Tags, 상세검색
PJ 18CHAPTER 25
REC #3 HATONN
SATURDAY, AUGUST 25, 1990 9:35 P.M. YEAR 4 DAY 9
COLLAPSE OF THE ANTI-WAR COUP D'ETAT
On the afternoon of June 25 reporters were summoned to the White House press room for a sudden major announcement. At around 3:00 P.M. the entity known as President Reagan strode in and walked to the microphone. Then, with an announcement about a minute long, he dropped a bomb.
For public consumption he began the announcement with words of praise and regret, but his face was the face of an executioner. Then he came to the only words that really mattered: "With great regret I have accepted the resignation of Secretary of State Al Haig."
The impression was given that Haig had resigned voluntarily and that its timeing was a great surprise, but that impression was not the truth. Reagan's very next words were: "I am nominating as his successor and he has accepted, George Shultz, to replace him."
A little later it was announced that Haig himself, would make a statement at the State Department. It was scheduled for 4:00 P.M., but Haig was nearly half an hour late. He had learned of his ouster only a few hours earlier, around noon. He had been compelled to compose a letter of resignation and pretend, for public consumption, that he had already given it to Reagan; but his late arrival at the State Department press conference was due to the fact that he was putting last-minute touches on his public statement.
When Haig arrived at the State Department auditorium, he faced an audience of around 1,000 reporters and department employees. As he was greeted by thunderous applause, Haig looked around wide-eyed, as if in a daze. He had been ordered to keep his entire statement to a maximum of five minutes. He had also been warned not to accept questions.
you were told by the controlled major media that Haig resigned as an abrasive prima donna, incensed that he was not getting his way; but when Haig took the microphone that afternoon at the State Department, his demeanor was far from that of a prima donna--he was, instead, a defeated General at the moment of surrender. The peculiar etiquette that governs this type of situation causes words to obscure the fact, but his voice and mannerisms were laden with the unmistakable burden of defeat. He spoke slowly, trying to keep the quaver in his voice under control. His tones were the lifeless tones of resignation that say, "I tried, but I failed".
Haig read the text of his alleged resignation letter to Reagan which was written hurriedly that afternoon after the fact. He began by praising the alleged original foreign policy plans of the Reagan Administration before it was subverted by the Bolsheviks. At one point he could hardly get the words out of his mouth as he said: "I believe that we shared a view of America's role in the world as the leader of free men and an inspiration for all."
Then he went on to describe a change of course which had taken place: "In recent months it has become clear to me that the foreign policy on which we embarked together was shifting from that careful course which we laid out. Under these circumstances I feel it necessary to request that you accept my resignation."
Diplomatic language is often so bland that it tends to make momentous statements sound tame and mild to the public. In those months American foreign policy had indeed been moving away from what could be called a "careful course", just as Haig said.
Haig was the top Government operative of the faction which had been trying to prevent the coming war; but the anti-war faction had lost, and Haig's ouster was the most visible signal that this had happened.
In the aftermath of the Haig bombshell, people had been falling all over themselves trying to explain it; but the more they talked the farther away from the truth they got. The closest anyone in the major media got to the truth was a statement just minutes after Haig's appearance at the State Department. Sam Donaldson of ABC television News, said, "It may seem strange for people who know General Haig's background; but the hard-liners from the standpoint of the Soviet American relations and the hard-liners when it comes to trying to curb what many people see as excessive violence by Israel in Lebanon, have won on this one."
Interesting thing about Sam Donaldson--as of last year, he no longer covers the White House and you rarely hear anything of his whereabouts--interesting indeed.
Sam Donaldson was correct about the hard-liners having defeated Haig, but there was far more to it than that. The so-called resignation of Alexander Haig on June 25 was a disaster for the antinuclear war forces. It was tied to other events--the end of the Falklands War, the beginning of the Mideast war and others; and the timing of Haig's demise, which seemed to mystify the major media, was dictated by a very specific event. That event was the launch of Space Shuttle Mission number four which was then in progress.
SAD LESSON
There was a very sad lesson of history that had been repeated more times than could be counted, from ancient times right down to the present day. The lesson was that, by and large, people were incapable of being warned about major calamities to come. It is human nature to think that the future will not be much different from the past. If something has not happened before, you find it hard to believe it could happen at all; and this had never been more true than when the impending calamity was the result of spiritual decay and moral degeneration.
You were living under the threat of just such a calamity--ALL-OUT THERMONUCLEAR WAR! AND IT HANGS THERE IN THE AIR LIKE HEAVY FOG ABOUT YOUR WORLD AT THIS MOMENT! AND NO-ONE EVEN SPEAKS OF IT--ALL OF YOUR ARMIES AWAIT IN THE DESERT OF SAUDI-ARABIA AND WAR GAMES COMMITTIES DEBATE THE PROS AND CONS OF CHEMICAL, NUCLEAR BOMBS AGAINST IRAQ AS IF YOU WERE SPEAKING OF WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH. Let me quote you an article from yesterday's Wall Street Journal:
WASHINGTON - Let's assume the nightmare comes true: Iraq attacks U.S. troops or Saudi cities with chemical weapons as part of a major war. Should the U.S. fight back with chemical or even nuclear weapons?
A number of military analysts say the answer is no. Even though chemical or nuclear weapons promise a quick victory in battle--and an emotionally satisfying response to a barbarous attack--the political fallout from using these weapons would be disastrous to U.S. interests. Moreover, the analysts say, the U.S. has more than enough aircraft and missiles to destroy Iraqi targets using conventional bombs in a war. Nuclear and chemical weapons don't add that much militarily.
"It's a losing proposition", says retired Maj. Gen. Elmer Pendleton, who was the Pentagon's senior officer in Turkey. "With our massive air ability, we can do the job as well" without nuclear or chemical weapons.
Using even small battlefield nuclear weapons would be a "disastrous mistake", adds Gary Milhollin, an arms control expert at the University of Wisconsin Law School. "It would be a signal to all the countries in the Third World that to stand up to the First World they need nuclear weapons."
One reason that the U.S. can contemplate more seriously using chemical or nuclear weapons, however, is the easing of relations with the Soviet Union, says retired Adm. Thomas Moorer, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The two superpowers aren't backing different sides in this conflict, so the U.S. can worry far less about retaliation from the Soviet Union.
"With them out of the picture, it has a significant impact on the flexibility available to the president", Adm. Moorer says. During this crisis, for instance, the U.S. has been able to empty the Mediterranean of aircraft carriers because of the diminished Soviet threat in Europe.
Last October, about 20 military planners sat down for a war game to plot U.S. responses to a chemical attack by a country in the Middle East, says Francis West, president of Gama Corp., a Falls Church, Va., consulting firm that stages war games for the Defense Department. They quickly realized, says Mr. West, that the U.S. didn't need to resort to chemical weapons to deal a devastating blow to the attacker. That's a calculation the Iraqis can make as well, Mr. West says, and one that might disincline them from attacking.
**{Hatonn: How does it make you feel to know this entire scenario was planned and set up last October--some ten months ago?}**
"It's hard to see any initiation of chemical weapons by Iraq where it doesn't come out much worse for them" if the U.S. uses only conventional weapons" he says, "That's the essence of deterrence."
In addition, the U.S. is likely to reject out of hand a strategy of terror involving bombing a city in Iraq with chemical or nuclear weapons in retaliation for a chemical attack on a Saudi city. "The last thing I'd do is say that because Saddam Hussein attacks a population, I'd attack a population." **{Hatonn: That might well be what he would "say" but they fully intend to do so--further, your own people fully plan to stage an incident with chemical and nuclear weapons and blame Iraq so that they can do exactly that very thing.}** This statement was from Albert Wohlstetter, a nuclear strategist who has greatly influenced Pentagon thinking. "It's like saying that if a terrorist kills your child, you kill his."
**{Hatonn: I repeat, there is not, and never has been, any such intent from Iraq to either invade an inch of Saudi-Arabia or to use chemical anything. This is a set-up in full preparation for you ones to expect an attack so that the "incident" will cause you to demand all-out war. You will have essentially killed your own children in the process.}**
And using chemical or nuclear weapons effectively in a battle is very difficult. A change in wind could spread killer microbes launched against Iraqi soldiers over civilians or U.S. soldiers instead. **{Hatonn: Ah Ha! And so it comes out--the U.S. also intends to use microbiological warfare--you did it before and you will do it again. No one else has even mentioned use of microbes until the Americans planned to use them.}** The potency of chemical agents also dissipates over time, making the weapons relatively ineffective against such targets as airfields or Iraqi chemical and nuclear research facilities.
Nuclear weapons, on the other hand, are so destructive that they can't be used anywhere near U.S. troops or civilians--essentially ruling out their use in a battle to retake Kuwait. Even the smallest nuclear weapons, fired by Howitzers, can kill anything in an area nearly one-half mile across.
Any use of chemical or nuclear weapons by the U.S., even in retaliation, also would produce heavy political damage. International support, so critical for the economic blockage against Iraq, would wither, say analysts, and opposition would mushroom at home. "If we retaliate with chemical weapons, we're getting into the mud with the pigs", says Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "We can accomplish our objectives with conventional weapons."
For all the incentives against the use of these weapons by the U.S., Iraq can hardly rest east that the U.S. will forswear them. It's impossible to gauge the effect of cries for revenge on policy makers if U.S. soldiers are gassed, with grisly pictures of their remains broadcast to this country.
If you cannot see herein exactly what your planners plan to do, then I pity you
for your blindness. They herein outlined exactly that which they plan to do just as soon as the set-up is right and an incident can be staged. What does it take, chelas, to awaken you who are about to be slaughtered and enslaved? May God have mercy for you sorely try Him in your foolishness. Everyone quoted in the above article are members of the elite cartel--even unto the Brookings Institute. Beloved one, I ache with pain for you one's for you know not that which is done unto you. The time is upon you and you see it not.
WHY DOES THE THREAT EXIST?
Why did it exist in 1982? Same reason. The reasons are fundamentally moral and spiritual in nature; and when the calamity comes, it will have consequences which are impossible to grasp in advance. As a result, for most of you the threat of nuclear war is one which you only half believe possible. You worried when you heard about new crises and you squirmed at the thought of ever-increasing nuclear arsenals. But in the last analysis mor os you go right on living your lives as if these things never existed. Deep down you tell yourselves, "Surely it can't really happen." You tended to think that your situation was without parallel in human existence--but that is not true. And it is even worse today in 1990.
You have been told that in ancient times a man named Noah was warned in advance about an equally incomprehensible calamity. He lived in a generation of people who were filling the land with abominations in total disregard for the Creator and His laws. Noah was warned that a giant killer flood was coming as a direct result of those spiritual and moral transgressions. Noah began building an ark; and he also began warning all his neighbors, as he had been directed by the Lord.
The building of the ark consumed not just years but decades. All the while Noah continued to warn the people of his land about what was to come, but the people were incapable of being warned. They found the idea of a great flood incomprehensible and unbelievable because it had never happened before; and besides, they were too busy living their own lives, doing as they please. So they laughed at Noah and his never-ending warning--until the day it began to rain! On that day they suddenly knew that the warnings had been true; but it was too late, and they perished.
Do you feel the raindrops starting to fall upon your little heads? I believe you are going to get very wet indeed--how well do you swim and how long can you hold your breath under water? The raindrops started to fall in 1982 at the forced resignation of Alexander Haig on June 25, 1982. All this information, furthermore, was public information and so, where were you? The time came and went for preventing nuclear calamity. Unless something very dramatic could take place to radically change the situation, it was a matter of time--and not much time at that.
As of that time, the Bolshevik war-planners in the Pentagon were still on track with their plan to set off nuclear war by the middle of September, 1982. This was true even though the intended final phase of their war plan had been crippled. The probabilities of stopping their well-laid plans in the Middle East are slim to minus zero.
The true mark of a prophet is the occurrence of that which he predicts which comes to pass--only interrupted by changes in sequence, or "timing" by possible circumstance changes. Let us again look back to 1982.
For some three years the U.S. Government had been torn by a bitter power struggle between two opposing factions. One faction consisted of agents of the Rockefeller cartel of Big Oil, Big Business, and Big banking. Then the Government was dominated by the cartel. The other faction was that of the American Bolsheviks together with expelled Bolsheviks from Russia who had flocked to the U.S. for a new start. At that time the Zionists were just gaining a strong foothold within your Government but the writing was well spelled out. If the nuclear war would fail to come off in 1982, it would be precipitated in the Middle East when appropriate.
For historical reasons those two power factions, the Rockefeller group and the Bolsheviks, had always worked together until those critical times.. The Rockefeller empire started its climb to power over a century prior with the aid of the Rothschilds based in England and Europe. Likewise, Bolshevism as a political force was created by the Rothschilds around the turn of the century. When the time was ripe for revolution in Russia, Rothschild-spawned Bolshevism was injected into Russia with Rockefeller help. From then on a secret alliance existed between the Rockefeller interests and the Bolsheviks on a world-wide basis but all that was changed.
A new anti-Bolshevik ruling group had taken over in Russia and had expelled most of the old Bolsheviks there. They had come mainly to the U.S., in great swarms in the following years. They were welcomed with open arms by their old Rockefeller allies. The re-enforced the long-time American Bolsheviks who were already present. Then, in early 1979, the Bolsheviks double-crossed their Rockefeller partners and launched an all-out grab for power. Now entered the Zionists in full-blast ahead.
The Bolshevik grab for power over the U.S. Government began with the murder of Nelson Rockefeller on January 26, 1979. This was followed by months of in-fightin behind the scenes including assassinations, resignations, and disappearances of key people. But true to Bolshevik tradition, it was all carried out in the shadows hidden from the public eye. The the turmoil escalated still further as the Intelligence agencies of foreign nations entered the fray. By the spring of 1979 a full-scale Intelligence war was ragin in America, especially in Washington. In addition to agents of the Rockefeller cartel and the Bolsheviks, the Intelligence agencies of Russia, Britain, and Israel were involved. All were trying to maneuver the crisis for their own benefit, and all were using their most advanced and most secret Intelligence techniques including some that would seem at home in the 21st Century.
Is a nuclear war still feasible with this new and changed Russia? Of course--for they now despise you for a much different reason--you have become the evil aggressor and they know that if you and England are not stopped, they, too, shall fall to the Global U.N. control of which they will have little input in the long-run--just as they are caught between Iraq and the hard place in this lithe excursion in the Middle East.
The above events all took place behind closed doors, hidden from the public eye by winners and losers alike in each skirmish. In battles at the pinnacle of power, that is how it is. There is never an appeal to the public, to the police, or to the courts for it is they who control the courts, the police, and your other institutions. At the pinnacle of power there is no appeal to higher authority because in their view there is none. So disputes were and are settled by the oldest means known to man; namely, by finding out who has the biggest stick. That is why power struggles take place in governments, and that is why wars take place between nations. It is all a struggle for raw power in an arena where no holes are barred.
1979 was a year of strange events, when the so-called Carter Administration appeared to go crazy on several occasions. At one point the entire Carter Cabinet was fired en masse. It sent shock waves around the world until a reconstituted Cabinet was formed. At another point the entity Carter disappeared at Camp David for weeks on end. Meanwhile worried rumors swirled like a storm through Washington circles.
All of these events were the direct result of a hidden turmoil which had actually been made public to you but you discounted his work and insanity. All the shocks just came and went without ever being touched by truth.
By late 1979 the dust was beginning to settle. The Rockefeller cartel had been grievously wounded, but it was not destroyed or totally unseated from Government influence. The Bolsheviks had acquired a dominant position over the U.S. Government, but their power was complete only in the military area. The Bolsheviks were bent on throwing the U.S. into nuclear war against Russia. To the Bolsheviks--aliens your midst--your entire country was nothing but a giant tool to further their own dreams of world power--and how much more a tool of the Zionists.
Up until the hidden Bolshevik coup d'etat three years prior, the Rockefeller cartel too was bent on nuclear war; but then, having lost control of the U.S. military, they could no longer afford nuclear war. So they had changed their tune. On all sides Rockefeller spokesmen were speaking out against the threat of nuclear war. The Rockefeller public relations machine was the most sophisticated in the world. Almost overnight it had stirred up public fears into a strong anti-nuclear movement--we should be so lucky to have such an organization this night.
Within the Government itself, Rockefeller cartel agents had been slowly regaining some of their lost power. As they did so they were trying to chip away at the Bolshevik plans for nuclear war, which was imminent.
The most important of all Rockefeller cartel operatives in the Government was Secretary of State Alexander Haig. Haig owed his presence in the Administration to the fact that the so-called Reagan Administration was initially installed by the Rockefeller cartel. But the Bolsheviks were determined not to let the Rockefeller group consolidate their gains. On November 30, 1980, just a few weeks after the "rigged" Reagan landslide election, the Bolsheviks were working fast. Then on March 30, 1981 there was a presidential assassination attempt at the Washington Hilton Hotel. For public consumption, all stories quickly converged on the traditional "lone assassin" theory; and just to make that more believable, a psychologically programmed scapegoat was on hand firing random shots--John Hinckley, Jr.
There was ample evidence that Hinckley was not alone and could not have fired the shot that hit the President. But never mind, seeing is believing even when it is a lie. Hinckley was conveniently wrestled to the sidewalk, gun in hand, right next to television cameras. Then the Washington jury shocked the world by finding Hinckley not guilty "by reason of insanity."
As it turned out, the shooting did not cause a change of face in the Oval Office--or at least not that you recognized. Even so, it did achieve what the Bolsheviks wanted. It created a period of vulnerability which halted the momentum of the new Rockefeller cartel governmental programs--what an obvious farce and you all missed it.
Within a matter of mere weeks the Bolsheviks were once again in the driver's seat, especially at the Pentagon. Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger had come into office with the new administration, but he was a Bolshevik mole in the Rockefeller machine. Ever since the Reagan assassination attempt, Weinberger and Haig had been at each others' throats because they were on opposite sides of the power struggle.
Well, I could go on but I do not intend to bore you further with repetitious details.
Dharma, allow us rest please. When we again sit we shall take up the final crises to ignite the war in 1982. You ones MUST pay attention for so many of the players in today's super-game are the identical players--only the location has changed.
Go in peace that you might gain strength to continue on the morrow--God willing there be a morrow. I shall clear you mind of this so that you will get rest, chela. In love I take my leave. Good-evening. Hatonn to clear, please.
PJ 18CHAPTER 26
REC #1 HATONN
SUNDAY, AUGUST 26, 1990 8:22 A.M. YEAR 4 DAY 10
AMERICAN HERITAGE?
Responsibility and perceived assets of the American "Christian Character": FAITH AND STEADFASTNESS, BROTHERLY LOVE AND CHRISTIAN CARE, DILIGENCE AND INDUSTRY AND LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE. LOOK CAREFULLY AT THESE FOUR THINGS WHICH SHOULD BE INGRAINED INTO YOUR CHILDREN--HOW MANY GLOW AS A LAMP UNTO THE WORLD? SO BE IT
SUMMER, 1982 AND SUMMER, 1990
June 1982 had seen the end of one war and the beginning of another. The war between Britain and Argentina for the Falkland Islands ended on June 14. That day the Argentine garrison at Ft. Stanley surrendered to the British. Meanwhile, a new war was already underway in the Middle East. Israel had launched its long-planned, all-out invasion of Lebanon. Are any of you remembering these things?
The Falkland Island War had come as a surprise to the master planner of nuclear war to come, the Bolsheviks. The Falklands fighting and the secret hostilities which preceded it were intended to upset those nuclear war plans. The Bolsheviks, who were fomenting violence world-wide, stamped out the unwanted Falklands War as quickly as possible.
The Thatcher Government in Britain, which is Bolshevik controlled, was left with a legacy of grievous losses which were being totally covered up. A major key to the Thatcher cover-up of the true extent of British losses was the continued posture of belligerence toward Argentina. It was being said that a sizable British military presence would be maintained in the South Atlantic. That provided a tailor-made excuse for the fact that many British ships, sailors, and soldiers would not be coming home any time soon. The fact that some of them would never return home could be hidden, and the families affected informed piecemeal, a few at a time, so that they would not form coalitions and question the real numbers of dead and missing. Each family would simply believe that their personal loss was one of the few who didn't make it. No one checks the real figures and military funerals hide everything and decide who will be viewed and who will not. Graves with unknown bodies or empty caskets (actually the caskets are reused) are the rule and not the exception. Military honors funerals are the best hiding front of any practices experienced in the military circles. Sometimes dozens of funerals are held in separate places under the "count" of one killed in action and flags are given to the families to account for their own.
The Thatcher Government intended to keep the lid on the situation just as Bush fully intended and continues to intend to keep the lid on Panama.
Another ingredient in the Thatcher cover-up plan was the at-sea repair ship, STENA INSPECTOR. It was bought from American interests in May and was then being refitted in the Savannah Shipyard Company in Georgia. Soon it would head for the South Atlantic to begin patching up many British vessels which were damaged in the Falklands War. When and if they would return to Britian, the true extent of the damage done to the Royal navy would have been literally covered up.
The final outcome of the Falklands War was a setback for the Rockefeller cartel and their limited partners, the new rulers of Russia. The Rockefeller-Soviet team won Round No. 1 of the South Atlantic fray, which was a covert warfare during April. Round No. 2, the battle for the Falklands themselves, turned out differently. Despite the damage done to the Royal Navy, it was the Rockefeller cartel and the Russians who were outmaneuvered in the Falklands battle.
It was known that the objective of the joint Rockefeller-Russian action in the Southern Hemisphere was to upset Bolshevik nuclear war plans. So the Bolsheviks responded by deliberately over-reacting militarily. Virtually the entire Royal Navy was dispatched to the South Atlantic. A situation was created in which a British recapture of the Falklands could not be stopped without setting off nuclear war itself. Finally, a totally unorthodox landing tactic was used to get British troops ashore. The end result was that the Rockefeller-Russian pledge to the Argentine junta was impossible to fulfill.
The Bolsheviks were hoping that the resulting turmoil taking place in the Argentine government would halt Argentina's rapid move toward Russia. In the past, Argentina was always staunchly anti-Soviet, but under Russia's new rulers, a major and growing trade relationship had been building between Russia and Argentina. The majority of Argentina's huge exports of meat and grain went to Russia, and in May relations between Argentina and Cuba suddenly started warming. The Bolsheviks would have liked to reverse all that and ultimately deny Argentina's food to Russia.
On June 5, 1982 Israeli tanks began moving across the border into a so-called Christian enclave in southern Lebanon. The following day the world learned that Israel was launching an all-out invasion of Lebanon.
There had been joint strategy of the Bolsheviks and Zionists for well over the prior year to pave the way for nuclear war. It was a complex five-track plan patterned after the build-up to World War I with its proliferation of pre-war crises.
All five tracks in the Bolshevik warpath converged about mid-1982. By then they expected to have America on a solid war footing. All four Space Shuttle Missions were planned to be completed by that time. The offensive weapons in the works would be ready, and by then the world would be a caldron of crises made to order for setting off nuclear war suddenly and without warning. Just as crises in the Balkans triggered World War I, a world in crises would trigger Nuclear War One.
Mid-1982 had arrived and the Bolshevik maneuvering to drag the world into war was right on schedule. That month on June 13 the Washington Post published a major article titled: "A WORLD SUDDENLY ASSAULTED BY GUNFIRE." It began, quote:
"By State Department count, three major and eight lesser wars were going on last week in a world that seemed suddenly beset by blazing battles."
ZIONISTS
It certainly "seemed" sudden indeed but it was not and neither was it accidental. The Bolsheviks were responsible for the fires that were burning out of control world-wide and they were most certainly caused by arson and "controlled burns". Speaking of fires--how better to keep you the people occupied for the summer of your demise, by fighting fires all over the West? The Bolshiviks then headquartered in America were allied closely with the militant Zionists in Israel. The situation was as much a mystery to the people of Israel as it was to the people of America. In both countries the average citizen was getting very concerned. In Israel, as in America, the then present government was bent on deliberately raising the level of tension, violence, and nuclear-war danger. In both countries more and more people were becoming alarmed over the growing danger without realizing that it was all indeed deliberately staged and orchestrated.
The government which ruled Israel came to power in a sudden astonishing change in April of 1977. The previous Prime Minister Rabin resigned abruptly. As always in these situations, a suitable excuse was found for public consumption. In Rabin's case, a mini-scandal over insignificant financial matters was fabricated to explain away his departure but the real reason was that Rabin had learned of the secret plans for a major Middle East war and wanted no part of it.
Rabin was replaced by a man of very different attitudes. The new Prime Minister was a man who frightened many and now had been thought incapable of seizing control of the Israeli government. He was known as an extremist, tracing all the way back to his days as the most wanted of all Israeli terrorists by the British. The idea that he might actually rule Israel some day had been unthinkable to many. Suddenly, the new ruler of Israel was none other than Menachem Begin!
Begin was representative of the most extreme faction of the political movement known as "ZIONISM". The Zionists used religious sounding terminology and Biblical words to disguise the true nature of their goals, which were indeed totally Satanic.
Political Zionism is as different from classical Judaism as night is from day. Like all the world's more notable religions, classical Judaism is based on worship of the Almighty, and it does so from its own distinct perspective. Judaism emphasizes the justice of God. Islam is righteousness in power. Christianity is love. Hinduism is spiritual essence. Buddhism, the peace that comes only from God. Justice is the hallmark of true Judaism, but it has NOTHING AT ALL to do with political Zionism except as a most deceptive slogan.
The Jews who have been lured to the land called Israel have gone there by and large believing the promises of a better life, but what they have gotten instead is a government which per capita has become the most violent and warlike on Earth. "There is no peace, saith the Lord, for the wicked." And the Begin Government in Israel was as wicked as, certainly, the Reagan Government in the U.S.--by means of the same elements and personalities involved. Modern Israel was no longer a threatened underdog, as was constantly preached and they pretend. Instead, Israel has become the world's third most powerful nation militarily. Using its runaway military might, the Zionists government of Israel was setting the world on fire. It was doing so with the blessing and support and taxpayer money of you the people and their American Bolshevik allies.
The agony which was being afflicted on tiny Lebanon, which had never done Israel harm, was beyond description. Over 10,000 Lebanese civilians had been slaughtered by the Israelis and over 600,000 made homeless in less than three weeks. Even the sanitized reports on American television could not entirely hide the wanton savagery of the Israeli invasion. One report after another showed devastation of entire city blocks on a scale not seen since World War II. On all sides the reports described Israeli shelling and dive-bombing of Beirut, Sidon, and other Lebanese cities with one word--indiscriminate.
Classical Judaism regards men as the crowning glory of God's creation. Man is supposed to have been formed in God's own image. Would God, the just God of Judaism, have done what Israel did in Lebanon? Are arrogance, bestiality, and genocide in the image of God? or are they in the image of Satan?
What the Israelis were doing in Lebanon was claimed to be in retaliation for provocations by the Palestine Liberation Organization; but the fact was that the events were part of the long-range plan to bring on nuclear war. The joint war plan of the American Bolsheviks and the Zionists in Israel was still on track. They were shooting for a Middle East war to break out before the end of summer 1982! Now try for 1990, Sheeple sleepers.
THE PLAN
The Begin plan was to goad the PLO into violence. Time after time over the prior year or so the Israeli Air Force mounted devastating air raids on Lebanon creating widespread devastation and death. Now aren't you proud to be their supporters and closest ally? The purpose of those repeated Israeli violations of the cease-fire was to provoke a highly visible counterattack by the PLO. With that as a pretext, the Begin Government intended to justify its planned invasion of Lebanon. But the PLO never did respond in kind to the Israeli goading. Aside from occasional small raids and shelling incidents, nothing was done that was sufficiently dramatic for the intended purpose. Meanwhile, time was running out.
The fast new war timetable required the Middle East war to get underway without further delay, so on June 3 the Begin Government provided its own pretext for war. That day the Israeli ambassador to Great Britain was gunned down by an assassin hired by Israel's own Intelligence agency, the MOSSAD! The Begin Government immediately professed to be outraged, saying this case was the last straw. Two days later the Israeli forces, which had already been massed along the Lebanese border, invaded.
The unbridled savagery of the Israeli attack shocked the world. In effect the nation that called itself Israel had turned the Palestinians into the new Jews of the world. They had no home; they were dispersed. They, along with innocent victims of their host country Lebanon, were the victims of genocide--a military holocaust without justice or mercy.
Protests and condemnation of the Israeli behavior in Lebanon was mounting world-wide. Nowhere was the worry greater than within the Jewish community itself. In Israel, popular sentiment against the Begin Government had erupted into widespread demonstration and, elsewhere around the world, many Jews were also speaking out against the Israeli-inflicted holocaust.
But through it all the Reagan-Begin Axis of the American Bolsheviks and the militant Israeli Zionists continued to function smoothly. In his United Nations speech of June 17th, the entity President Reagan condemned "armed aggression". And to the new Russian pledge not to be the first to use nuclear weapons in war, Reagan demanded, "deeds, not words". But when it came to Israel, those criteria were never applied. In fact the payments from your country to Israel only increased by leaps and bounds as did military supplies. The Begin Government agreed in words to one ceasefire after another, but in "deeds" it broke each truce when ready and Israeli armed aggression left over 20 percent of the population of Lebanon homeless. The whole world was shocked and outraged, yet all that did not provoke even a slap on the wrist for Israel from Washington.
The Satanic Begin Government was then in its sixth year in Israel. June of 1982 was the sixth month of the year. On the fifth day of the month the Israeli invasion of Lebanon began, and with it abominations of military desolation.
PAY ATTENTION
This had better be bringing something sharply into focus: The visions of the prophet Ezekiel, Chapter 8. The prophet says in the first verse that he was shown visions "IN THE SIXTH YEAR, IN THE SIXTH MONTH, IN THE FIFTH DAY OF THE MONTH.." He was shown abominations spawned in the Holy Land by people who arrogantly said, "The Lord does not see us."
The chapter ends in the words:
"Then He said to me, ‘Hast thou seen this, O son of man? Is it a light thing to the house of Judah that they commit the abominations which they commit here? for they have filled the land with violence, and have returned to provoke me to anger; and, lo, they put the branch to their nose. Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them.'"
So be it and Selah, for these things of God shall all come to pass in this generation upon the world. May God have mercy on ye who do not know and bless fully those of you who see and act to stop this thing come upon your world.
Allow us to close this segment.
I am Hatonn of God with the Hosts sent of God to show you the way. May you awaken and see and hear in time. Salu
