those are three admirable goals.

I just added them to my left sidebar under the heading "Taxpayer Friendly Sites". Inquiring minds may wish to bookmark their site.

Addendum:

Proving that some people can neither read nor think, I received an email from an apparent government sympathizer showing a graph by Calculated Risk on Government Employment Since 1976.

Interestingly, the Cato video posted a similar chart then went on to dispute it three ways, primarily by salary, second by mentioning quasi-government employees, and third by pointing out figures do not include military employees, postal workers, subsidy recipients, or contract jobs.

Here is a chart from the video.



Those numbers are from 2005. Care to guess where those numbers are now?

Quasi-Public Jobs

Bear in mind the numbers also do not include "Quasi-Public" jobs.

Please consider Current Decade of Job Losses vs. Great Depression; How Did Quasi-Public Jobs Fare? Who is Whining?

Public and Quasi-Public Jobs vs. Everything Else



Please see Mandel's article for a state-by-state breakdown.

Who is Doing all the Whining?

Who is doing all the whining and all the pissing and moaning? The answer of course is those who fared the best in the last decade: the police and fire unions, the teachers' unions, transit unions, and public unions in general.

Many in private sector fields have been hammered silly with rapidly rising healthcare costs and lower paychecks (assuming they have a job at all). Meanwhile those with the most benefits and those who have suffered the least are the ones unjustifiably bitching to high heavens about how unfairly they are being treated.

The above chart is from A Decade of Labor Market Pain by Mike Mandel.

In another related story: Stephen Moore documents the rise of the class of government workers and explains the seismic shift in the philosophy from a nation that once valued opportunity to a nation that now puts a premium on security.

Consider:

We've Become a Nation of Takers, Not Makers

If you want to understand better why so many states—from New York to Wisconsin to California—are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government.

It gets worse. More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers. Nearly half of the $2.2 trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1 trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?

Every state in America today except for two—Indiana and Wisconsin—has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods. Consider California, which has the highest budget deficit in the history of the states. The not-so Golden State now has an incredible 2.4 million government employees—twice as many as people at work in manufacturing. New Jersey has just under two-and-a-half as many government employees as manufacturers. Florida's ratio is more than 3 to 1. So is New York's.

Even Michigan, at one time the auto capital of the world, and Pennsylvania, once the steel capital, have more government bureaucrats than people making things. The leaders in government hiring are Wyoming and New Mexico, which have hired more than six government workers for every manufacturing worker.

Now it is certainly true that many states have not typically been home to traditional manufacturing operations. Iowa and Nebraska are farm states, for example. But in those states, there are at least five times more government workers than farmers. West Virginia is the mining capital of the world, yet it has at least three times more government workers than miners. New York is the financial capital of the world—at least for now. That sector employs roughly 670,000 New Yorkers. That's less than half of the state's 1.48 million government employees.

ImageZoo/Corbis

Don't expect a reversal of this trend anytime soon. Surveys of college graduates are finding that more and more of our top minds want to work for the government. Why? Because in recent years only government agencies have been hiring, and because the offer of near lifetime security is highly valued in these times of economic turbulence. When 23-year-olds aren't willing to take career risks, we have a real problem on our hands. Sadly, we could end up with a generation of Americans who want to work at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

The employment trends described here are explained in part by hugely beneficial productivity improvements in such traditional industries as farming, manufacturing, financial services and telecommunications. These produce far more output per worker than in the past. The typical farmer, for example, is today at least three times more productive than in 1950.

Where are the productivity gains in government? Consider a core function of state and local governments: schools. Over the period 1970-2005, school spending per pupil, adjusted for inflation, doubled, while standardized achievement test scores were flat. Over roughly that same time period, public-school employment doubled per student, according to a study by researchers at the University of Washington. That is what economists call negative productivity.

But education is an industry where we measure performance backwards: We gauge school performance not by outputs, but by inputs. If quality falls, we say we didn't pay teachers enough or we need smaller class sizes or newer schools. If education had undergone the same productivity revolution that manufacturing has, we would have half as many educators, smaller school budgets, and higher graduation rates and test scores.

The same is true of almost all other government services. Mass transit spends more and more every year and yet a much smaller share of Americans use trains and buses today than in past decades. One way that private companies spur productivity is by firing underperforming employees and rewarding excellence. In government employment, tenure for teachers and near lifetime employment for other civil servants shields workers from this basic system of reward and punishment. It is a system that breeds mediocrity, which is what we've gotten.

Most reasonable steps to restrain public-sector employment costs are smothered by the unions. Study after study has shown that states and cities could shave 20% to 40% off the cost of many services—fire fighting, public transportation, garbage collection, administrative functions, even prison operations—through competitive contracting to private providers. But unions have blocked many of those efforts. Public employees maintain that they are underpaid relative to equally qualified private-sector workers, yet they are deathly afraid of competitive bidding for government services.

President Obama says we have to retool our economy to "win the future." The only way to do that is to grow the economy that makes things, not the sector that takes things.

Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page.

Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Comic Relief

Not-so-great escape

A criminal in Dayton, Ohio, may have robbed a bank, but he chose what some would call a politically correct getaway vehicle. Dayton police say the suspect, whom they did not identify, hopped on board a public bus minutes after robbing a KeyBank branch on March 16. Alerted to his getaway method by witnesses, police were able to catch up to the bus a mile down the road and arrest the man without incident.

The Left's Political Football: Poverty

Sure the Health care law will forever change our nation, but it is also the many other subtle changes to our society by this administration that continue to erode democracy and replace it with the friendly, benevolent welfare state. The latest change is that the poverty rate will no longer be calculated on a standards of living based calculation (i.e. the amount needed to pay for basic necessities) but rather on an equality based calculation (i.e. Below 33% of the average income level). Thus, even if living standards would double, 1/3rd of our country will be 'poor' even if our poor's living standards were hypothetically better than the wealthiest on earth. This change only furthers to illustrate the fact that liberals have never really been fighting for the poor in their 'war on poverty', but rather using the poor as a means to achieve their political aims, using the poor as a political football in the process. The goal is not to eliminate poverty, but rather to make sure that their rants against inequality will forever be justified.

Poverty politics

Poverty | Playing with the numbers to increase those defined as poor, Washington is set to wage a costly war on inequality in the name of fighting poverty | Marvin Olasky

As you pay your federal income taxes this year, the amount that goes for welfare benefits depends in part on Mollie Orshansky, perhaps the most influential person you've never heard of. But on Sept. 1 her influence will begin to diminish in a way likely to increase welfare costs without increasing compassion toward the poor—if Congress doesn't step up.

In 1963 and 1964 Mollie Orshansky, a staff economist at the Social Security Administration, asked the question: Below what income is a person "poor"? She called the meeting of basic needs a "poverty threshold" and calculated a number based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture's "economy food plan" and typical American spending patterns.

Economists have updated the threshold every year by using the Consumer Price Index to account for inflation, but the simple basis for calculation has remained the same. On Sept. 1, though, the Obama administration will unveil a Supplementary Poverty Measure (SPM) calculated on a different basis. Adoption of the SPM would increase accuracy in some ways but also affect state budgets and probably increase federal deficits.

It would also make a radical conceptual leap by defining the enemy not as poverty but inequality. American poverty-fighting for three centuries has rested on a principle that no citizen should go without a basic level of food, shelter, and clothing. The question was always, "What are the basics?" It was not, "How much income does a poor person have relative to an affluent person?"

Europeans have already made poverty relative. The European Union defines poverty as an income below 60 percent of the national median, whatever that median is. If rich and poor both double their income, the poverty rate does not change: Everything's relative. With almost no public attention or discussion, the United States is taking a large step toward Europeanization.

Why the change now? You can read online, if you dare, about a dozen academic papers presented at the Allied Social Science Association's annual meeting in Denver in January. Those, in turn, play off of 15 years of discussions sparked by a 1995 recommendation of the National Academy of Science. But the easier way to understand what's happening is to start with Mollie Orshansky's legacy.

Orshansky saw that a half-century ago families of three or more people typically spent about one-third of their after-tax income on food. Logically, she multiplied basic food costs—enough to eat, but not salmon and raspberries—by three to come up with poverty thresholds for various family sizes. She then defined as poor those with insufficient cash income to pay for basic needs. That seems intuitively right.

Over the years some problems with her formula have emerged: For one, people today normally spend closer to one-sixth of their income on food rather than one-third. We spend more money on wants, not needs, and those defined as poor can receive food stamps, housing, childcare, and other government benefits.

Statisticians have not counted those benefits as part of a family's gross income, so the resources available to some poor families are greater than officially measured. Factor in underground and illegal economies—people paid in cash and not reporting income for tax purposes—and it's not surprising that consumer expenditure surveys from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show the lowest fifth of U.S. households spending up to twice as much as their reported pretax income.

Some in America—particularly homeless persons and most immigrants—are still severely poor, but government data show most persons defined as poor having a home and car in good repair. Typical possessions also include air conditioning, two color televisions, cable or satellite service, a VCR or DVD player, and a cell phone, as well as a refrigerator, stove, microwave, and a washer and dryer.

So which hardships should be emphasized? The small numbers of persons who are homeless and hungry, or the large number—44 million in 2009—defined as poor but, by the standards of most of the world, materially rich? To ask this is not to diminish the real problems many Americans face—including fatherlessness, stupefying public schools, bad work habits, and crime—but to observe that the problems are often spiritual and cultural more than material.

News releases about poverty rarely show those non-dollar problems, and the stats are misleading. Poverty thresholds do not take into account where people live (city, suburb, town, farm) or how. Families with two parents working are less likely to be poor, so the typical poor household with two children has one parent. Many more young people are cohabiting, which leads to economies in some situations but many more transitory relationships and accompanying upheavals.

Statisticians and savvy politicians have been aware of these problems, but the measure of poverty stayed the same. And it's hard to get it right: A one-size-fits-all poverty line is hard to draw, and the definition of poverty is a political football. If it changes, some states now classified as poorer will be enriched by federal funds, and some that do better in fighting poverty will lose.

Last year with Democrats dominant at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, the Obama administration moved toward changing in four ways the definition of who is poor. Officials embedded radical ideas among some sensible proposals. Among the noncontroversial: When calculating the Supplemental Poverty Measure, take into account welfare payments that those classified as poor receive from about 80 programs. Doing that reduces hugely the number of people defined as going without the basics.

A second SPM change will reflect changing social relationships, with cohabiting couples treated as if married, and the default family pattern seen as one adult and two children rather than 2 + 2. That's realistic but troubling—and given how often cohabiting couples break up, this calculation may mask some poverty problems.

The third SPM change—take into account geography—has a political edge. Housing costs tend to be higher and unemployment greater in states that are more unionized and less oriented toward free enterprise. If the Supplemental Poverty Measure becomes the norm, blue states in general will get more money, red states less.

The fourth SPM change could be the most controversial: Instead of assessing basic needs, the poverty measure will be based on what Americans at the 33rd percentile pay for food, clothing, shelter, and utilities, plus an additional one-fifth of that for other purchases.

For determining whether a household is officially poor, the SPM will count as income money from all sources plus the value of food stamps, housing and utility subsidies, and government nutrition programs. The SPM will subtract from income taxes, work-related expenses, medical out-of-pocket expenses, and childcare costs.

Got it? One thing you may have skipped by in that complicated formula is the designation of the 33rd percentile as the poverty marker. Why 33 percent? The Census Bureau usually reports in quintiles, so why not 20 percent? Maybe because that would substantially lower the number of persons counted as poor.

Using the 33rd percentile, though, the typical "poverty threshold" will climb from the current $22,000, in round numbers, to $25,000 for a household with two adults and two children. (Remember, they spend more than that.) Suddenly millions more will be defined as poor, the poverty rate will jump from about 14 percent to about 16 percent, and a drumbeat for more federal spending can pick up intensity.

Another reason for the 33rd percentile might be that it has some history behind it. Franklin Roosevelt famously spoke in 1937 about one-third of the nation being ill-housed, ill-clad, and ill-nourished: Even if most of that one-third is now decently housed, clothed in ways that make children around the world imitate us, and over-fed (although sometimes still ill-nourished), it's still the bottom third. Liberals who see inequality as the enemy cannot stand this.

Conservatives, though, should criticize the concept that if everyone's income doubles over the course of a decade, the number of people considered poor does not change: That will move us from "A rising tide lifts all boats" to "Your boat is still bigger than mine." Furthermore, our real public-policy goal for those now classified as poor should be not to trap more in welfare but to create more economic opportunities for them to leave poverty.

It's fun, in a policy-wonk way, to play with numbers. For example, adding the cash value of food stamps reduces the number of officially defined poor people by 2 million. Other changes increase the numbers. But it's a bit like the joke about the old person delighted to learn that, due to border changes, her town in Russia was now part of Poland: "Wonderful—I couldn't stand any more of those Russian winters."

It's no joke, though, if we play with numbers instead of concentrating on helping those who are truly tired, aching, and without hope. It's no joke if the federal government increases the clout of officials whose power depends on defining more people as poor. It's no joke if we head down a relativizing road that makes envy rather than enterprise our national pastime.

America's Muslim Preacher Rallies in Support of Gadhafi

Farrakhan defends Libya's Gadhafi as 'brother'

Warning that destruction could be on America's doorstep because it oppresses “God's chosen people,” Minister Louis Farrakhan, the controversial Nation of Islam leader, defended Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi today, calling the U.S. action in Libya hypocrisy.

Speaking from the pulpit of Chicago's Mosque Maryam, the Nation of Islam's international headquarters, purchased 40 years ago with a $3 million loan from Gadhafi, Farrakhan blamed demons for altering President Barack Obama's moral conscience and driving the assault on Gadhafi, who he calls a brother.

“It is a terrible thing for me to hear my brother called all these ugly and filthy names when I can't recognize him as that,” Farrakhan said to the crowd assembled at the mosque on Chicago's South Side. “Even though the current tide is moving against him … how can I refuse to raise my voice in his defense? Why would I back down from those who have given so much?”

Though they haven't spoken since 2005, Farrakhan and Gadhafi have been allies for decades. In 1996, around the time Gadhafi shifted from pan-Arab to pan-African ambitions, Farrakhan was criticized for traveling to meet the leader in Tripoli.

The following year, Gadhafi addressed Nation of Islam members via satellite, lauding Farrakhan for being a “courageous freedom fighter” who galvanized African-Americans at the Million Man March in Washington, D.C., and Muslims in nations around the world. During that speech, Gadhafi panned America for taxing poor people, who the Libyan leader said do not benefit from space exploration or support of “a Hebrew state.”

“Consequently,” he said, “the voice of Louis Farrakhan will be heard among the simple people louder than the president of the United States.”

On Thursday, Farrakhan said scenes from an earthquake- and tsunami-ravaged Japan inspired him to warn the American people about an impending natural disaster that will punish them for their arrogance.

“A major earthquake is on the way to you and me and us,” he said. “Death and destruction is at the door of all of us, and we are worse prepared than the Japanese.”

Farrakhan cautioned Obama that he was being used as a pawn to oppress his own people in Africa. He insisted several times that Jews controlled the media and pressured Obama to take so-called humanitarian action in Libya, but not in other places such as the Gaza Strip.

“The stupid mistake we make is assuming the president is the supreme power,” Farrakhan said. “The mad dogs are growling and grinding in Washington, D.C.,” referring to one of Gadhafi's nicknames, “Mad Dog of the Middle East.”

Comic Relief

Muslims Sympathies From the USA

Islamic Prophecy predicts that leaders in the west would become sympathetic to the Muslim cause, shortly before the return of the Mahdi. The USA: A nation once founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs now accepts and encourages the Muslim faith.

Holder Sues So Muslim Teacher Can Make a Pilgrimage to Mecca

U.S. Sues on Behalf of Muslim Teacher

Critics of a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit on behalf of a Muslim teacher in Illinois say it is politically motivated.

Government lawyers filed the religious discrimination suit in December on behalf of Safoorah Khan, The Washington Post reported Wednesday. Khan quit her job in Berkeley, a suburb of Chicago, when she was refused time off to make a pilgrimage to Mecca.

Critics say Khan was requesting a three-week absence, well beyond the usual accommodation to employees' religion, and the Justice Department should not have become involved. They suggest the Obama administration filed the lawsuit in an effort to reach out to U.S. Muslims. Read more at upi.com.

12th Imam and Islamic Propecy Fulfillment

An Iranian video released by those inside the Iranian Regime show that many believe that Islamic Prophecy concerning the End Times is coming to a climax. This should cause all to be on alert as to the days ahead. Remember: Muslims are not like Christians in the fulfillment of prophecy, they are active in wanting to initiate the fulfillment. Unlike the Christian mindset that sits and waits for Christ to come back, the Muslims are looking to self fulfill their prophecies in an effort to unite the world in Islam.

Many including Osama Bin Laden and others have viewed themselves and acted as forerunners to the Mahdi.



12th Imam:

New evidence has emerged that the Iranian government sees the current unrest in the Middle East as a signal that the Mahdi--or Islamic messiah--is about to appear.

CBN News has obtained a never-before-seen video produced by the Iranian regime that says all the signs are moving into place -- and that Iran will soon help usher in the end times.

While the revolutionary movements gripping the Middle East have created uncertainty throughout the region, the video shows that the Iranian regime believes the chaos is divine proof that their ultimate victory is at hand.

'The Coming is Near'

The propaganda footage has reportedly been approved at the highest levels of the Iranian government.

It's called The Coming is Near and it describes current events in the Middle East as a prelude to the arrival of the mythical tweflth Imam or Mahdi -- the messiah figure who Islamic scriptures say will lead the armies of Islam to victory over all non-Muslims in the last days.

"This video has been produced by a group called the Conductors of the Coming, in connection with the Basiji -- the Iranian paramilitary force, and in collaboration with the Iranian president's office," said Reza Kahlil, a former member of Iran's Revolutionary Guards who shared the video with CBN News.

Kahlili, author of the book, A Time to Betray, worked as a double agent for the CIA inside the Iranian regime.

"Just a few weeks ago, Ahmadenijad's office screened this movie with much excitement for the clerics," Kahlili told CBN News. "The target audience is Muslims in the Middle East and around the world."

To watch the video in its entirety, visit Kahlili's website.

The video claims that Iran is destined to rise as a great power in the last days to help defeat America and Israel and usher in the return of the Mahdi. And it makes clear the Iranians believe that time is fast approaching.

"The Hadith have clearly described the events and the various transformations of countries in the Middle East and also that of Iran in the age of the coming," said a narrator, who went on to say that America's invasion of Iraq was foretold by Islamic scripture--and that the Mahdi will one day soon rule the world from Iraq.

Other 'Prophetic' Signs

The ongoing upheavals in other Middle Eastern countries like Yemen and Egypt--including the rise of the Muslim Brotherood -- are also analyzed as prophetic signs that the Mahdi is near -- so is the current poor health of the king of Saudi Arabia, an Iranian rival.

"Isn't the presence of Abdullah, his illness, and his uncertain condition, great news for those anxious for the coming?" asks the narrator.

Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khameini, and Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Iran's terrorist proxy Hezbollah, are hailed as pivotal end times players, whose rise was predicted in Islamic scriptures.

The same goes for Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad, who the video says will conquer Jerusalem prior to the Mahdi's coming.

"I think it's a very grave development," Mideast expert Joel Rosenberg, author of The Twelfth Imam, told CBN News, "because it gives you a window into the thinking of the Iranian leadership: that they believe the time for war with Israel may be even sooner than others had imagined."

Kahlili says The Coming is Near will soon be distributed by the Iranian regime throughout the Middle East. He explained that their goal is to instigate further uprisings in Arab countries.

Islamic Prophecy Pointing to the President

Perry Stone comments on Islamic Prophecy and the coming the Mahdi. The Mahdi is a central religious figure that both Sunni and Shiite Muslims believe will arise in the last days and unite the world in Islam. This new ruler will unite the Islamic world in a new Caliph, the same Caliph that beginning to form via revolutions all over the Middle East as we speak: Eqypt, Lybia, Yemen, Bahrain, and now Syria. Both sects also agree that this figure will arise out of the country of Iraq.





The rise of Islam in America--Louis Farrakhan

Nation of Islam leader says his comments on Jews are meant "to pull the cover off Satan" and "Zionists dominate the US government and banks."

Talkbacks (162) Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan said on Tuesday that Jews and Zionists are “trying to push the US into war” and that “Zionists dominate the US government and banks.”

Farrakhan, 77, made the comments at the Nation of Islam’s annual meeting near Chicago.

Back to Perry: Part II





The Islamic Calendar has 12 months with Ramadan being the sacred month where Muslims believe Gabriel brought the Koran to Mohamed. This Calendar began in 622AD, not at 0 AD in the Christian calendar.

Islamic prophecy states that every 1000 years major renovations will take place. In the 1400th year on the Islamic calendar--in our calendar 1979---the Mahadi was expected to come about. It just so happens that in 1979 that the overthrow of the Shah in Iran happened in this time. In the year 1421--our year 2000---Islam would become a dominant world force. It just so happens that Bin Laden--who proclaimed himself as the Mahdi--decided to attack the west.

Muslims are not like Christians in the fulfillment of prophecy, they are active in wanting to initiate the fulfillment. Unlike the Christian mindset that sits and waits for Christ to come back, the Muslims are looking to self fulfill their prophecies in an effort to unite the world in Islam.

Many Muslims believe that the 'sun will begin to arise at that time.' Some believe that many leaders would rise up in the last days that would protect Muslims and their beliefs in the last days.

Now Part III--A significance to Obama? How is this man in prophecy?



A prediction was made in Islamic Prophecy that a world leader would come between 2001 and 2011 and would help form an Islamic Union, help bring about the Mahdi, and be called the Mahdi.

The sun will rise out of the west is a belief that many, including Farrakhan, believed represented a person that would rise in the form of a leader from a nation in the West.

The seal that was placed Obama's plane and with his campaign looks like a 'sun rising' in the seal.

Perry Part IV:



Here's where it gets exciting and interesting.....

More symbolism: The white horse represents the Anti Christ in Revelation AND the symbol of the Mahdi in Islamic teaching.

Ahmadinajad, Saddam Hussain, etc. all have had white horse's just in case they would be chosen as the Mahdi in the end days.

Barrack is a form of the world blessed in Hebrew. It is also the name of Mohamed's horse. Barrack Obama held his acceptance speech in Denver at the football stadium under a massive....white horse.


& if you're still fascinated with all this and still watching, Part V.