(Continued from page 191)
In early March, 2011, Brent oil was about 115$ per barrel and expected to rise further in the light of the unrest in the Middle East and, looking back to the statement of the Chinese Academy of Sciences who studied the economic facts more than 3 years ago, we read:
"Production of liquid fuels from coal is practically the most feasible route to cope with the dilemma in oil supply. ... Establishing large-scale CTL [coal-to-liquids] plants on the pitheads of several main coalfields is feasible and competitive when oil price is well over US$25 per barrel."
More commercial scale coal-to-oil plants were under construction in China and, although the Chinese government expressed 'concern' about the possible environmental impact of uncontrolled expansion and said it was taking steps to limit the number of smaller facilities, we can be sure that, like everything else in this growing 'Super Power,' Communist-humanist pragmatism will rule the decisions, not 'global warming/environmental issues.' In Asia, oil does not reach even one third of total energy consumption, with a large part coming from renewables and gas. India and China rely on oil for barely more than a fifth of their energy supply and are cushioned from oil price spikes by now having exceptionally high proportions of their energy coming from coal. This should be a factor concerning those watching the Middle East developments - and the coming Gog and Magog developments when all the elements are so thoroughly bound together.
Somewhat side-issues are the counter claims that the coal-to-oil technique is cleaner, because contaminants such as sulphur are removed from coal during the process and therefore there are claims that it is a way to fight 'global warming' (despite the industry's own figures, which show that converting and burning the liquid coal together releases almost twice the carbon pollution as using conventional diesel!) while climate campaigners inevitably insist the move is in totally the wrong direction. An analysis by the U.S. Department of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory declared that liquid fuels from coal, even with carbon capture and storage employed, would still produce at least 20% more carbon dioxide than petrol and diesel made from oil - and the energy-intensive conversion plants also require massive amounts of cooling water to stop them overheating.
Nevertheless, the U.S. Defense Department is studying coal-to-oil technology as a way to reduce the American military's dependence on Middle Eastern crude oil. The National Coal Council pushed for government incentives to help generate some 2.6 million barrels of liquid fuel a day from coal by 2025 to satisfy about 10 percent of America's expected oil demand that year. The plan would require 475 million tons of coal a year, which represents more than 40 percent of current annual U.S. production, but experts believe America's coal reserves are big enough to allow for the extra production.
Recent estimates indicated the world has about 40-50 years of known oil reserves and 65 years of natural-gas supplies, but enough coal reserves to last an estimated 155 years, with some of the largest reserves in the two biggest oil-consuming countries, the U.S. and China! The U.S. has 40 times as much energy in coal than oil, even more in oil shale, and Montana alone has 120 billion tons (109 billion metric tons) of coal that could supply the nation's gas, diesel, and jet fuel needs for the next 40-50 years. The counter-arguments include the cost of coal-to-oil projects - a single plant capable of producing about 80,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day (less than 0.5 percent of America's daily oil diet) would cost an estimated $2-6 billion to build. Perhaps we can compare that with the fact that the U.K. government plans to spend about US$200 billion on wind turbine technology when, in the winter of 2010-2011, our existing turbines were so efficient that they contributed less than 1% to our energy grid during our coldest spells - and actually had to be heated to prevent them seizing-up!
The argument that coal-to-oil projects also pose serious environmental questions is driven by the worshippers of the 'god of global warming,' whose existence has long been debunked by a significant number of scientists who have no agenda other than studying and reporting the facts. When superheated coal is turned into a gas one of the main waste products is carbon dioxide, thought to be a significant cause of global warming, but also known to be absorbed and converted into food and oxygen - both essential for mankind. If there were a larger concern for massive reduction in deforestation and seeking after techniques to employ existing plant-life in aqueous environments to similarly reduce carbon dioxide, perhaps at the source of the coal-oil conversion where considerable water is also required, we might take such claims more seriously. Leading South African producer, Sasol, plans to reduce its 'greenhouse-gas emissions' per ton of product by 10 percent by 2015 and claims that future coal-to-oil plants can be built with newer technologies that trap carbon dioxide and store it, sharply reducing their emissions. Sasol are probably way ahead of the game and already working with China to produce additional Chinese facilities.
Coal-to-oil is one of several promising but potentially polluting technologies that are receiving new attention amid high oil prices are oil and natural gas trapped in shale and other difficult rock formations, as well as oil-soaked sands in Canada and 'heavy' oils in Venezuela. Other alternatives are the use of animal manure to produce low-carbon gases, such as ethane, and diesel fuel which could be much cleaner burning than conventional diesel, or gasoline (petrol) and even wrest more diesel fuel and ethane gas from hydrocarbon by-products produced by oil refineries. Allied to the 'Nazi oil' method of Fischer-Trospch (German scientists Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch), modification of such synthesis can convert coal, natural gas, or wood gases, into useful hydrocarbons, including ethane, propane, butane and diesel fuel. Nazi Germany used the technique during World War II to manufacture synthetic fuel from coal, churning out 124,000 barrels per day by 1944.
Economics or 'Obama-think' to determine U.S. policies?
CAIR and allies fight anti-terrorism bill
The prospects of oil remaining well over $100 a barrel for the foreseeable future, and remaining high if Libya's oil ports are not reopened soon, leave the United States and other Western countries facing an end to economic recovery, which was just getting underway. But what can the U.S. really do since their president has made it clear that his left-wing ideals will determine the actions of his government. Obama sent a clear signal that the days of America unilaterally using its power to defend its interests were over when he told the United Nations General Assembly, in September, 2009: 'power is no longer a zero-sum game ... No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation ... No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed.' If he really believes this to be true he will, logically, begin to strike back at the rise of Islam. If he is not as blind over his Islamic notions as he clearly is over his 'Christian' connections!
Qaddafi and other Middle East despots have doubtlessly concluded that they no longer need fear unilateral American military action for their immoral behaviour. The air strike that Ronald Regan ordered against Qaddafi in the 1980s is no longer feared and the leftist egalitarianism of Obama has reduced the power of the U.S. to a seemingly toothless level. Hillary Clinton reflected this approach when she declared that the United Nations Security Council is where action on Libya should be decided. When Obama declares: 'I've also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis ... This includes actions we may take and those we will co-ordinate with our allies and partners, or those that we'll carry out through multilateral institutions' he sounds less than decisive.
The historical methods of U.S. or NATO air-power creating a no-fly zone over Libya, or the appearance of a U.S. aircraft-carrier off the Libyan coast, will certainly put an end to Qaddafi using mercenary pilots to bomb the opposition and may stop the killing on the ground. But, with Obama in the White House, such a show of American power is highly unlikely. While the Middle East is boiling over with revolutionary fervour in the streets, with Hezbollah and Iran threatening the U.S. and her allies, including Israel, the Obama Administration continues to demonstrate weakness and appeasement in the face of Palestinian and Arab threats. No anti-Israel resolution can pass the U.N. Security Council without the consent of the U.S. because U.S. presidents in the past have used their veto repeatedly in defence of U.S. and Israeli interests.
The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has reiterated the words of Adolf Hitler in openly calling for the obliteration of the State of Israel in violation of the United Nations Charter without any General Assembly Condemnation. The determination of such fanatics and the failure of the civilized world to deal with them makes allowing such a regime to acquire nuclear weapons the height of lunacy. But, of course, the mistaken invasion of Iraq in a hunt for nuclear weapons that uncovered zero warheads/missiles fitting the supposed description supplied by 'informers,' has left Obama wary of following Bush into the history books as a gullible swallower of fairy-tales. Sadly, as we found out during the presidential election, Obama's supposed Christian pastor exhibits embarrassing traits every bit as damaging to the presidential history!
Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Abdallah al-Qaradawi
Meanwhile, back in Tennessee, USA, a bill that links the sharia doctrine of jihad to material support of terrorism is being fiercely opposed by CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), other Islamist groups, and the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union).
CAIR will obviously continue to pursue its long-term agenda - the advancement of political sharia in America - but the bill will criminalize only those individuals who knowingly engage in what has already been defined federally as material support for terrorist activity. But the bill in no way regulates or affects the peaceful practice of any religion. Who would oppose such a common-sense measure - clearly only the loonies of the radical left and Islamists who would do anything to support the jihad provisions in sharia? Such anti-terrorism legislation would perhaps give some power to local and state law enforcement to deal with jihadist plans.
The bill is not designed to interfere with the constitutionally protected rights of those who practice sharia religious law, religious rights, or Islamic beliefs, but to protect citizens from acts of terrorism that come from sharia jihad which is a growing threat in every U.S. state.
Far-left groups like the ACLU, Soros-funded extremist blogs like Mother Jones and ThinkProgress, and Islamist Muslim Brotherhood-linked pressure groups (like the Muslim Public Affairs Council and CAIR), will oppose the bill fiercely and they are growing. Misleading press reports have been issued by the Associated Press, who incorrectly reported: '[it] would make following sharia a felony [and] ...represents the boldest legislative attempt yet to limit how Muslims worship.' Not surprisingly, the Islamic groups [CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)] who are already heavily linked to terrorist funding, have launched a media campaign to distort the law and defame its author, Center for Security Policy General Counsel, David Yerushalmi.
They have lied ridiculously to the extent that they claim the bill: 'would jail sharia followers ... [make it] a crime to practice Islam peacefully in the state ... outlaw central tenets of Islam, such as praying five times a day toward Mecca, abstaining from alcohol or fasting for Ramadan.' They even quoted Remziya Suleyman, policy co-ordinator for the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition: 'This is an anti-Muslim bill that makes it illegal to be a Muslim in the state of Tennessee.'
In an interview with 'Mother Jones', CAIR staff attorney Gadeir Abbas shared a shred of truth when he said: 'essentially the bill is trying to separate the 'good Muslims' from the 'bad Muslims.' If the Tennessee bill really could separate sharia's law of jihad ('bad') from peaceful jihad practice ('good') - as so many 'moderate Muslims' claim when they are asked to define jihad - we could ask them how they could possibly oppose it. Unfortunately, when we know that the lying dawah and taqiyya doctrines of Islam exist we can be uncertain if a Muslim is ever telling the truth!
Of course the mis-characterization of the bill by these Muslim pressure groups is entirely consistent with these lying doctrines! Despite the bill's very clear wording on protecting citizens' First Amendment rights to peacefully practice their religion including Islam, of course, these Muslim groups are making two very clear statements: (1) they are drawing a line in support of the law of jihad in sharia, and (2) are affirming that, as books like Sharia: The Threat to America have argued, sharia is a unified theological, political, military and legal code.
The proposed law is very straightforward, and is based almost precisely on the federal material support of terrorism statute upheld recently by the U.S. Supreme Court which found that any individual discovered to be providing 'training,' 'expert advice or assistance,' 'service,' and 'personnel' to designated terrorist organizations constitute material support and, thus, would be in violation of the law.
The truth of the matter is that the proposed law deals a major blow to favourite causes of both the radical left and the Islamists in the Muslim Brotherhood front groups (CAIR etc.) and clearly stands in the Islamist goal of providing material support to the genocidal Hamas or Hezb'allah, or the leftist enviro-terrorists (or FARC).
The bill's first section includes legislative findings that conclude that authoritative sharia is the basis for jihad both around the globe and domestically. The legislative findings make clear that the law refers to the objectively knowable sharia that clearly calls for violent jihad against the West and is the law of the land in many Islamic controlled countries, e.g. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Gaza, Sudan, Somalia, Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, Pakistan, parts of Muslim-controlled Nigeria, Indonesia and even the Philippines. The bill clearly identifies sharia's brutal practices and guiding principles as they occur in reality and historically (rather than the imaginary sharia of 'moderate Islam').
The second section of the bill, the legislative intent, states clearly that the target is a violent jihad-driven sharia, not any peaceful Islamic religious practice. This peaceful religious practice even includes the 'moderate Islamists' non-violent definition of jihad, i.e. the personal struggle or striving to better ones' self (which is based on a very weak interpretation of the hadith which is noticeably rejected by the imams of the Islam-ruled countries listed in the previous paragraph).
Since September 11, 2001, these Muslim Brotherhood pressure groups have often condemned what they describe as 'terrorism in the name of Islam' - and then been caught sending funds to known Islamic terrorist groups. How do people think these Muslim 'pressure' groups can support criminalizing organizations that clearly promote what they dared to call 'perversions of Islam' - but then have been found supporting these same 'perversions'?!
In the third section of the law, the Attorney General would have the authority to designate a sharia organization but only if that organization is advancing violent sharia and either actually engaging in terrorism or retains the capability to engage in terrorism and intends to engage in terrorism. These facets are so explicit that only those blatantly engaging in violent jihadic terrorism, as defined here clearly, would be in any danger of being prosecuted. But, once identified, the sharia organization can have its financial assets frozen. These clear riders add clear support to the Federal Material Support of Terrorism Statute upheld recently by the U.S. Supreme Court and the final section is the Criminal Section, which makes it a crime to provide such a terrorist organization with material support and, again, supports the Federal Material Support Statute.
The Tennessee bill clearly does not impact the peaceful worship by law-abiding Muslims. Anyone who does not advocate violent sharia or become engaged in, or plan to engage in, terrorism has no reason to fear this law. The only ones who need fear anything from this law are sharia advocates and devotees of terrorism who will find it criminalizes any material support of terrorist organizations. Federal laws are meant to 'discriminate' against foreign terrorist organizations just as all good laws will put the rights and protection of the innocent, law abiding citizens first while ensuring that the evil and guilty still get fair and thorough investigation, as well as their fair and just reward for their crimes!
Attempts to blame 'Islamophobia' and claim bigotry do not surprise us, for they come from groups who oppose reasonable counter-terrorism measures that would make the USA more secure by addressing real threats in order to follow their own agendas. Brotherhood off-shoots, such as CAIR, ISNA, and MPAC, have made it clear that the protection of jihad and sharia are agendas that will always come at the expense of the truth.
A federal court filing in December 2007 unequivocally stated:
'From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists' [and] 'the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.'
David Rusin stated that, from the beginning of its creation, the Brotherhood described itself as a social group while running violent operations:
'Affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, such as CAIR and ISNA [Islamic Society of North America], also have mastered the art of deception ... [The groups are] portraying themselves as run-of-the-mill civil liberties groups when they actually promote a supremacist agenda that demands special privileges for Muslims and the curtailment of the rights of others, especially with regard to free speech.'
An example of 'soft jihad' investigation was recently seen at the Homeland Security Committee hearing in March, 2011, when Rep. Keith Ellison's (D-Minn.) - the first Muslim-American to be elected to Congress - was among those Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) invited to testify to investigate possible terrorist recruitment within the American Muslim community. Ellison complained to the committee that the proceeding was "the very heart of scapegoating."
At a recent House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf cited a letter obtained by Fox News and dated Sept. 23, 2009, that revealed that CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) Executive Director Nihad Awad had written to Muammar Qaddafi requesting money for CAIR to fund 'a new project'! CAIR has a history of seeking, and receiving, money from foreign entities, but is not registered under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) which is not being fully enforced, as it should be!
In the letter, Awad asked Qaddafi for funding for his new project called the 'Muslim Peace Foundation' and delivered to Qaddafi when he was in New York attending the United Nations General Assembly. Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., cited the letter at a House Appropriations sub-committee hearing, during which Wolf asked FBI Director Robert Mueller about the FBI's relationship with CAIR; Mueller replied there "is no formal relationship with CAIR."
A translation of a portion of the letter, written originally in Arabic, reveals: "I am pleased to send to Your Excellency in my name most solemn assurances of thanks and appreciation for the efforts you exert in the service of Islam, Muslims and all mankind through your initiative to teach Islam, spread the culture of Islam, and solve disputes, for which you are known internationally." This letter was obviously written long before the recent uprising in Libya, but Wolf said the CAIR director's 2009 letter was nonetheless written with the full knowledge of the regime's brutal treatment of its opponents and its deplorable human rights record, as well as its long history of acts of international terrorism. The letter apparently reveals that Awad was in the process of setting up the 'Muslim Peace Foundation' and seeking to raise $15 million and ends by thanking Qaddafi for his "generous support." Wolf also stated that he understood that Awad had made repeated attempts to solicit funding from Qadaffi and other foreign sources, and he asked Mueller if the FBI was aware of the outreach to Qadaffi and if the group had received funds from the Libyan regime. Mueller was unable to confirm or deny whether this was true but indicated that he would research the matter.
The Investigative Project on Terrorism released a report that quoted a Libyan news website that reported that CAIR officials, including Awad, had met with Qaddafi in September 2009 and that they had requested that he "underwrite a program to distribute 1 million copies of the Quran to government officials and the general public in America."
However, CAIR spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, told Fox News that the organization didn't receive any money from the Libyan government:
"A number of community leaders and organizations were invited to a meeting in New York, at which support was sought for an initiative, unrelated to CAIR, to promote peace and mutual understanding ... That single meeting mirrored the actions of the Bush and Obama administrations."
Hooper also claims that "CAIR was one of the first American organizations to call for a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians."
Steve Emerson, the executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, did not miss the opportunity to accuse CAIR of being "hypocritical ... [to] ask for funds from Qaddafi given that they've just condemned him … Their transgressions are multiple … some of them fall into immorality, some into illegality."
Emerson pointed out that raising funds abroad is legal but must be reported by CAIR on the group's annual 990 tax form, but if they were to work at the "direction or control" of a foreign donor they could very well be violating the Foreign Agent Registration Act. Hooper would not respond to Fox News' questions on whether CAIR receives funding from foreign donors, but he would say that CAIR works with the FBI on "an almost daily basis on civil rights issues."
Small wonder that Rep. Peter King declared that the Homeland Security Committee hearings will continue and the committee will investigate radicalization of Muslim Americans in U.S. prisons, strategies of al-Qaeda and other organizations to recruit Americans, and how the Department of Homeland Security plans to address the "increasing radicalization of individuals within the United States," reported Yahoo News.
Many are asking that King's committee should also investigate the Islamist indoctrination taking place in America's schools since government schools have been using textbooks that glorify Islam and denigrate Christianity for some time. Such materials give children a favourable view of Islam and a negative view of Christianity and the Judaeo-Christian heritage. In June 2008, after two years of painstaking study, the American Textbook Council (founded in 1989 as an independent national research organization) released a 48-page report entitled "Islam in the Classroom: What the Textbooks Tell Us." The report summarized the Council's detailed evaluation of the major history and social science texts in use in government schools in 2006 and, significantly, the portion of the report concerning seventh-grade world history textbooks. Many seventh-grade curricula follow the lead of California schools and now require students to receive instruction and engage in activities to learn about Islamic history, culture, the Qur'an, and the religious practices of Muslims.
Should we be surprised that the report notes that:
"textbooks reviewed avoid all conflict and bloodshed in describing Islam's push out of Arabia and rapid conquest of most of the Mediterranean world. They fail to explain how Islam spread in the seventh and eighth centuries. Islam appears out of nowhere, spreads smoothly and by implication without conflict. Once it was common to say that Islam was spread by the sword. Now, textbooks implied, it moved peacefully, with traders. Islam is brought to apparently willing populations."
In the same way the Mormons dress up their history while avoiding atrocities such as the Mountain Meadows massacre, or the Japanese gloss over the way they brutalized their enemies in WWII, Islam is being allowed to white-wash its history. It is understandable that they do this in their own backyards, but how can this happen in the USA? In 1995, President Bill Clinton directed his Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley, to prepare guidelines for religious expression and activities in America's schools. The guidelines, set forth in "Religious Expression in Public Schools," declared that government schools may not provide religious instruction as such, but they may "teach about religion." Christians can only wonder how a nation that so many think of as 'Christian' could have gone so far astray that they fell for this deceiving move. But then, it will be the all-time kick in the teeth to many in the Darwinian-Dawkinsian camp if they fall to a bunch of 'stealth jihadist' religionists from the Middle East who had nothing to throw at them bigger than their own passenger planes, but then overthrew them through the Fifth-columnist method! How dreadfully ironic it would be for the U.S. to stand alert and powerful against the God-hating atheists of the Communist world and then fall to the God-hating Islamists? We pray to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that it will not be on our watch.
The Clinton administration opened the door to (inaccurate) teaching about the history and religious practices of Muslims by using the statement that "... students generally do not have a Federal right to be excused from lessons that may be inconsistent with their religious beliefs or practices." Thus, incredible though it seems to the rest of the world (even to the U.K. where you can be fined for daring to resist the laws over-riding objections of a 'religious nature'), parents who may object to their children being compelled to assume a Muslim name and recite prayers to Allah as part of their "learning activities" have no recourse and may not withdraw their children from these activities.
One highly publicized case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006, but the Court rejected the appeal "without comment" and let the ruling by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco stand in favour of the school district. The suit brought by Christian students and their parents challenged the content of a seventh-grade history course at Excelsior Middle School in Byron, California, in the fall of 2001. The teacher was supposedly following an instructional guide when she told students they would pretend to be Muslims for three weeks in order to learn what Muslims believe. According to news reports, during this time they were required to wear Muslim dress, memorize verses from the Qur'an, pray to Allah, simulate Ramadan by fasting, use the phrase "Allah Akbar" (Allah is great), and play "jihad games." The federal judge in the Ninth Circuit ruled that such activities constitute teaching "about religion" and declared the program devoid of "any devotional or religious intent," and therefore educational, not religious in nature.
Since the U.K. government have continued to make similarly illogical rulings and are trying to coerce Christian churches into holding 'marriage ceremonies' for couples of every sexual persuasion we are waiting for two possible scenarios to develop:
The Christian denominations who have used the most liberal of procedures as evidence that the couple to be married are truly Christian will now insist on real evidence for belief and seek only to marry true believers so that the question of who is getting married will not arise;
Two people apply for a 'same sex marriage' at a mosque in the U.K. - and are refused!;
Obviously, neither scenario is more than theoretical. Christian denominations have apostatized from the Word of God too far to dare back-track and admit their error. And which brave couple would even dare to put on an act as a 'homosexual' couple in an Islamic mosque in the U.K.? A few years ago one Muslim family in the U.K. who dared to convert to Christianity were promptly targeted for abuse and damage of their property and vehicles by their former Muslim 'brothers.'
In the U.S., stories of similar 'soft jihad' occur repeatedly and one writer, Cinnamon Stillwell, wrote in The San Francisco Chronicle article, "Islam in America's Public Schools: Education or Indoctrination?" (2008): "Islamists have taken what's come to be known as the 'soft jihad' into America's classrooms and children in K-12 are the first casualties. Whether it is textbooks, curriculum, classroom exercises, film screenings, speakers or teacher training, public education in America is under assault."
Obviously, the onus is on parents to check the textbooks their children use for history, geography and/or social studies to discover if they are presenting a "politically correct" view of Islam while denigrating Christianity and the Judaeo-Christian heritage. Parents must speak about concerns to the appropriate teacher, or even the school principal, if problems are found. As Stillwell writes: "Probably the single greatest weapon in the arsenal of those trying to fight the misuse of America's public schools is community involvement." Over 80 percent of Christian parents send their children to government-controlled schools and, if even 20 percent of these parents took an active role in the fight against indoctrination in the public schools, substantial improvements would be made.
The Muslim Brotherhood make-over of its image uses carefully-worded language to put its adversaries at ease. But believers in this world must not be fooled and should recognise that this group was created to establish a worldwide state governed by sharia, and for the Brotherhood to abandon that goal would be considered an act of apostasy by its fanatical supporters.
Syria resorts to customary Islamic force to crush objectors
Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Abdallah al-Qaradawi is a central figure affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and, after expulsion from Egypt, found refuge in Qatar and continued to operate from there throughout the Muslim world. Many consider him to be the supreme religious and ideological authority for the Muslim Brotherhood, although he is not officially its leader and has refused to accept the title of the Muslim Brotherhood's General Guide. He is very influential in Egypt and considered to be one of the most important Sunni Muslim clerics of his generation, and a spiritual authority for millions of Muslims around the world, including the Hamas movement. His popularity among Sunnis has grown because of the massive use he makes of his media opportunities, particularly television and the Internet, e.g. the Al-Jazeera TV channel, which broadcasts his popular program 'Life and Islamic Law' and is viewed by tens of millions of Muslims. That his program demonstrates typical Islamic anti-Semitic propaganda and incitement should come as no surprise to those familiar with his work on the IslamOnline website, which he co-founded in 1997.
Al-Qaradawi refers to his religious views as 'moderate Islam,' claiming to seek to balance intellect and emotion while striving for reform in Islam, which he calls 'correcting perceptions which were corrupted.' He is considered one of the foremost proponents of the doctrine of the 'the law of the Muslim minorities,' which provides the Muslim minorities around the globe with space in which to 'manoeuver' and 'compromise' between their daily lives and Islamic law. The aim of implementing his 'doctrine' is to unite and unify Muslim minorities by making it possible for them to live under non-Muslim regimes while preparing to be ready for the final stage of spreading Islam worldwide, using force at the right time when they have superior numbers or forces, and as necessary.
While teaching Muslim emigrants how to go about their daily lives with minimal compromise while carrying out their duties to Islamic religious law, al-Qaradawi also instructs them regarding the Islamisation of Europe for, in 2003, he issued a fatwa declaring that:
'Islam will return to Europe as a victorious conqueror after having been expelled twice. This time it will not be conquest by the sword, but by preaching and spreading [Islamic] ideology…The future belongs to Islam…The spread of Islam until it conquers the entire world and includes the both East and West marks the beginning of the return of the Islamic Caliphate…'
Although, incredibly, al-Qaradawi opposes al-Qaeda and its methods, he enthusiastically supports Palestinian terrorism, including suicide bombing attacks targeting the civilian Israeli population. In the past he also supported 'resistance' (i.e., terrorism) to the occupation of Iraq, issued fatwas calling for jihad against Israel and the Jews, and authorized suicide bombing attacks even if the victims were women and children. He regards all of 'Palestine' as Muslim territory in full accordance with Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas ideology, strongly opposes the existence of the State of Israel, rejecting the peace treaties signed with it and opposing the Palestinian Authority (even, in the past, having called for the stoning of Mahmoud Abbas).
In response to the recent dramatic events in Egypt, al-Qaradawi was widely reported as expressing support for the demonstrators and calling on the Egyptian people to fight the despots while forbidding security forces to shoot civilians. The IslamOnline website posted a chapter of his book [Islamic] Law and Jihad, according to which jihad against corruption and a tyrannical regime is the most exalted form of jihad, even more important than jihad against external enemies.
Al-Qaradawi was expelled from Egypt in 1997 because of his affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood, which was outlawed and, after Mubarak was ousted, al-Qaradawi appeared at a February 18 rally attended by more than a million people in Cairo's Tahrir Square and delivered the sermon. He expressed his esteem for the young people of Egypt who had revolted against the 'despotic Pharaoh' Mubarak. He sent a message of interfaith unity between Muslims and Christians, who had stood and demonstrated side by side, and asked Christians 'to bow in Muslim prayer in an act of submission to Allah' (WorldNetDaily reporter Aaron Klein). The request could mean only one thing: the Brotherhood wants Christians to submit to Allah and eventually to the dreaded Sharia law. He praised the Egyptian army which had 'adhered to freedom and democracy' and called for the immediate release of all political prisoners and for the rapid formation of a civilian government. He ended the sermon with a call for the liberation of Al-Aksa mosque and asked the Egyptian army to open the Rafah crossing and allow aid convoys to enter the Gaza Strip. A few days later, apparently on February 21, he returned to Qatar.
The Muslim Brotherhood was careful to keep a low profile until al-Qaradawi's arrival and then quickly declared that it was not behind the invitation that brought him to Egypt, apparently to prevent tensions with the other protest movements. Dr. Muhammad Sa'ad al-Katatni, a Muslim Brotherhood spokesman, said that they had not invited al-Qaradawi to Egypt but, rather, the invitation had come from 'the youth in [Tahrir] Square.' Spokesmen for other protest movements predictably tried to diminish the importance of al-Qaradawi's appearance. But, as we can see from the very nature of dawah and taqiyyah, it is foolish to trust anything that comes from the mouth of a Muslim as totally representing anything more than a fraction of the truth. The 'father of all lies' (John 8v44: 'You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies') has done an excellent job in the religion of Islam - possibly his ultimate 'religion' outside of the final work of the Mahdi/anti-Christ!
Al-Qaradawi's appearance at the rally in Cairo was a tribute to the great popularity he enjoys in Egypt and reflects a new stage in the Muslim Brotherhood's public involvement in the events in Egypt. However, the statement made by the Muslim Brotherhood spokesman may indicate a potential rivalry and/or dissension between the Muslim Brotherhood leadership in Egypt and al-Qaradawi, who entered the leadership vacuum which has plagued the Muslim Brotherhood in recent years - or it could just be another ploy in their 'lying doctrine of demons' (1 Timothy 4v1-2). His biography reveals that he was born in a small Nile delta village in 1926, his father died when he was two and he grew up in his uncle's house, in a religious environment. When he was four he was sent to a religious school and, according to legend, when he was nine knew the Koran by heart. As a youth he studied at a religious school in Tanta, where he delved into the writings of the infamous Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, who shaped his political and religious thinking. When he was 18 he became a student in the religion department of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, graduating in 1953 and passing the exam for the teaching license the following year. In 1958 he received a Master's degree in Arab language and literature and in 1973 received a Doctorate. He has written more than 50 books about various aspects of Islamic jurisprudence. During his studies at Al-Azhar he was exposed to the Muslim Brotherhood ideology and devoted himself to political Islamic activity and to preaching against the British presence in Egypt. His preaching against Nasser's regime led to his repeated arrest.
His Islamic political activity and critical tongue caused him to be dismissed from Al-Azhar University in 1961 and be assigned to head its branch in Qatar where he became prominent as an independent cleric. He remained in Qatar, where he headed a high religious school and, in 1977, he founded the Department of Islamic Law Studies in the University of Qatar and headed it until 1990, also founding an institute for Sunnah study. The institutions he founded remain important centres for his activity in the Arab- Muslim world and among Muslim communities in the West and he was granted Qatari citizenship in honour of the services he performed for the country, also receiving a number of external awards and decorations, among them the King Feisal of Saudi Arabia Award, the Islamic University of Malaysia Award and the Sultan of Burundi Award.
After the Muslim Brotherhood was outlawed in Egypt, al-Qaradawi was a wanted man and had to employ his base in Qatar to continue to hold a number of posts, both in and outside the country, including head of the Qatar University's Institute for the Study of the History of the Prophet Muhammad. He was also chairman of the association of Muslim scholars, and head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR), an Islamic-European umbrella organization for the rapprochement between Muslim communities throughout Europe and for building bridges between the various Islamic schools so that they can integrate life in democratic Christian Europe with Muslim law. In July, 2007, he launched a forum for 'moderate Islam' named after himself and funded by the sharia department of the University of Qatar and the moderate Islamic Centre in Kuwait. Although al-Qaradawi began as a transparent Muslim Brotherhood activist he later denied membership in it and, as noted earlier, several times refused offers to head the movement in Egypt.
Conservative Muslims object to what they consider al-Qaradawi's excessive flexibility and have occasionally attacked his fatwas as 'too permissive.' Despite the criticism he is esteemed in the Muslim world and most Muslim clerics respect his fatwas, some even considering him the heir of Sayyid Qutb (the Muslim Brotherhood founder and major activist demanding a return to Muhammadan jihad) and the movement's highest religious and ideological authority, even though he rejected their offers to officially head it. Note that he may have chosen the smarter option for himself and Islamic 'stealth jihad': one, by rejecting offers to be official head of the Brotherhood and therefore not turning close, direct attention to himself; and, two, by appearing to be 'moderate' he fools the gullible in the West while continuing to train his followers in 'stealth jihad';
But, of course, all we have to do to unmask his deception is to peruse his quotes concerning Jews, Israel, or any nation that does not embrace Islam - all the hatred and vitriol that are standard Muslim fare are found!
Al-Qaradawi's books are exemplified by 'The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam' which has been translated into many languages, sold millions of copies, and is widely considered to be the best selling Muslim book after the Koran.
His enthusiastic support of Palestinian terrorism, including its direction against civilians, is entirely consistent with Muhammadan doctrine and unsupported by his pathetic claim that Israel is a militaristic society where every civilian is a potential soldier! The historical facts show that Muhammad led his armies against Jewish merchants, traders, and civilian populations - the driving factor was their wealth and relative weakness which he needed to increase his wealth and strengthen his army by promising them easy pickings and easy victories! It was only after they grew by this terrorism that Islamic armies then began to branch out and spread worldwide. But, since this was clearly the Muhammadan method we cannot be surprised that Al-Qaradawi follows this despicable example by also issuing fatwas authorizing attacks on Jews around the world because, he claims, there is no essential difference between Judaism and Zionism, and therefore every Jewish target equals an Israeli target. His status as a leading Sunni Muslim cleric gives increased authority to his fatwas supporting Palestinian terrorism and make him particularly influential in shaping anti-Israeli sentiments in the Arab-Muslim world.
In July, 2003, during the height of the suicide bombing terrorism (the second intifada), Al-Qaradawi addressed the issue of suicide bombings at an ECFR conference and declared that istishhad (death as a martyr for the sake of Allah), carried out by Palestinian organizations to oppose the so-called 'Zionist occupation,' were by no means to be defined as terrorism! Senior Hamas leaders needed no encouragement to use al-Qaradawi's fatwas to authorize suicide bombing attacks against Israel, e.g.
Sheikh Hamid al-Bitawi, a senior Hamas activist in Judea and Samaria, referred to an al-Qaradawi fatwa to emphasise that, according to Islamic jurisprudence: 'jihad is a collective duty…' and that 'if infidels occupy any bit of Muslim land - such as the occupation of Palestine by the Jews - jihad becomes the duty of every individual, thus making it permissible to carry out suicide bombing attacks'.
Dr. Abd al-Aziz al-Rantisi, a senior Hamas leader who died later in a targeted killing, quoted the authority of a fatwa issued by al-Qaradawi to claim that: ' ... suicide depends on intention. If the person intends to kill himself because he is fed up with life, that is suicide (which is prohibited). However, if he wants to die to strike at the enemy and to receive a reward from Allah, he is considered as delivering up his soul [and not as committing suicide].'
To help fund Hamas's civilian infrastructure (the da'wah) al-Qaradawi established the 'Union of Good', an umbrella organization which raises money for Hamas and other Islamist activities around the globe. The 'Union of Good' was declared a terrorism-sponsoring organization and outlawed by Israel in February, 2002 and, in December, 2002, it was also designated a terrorist organization by the United States and outlawed.
At the beginning of 2010, Al-Qaradawi criticized Mahmoud Abbas for a UN vote regarding the Goldstone Report, and issued a fatwa calling for Abbas to be stoned in Mecca. Abbas demanded a retraction from al-Qaradawi, who denied having issued the fatwa but did admit that, during a sermon, he said that if accusations against any person in the Palestinian Authority were proved true [i.e., that he had supported the cancellation of the vote on the Goldstone Report], that person should be stoned in Mecca as punishment for treason. In response, Mahmoud al-Habash, the Palestinian Authority minister of religion and endowments, declared that his ministry had ordered all preachers in PA mosques to attack al-Qaradawi personally!
Al-Qaradawi's anti-Semitic remarks are classic Islam, e.g. in his 'Life and Islamic Law' program broadcast on March 15, 2009, he was discussing the topic of righteous Muslims in Islam and a participating viewer asked about the role of the righteous (al-salkhoun) in the Koran in the liberation of the [Islamic] holy places and the victory of the [Muslim] nation. Al-Qaradawi used the opportunity to attack the Jews, basing his answer on a widely used hadith [oral tradition] that maintains that the prophet Muhammad called for the murder of Jews, quoting: '… you will continue to fight the Jews and they will fight you until the Muslims kill them. The Jew hides behind rock and tree. The rock and the tree say, 'Oh, slave of Allah, oh, Muslim, here is the Jew behind me, come and kill him.' On the same program Al-Qaradawi claimed righteous Muslims were 'the salt of the earth' who were always instrumental in liberating lands, a 'source of hope' and that, through them, Jerusalem, 'Palestine,' 'the Gaza Strip', and all the lands ruled by the enemies of the Muslims would be 'liberated.' He claimed that the war against the Jews was not only the war of the Palestinians but of all Muslims. In the light of these words you would expect the laughable collection called the 'Arab League' to be rushing to 'liberate' Libya but, of course, they are as befuddled by the typical Muslim contradictions of their brother, Qaddafi, as they were by those of the late Iraqi tyrant, Saddam Hussein. And, while mentioning contradictions and the 'Arab League', we mighgt ask the question of why any Western nation should put forward one plane, one tank, or one missile, to 'free' Libya from her Muslim brother(s) when the ummah nations surrounding Qadaffi spend, on average, £52 billion pounds per year on armaments! What are they using these weapons for? To stockpile defences against their fellow Muslims who might attack them in a Iraq v. Kuwait or Iraq v. Iran fashion? Or for their next planned mass attack against little Israel who have already kicked their collective backsides repeatedly since 1947?!
We've asked before, but it bears repeating - if Allah is with Islam in its attempt to take over the world, why have the Muslim nations been such a miserable collective ever since the fall of the Ottomans?
Al-Qaradawi denounced the September 11, 2001, Al-Qaeda attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and said it was the duty of every Muslim to help bring the perpetrators to trial, but he called for attacks on Americans fighting in Iraq. In August, 2004, a 'Pluralism in Islam' conference was held by Egypt's Journalists' Union in Cairo and al-Qaradawi issued a fatwa allowing the abduction and murder of American civilians in Iraq, apparently to exert pressure on the American army to remove its forces. He emphasized his interpretation of jihad in a similar manner to his statements on the nation of Israel, declaring that 'all the Americans in Iraq are fighters, there is no difference between civilians and soldiers, and they have to be fought against because the American civilians come to Iraq to serve the occupation. Abducting and killing them is a [religious] duty to make [the Americans] leave [Iraq] immediately. [On the other hand] abusing their corpses is forbidden by Islam.' So now we can understand the logic of the kidnap and murder of U.S. and U.K. civilians in Iraq and the videos released showing the beheadings etc. Clearly, it is alright to behead - but 'abusing the corpses is forbidden by Islam'! So that's alright then! Perhaps someone should explain to Al-Qaradawi that most people don't fear what happens to their corpse, but they care a lot about their necks! Or some Scriptural advice from Jesus about the important things in life (Matthew 5v27ff.):
27'You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery'; 28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29'If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30'If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.
The condition of the spirit and soul of a man is far more important than the state of his body - even before death! While Islam tries to patch up their inability to control their lusts and passions by forcing their women into burkha's they mistakenly believe that this is obviously far better than the West which has allowed their women - and even young children to dress and talk 'sexy'. Muslims would not want us to know that, appart from their men degrading women by allowing polygamy, temporary marriages (i.e. legal prostitution), and even paedophilia (in which they are following the example of their 'prophet'- as witnessed by the evidence of disgusting old Muslim men purchasing very young children from places like India so they can vent their perversions). They also fail to recognise that the vast majority living in the West, who also exhibit behaviour that Muslims find disgusting, are not Christians in any way described by the Bible. Sadly, Muslims hold the mistaken view that everyone who lives in a 'Christian nation' must be a Christian, just as (almost) everyone living in a Muslim nation must be Muslim, or they are paying the jizyah tax to obtain exemption from following Islam, or (more likely) they are daily persecuted - or already dead!
The Lord Jesus Christ always spoke the truth and made it clear that few will find their way to heaven (Matthew 7v7ff.):
7'Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 8'For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. 9'Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? 10'Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he? 11'If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him! 12'In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets. 13'Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14'For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Al-Qaradawi is not the only Muslim who could benefit greatly from reading these powerful Words. Can any Muslim who continues to seek the death and destruction of non-Muslims and 'their nations' ever claim to read and love the teachings of Jesus? They are as far away from Al-Qaradawi as you could get - yet we do receive e-mails from Muslims who claim to read the Bible and 'love' the Words of Jesus. And, in the next sentence, they rail at the Jews and reveal the true nature of their hearts.
Al-Qaradawi issued the fatwa at the 'Pluralism in Islam' conference in Cairo a week after public figures from various Muslim countries had published an open letter calling for support for the forces fighting the coalition in Iraq. It was signed by 93 Islamic clerics and public figures, including al-Qaradawi and figures from the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah. Ten days later, al-Qaradawi sent a fax to the London-based daily Arabic newspaper Al-Hayat denying 'what the media said' and insisting he never issued a fatwa on the issue. However, before the denial was issued, Azzam Halima, al-Qaradawi's office manager, had confirmed that al-Qaradawi had, indeed, issued a fatwa stating that it was a duty to fight the American civilians in Iraq because they were invaders! Moral of the story - never trust anything a Muslim says!
Al-Qaradawi is a strident opposer of Shi'ite Islam and thus extremely critical of Iran's attempts to spread it to Sunni countries. He has also criticized Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on a number of occasions - not surprisingly, considering the clear connection of this terrorist group with Shi'ite Iran. Regarding the Iranian quest to obtain a viable nuclear capability, al-Qaradawi has agreed that Muslims should acquire nuclear weapons 'to terrify their enemies' but, on the other hand, has said that nuclear weapons should not be used. No doubt, if they could effectively 'nuke' Israel without fallout striking Muslim nations, his opinion would change again. Perhaps he is not familiar with 'N-bomb' capabilities - or the people dealing with Iran do not have the 'know-how' to supply it, or have the 'smarts' to fail to supply it?!
The Tunisian events caused al-Qaradawi to proclaim that the struggle should continue until all the members of ousted president Ben Ali's party were removed from their positions, with the exception of the interim president who should remain in power to prevent the creation of a constitutional vacuum. He also called on Tunisia to release its political prisoners, bring back political exiles and restore the Islamic customs which had been forbidden by the secular regime, such as wearing the veil (hijab) on university campuses.
Regarding Libya, al-Qaradawi called on Gaddafi to relinquish power and to 'learn the lessons' of Egypt and Tunisia. He declared that a revolt against Gaddafi was an Islamic religious duty, and called on the tribes in Libya to rise up and join the ranks of the demonstrators, and for the Libyan army 'to behave like their brothers in Egypt, to stand alongside the people to restore to Libya its Arab Islamic character.' He encouraged the jihad fighters rising up against the Libyan regime by declaring that those who had already died during the violent events were now shaheeds in paradise.
Jihadists are now everywhere in the world. In the Middle East even Syria, which is being armed to the teeth by Iran and Russia, is having to resort to the customary Islamic force to crush those who object to its rulers. How will it all end? A coming conflagration in the Middle East seems ever more imminent by any group of circumstances playing out now. The U.S. and U.K. economies are now further damaged by soaring prices and Japan, with a record-breaking debt comparable to that of the U.S., is now in the grip of a natural disaster of astronomic proportions linked to man-made stupidity. Who would ever have dreamt that man would build a nuclear reactor within easy reach of a devastating earthquake-tsunami? It reads like a B-movie script! Will these countries ever recover from the actions of a few greedy, evil, and stupid people?
Are these signs that we need to watch as signalling the End-Times? Matthew 24v4ff.:
And Jesus answered and said to them, 'See to it that no one misleads you. 5'For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many. 6'You will be hearing of wars and rumours of wars. See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end. 7'For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. 8'But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs. 9'Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. 10'At that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another. 11'Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. 12'Because lawlessness is increased, most people's love will grow cold. 13'But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. 14'This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
The greatest sign people need to watch is still Israel yet, mainly in the USA, Replacement Theology (the doctrine that the church has replaced the nation of Israel) dominates many churches. Thus, many refuse to believe that the countdown could have begun and they feel life as they know it now will continue, perhaps for many hundreds of years. They believe there is nothing unusual about the present generation and that any believers who point to Israel, war in the Middle East and related issues, are just "the sky is falling" type people. They remind us that we have always had 'wars and rumours of war' - which is true and an argument that we have used to refute the scare-mongering so loved by Jehovah's Witnesses whose organisation, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, pushed it heavily until their '1975 Armageddon prophecy' failed (as did all their other 'best guesses'!). Careful study of the frequency of wars and earthquakes by 'Reachout Trust' (an apologetics ministry based in the U.K.) reveals a strong pattern of both for a considerable number of years. But the gradual escalation of Islamic aggression against Israel (whose foundation out of next-to-nothing on 14th May, 1948, was itself miraculous, but prophesied in the Bible) points towards a gathering End-Times scenario.
God's promises are very clear in this reiteration and detailing of the Abrahamic Covenant. First, the land of Canaan was given to the seed of Abraham. Second, the seed who would inherit the promised land would be in Egyptian bondage for 400 years. This is a clear indication that it is not the seed of Ishmael, but the seed of Isaac - Israel - who would be the Biblical inheritors of the land. Third, the exact boundaries of that land were given. Since Israel has yet to possess the land to the full extent of these boundaries, clearly there must be a day still future when she will do so. This is not a promise to be fulfilled to the Church, but a literal promise awaiting future fulfilment for the physical seed of Abraham (Genesis 12:2ff.; 13:14ff.; 15:4ff.; Nehemiah 9:7).
At a time when the world had reached the depths of sin and degradation, God called Abraham, a man through whom he would forge a great nation. He promised Abraham a land and a seed, and through that promised seed He reached out to a lost and dying world, for it was from the seed of Abraham that God brought forth the one promised in Genesis 3:15, the one who would ultimately defeat Satan. This seed of Abraham, who came through Israel, is none other than the Messiah-Jesus who is rejected by most of the world - and none more so than by Islam which insults Him and His Gospel that can bring peace to the heart of any man or woman on earth now and, ultimately, for eternity with Him in Paradise.
By snatching Abraham out of an idolatrous society, giving him a land, and making of him a great nation, God took a major step in His plan for the redemption of mankind. The people and land of the Saviour were identified. But far more important than the question of who should possess the land of Israel is the question of whether we, as individuals, possess the Messiah-Jesus who, like Abraham's son Isaac, became a willing sacrifice. Jesus paid the penalty for our sins at Calvary so that we may one day possess an eternal land.
But while the apathetic church worldwide so often allows itself to be seduced by false teachers, some promising a perfect world via Dominion/Kingdom Now theology that teaches that the church is supposedly called to bring in before Christ returns, the world's growing instability and financial meltdown, chaotic Middle East, and increasing tribulation, doesn't fit their Biblical agenda. The global revival some Christians expect is encouraged by occasional revivals, as the Word promises, but the judgment facing the earth is a Biblical doctrine and will certainly happen in God's will and timing and not via man's foolish planning. The growing persecution of Christians in the West is also gathering as humanist doctrines increase and governments try to impose their will on the church.
(Continued on page 193)