A collection of great writings from our Infidel and Apostate friends. Read my newspaper, The Pulp Ark Journal, and my magazine The Pulp Ark Gazette. Come check some nice books from my Scribd library.
Jihad is the doctrine in Islam which directs its followers to armed assault against non-believers. The recent Boston pressure cooker bombing was committed by two Muslim believers, proving Obama has done nothing to permanently halt the threat of Muslim terrorism.
The purpose of jihad is to convert, impoverish or kill all unbelievers. It is an essential element of the teachings of Mohammad, and cannot simply be removed from the Koran. Therefore, when are Americans going to take seriously Islam as a threat and figure out a way to defuse its dangerous demand to subjugate the world in the name of Allah?
Obviously, the doctrines of Political Correctness are keeping Americans from addressing the issue in depth. We seem more intent upon not being rude than fighting to keep bombers off our streets. So, what can be done to address this bedeviling problem?
It has been repeatedly stated the term “Jihad” in Islam is more properly defined as “holy struggle” than “holy war.” Reuven Firestone, in Jihad, The Origin of Holy War in Islam, points out that the word “Jihad” has no direct connection to war. Yet, as Firestone elucidates, Jihad is a holy struggle most often expressed in terms of violent attack against Islam’s enemies, stating,When the word is used without qualifiers, like “of the heart,” or “of the word,” it is universally understood as war on behalf of Islam (equivalent of Jihad “of the sword”—jihad al-sayf), and the merits of engaging in such Jihad are described plentifully in the most respected religious works.
In the thirteen-century old lexicon of Islam, jihad is a struggle against an aggressive foreign force or an offensive in the name of the faith. The Koran incites Muslims to battles, for those who believe in God should fight for him. It is “an obligation on the true believer, because only in a free country can there be righteous self-respect.” In the seventh century, jihad was considered by early Muslims to be the most effective means of conquering lands for the new Muslim empire.
According to Rudolph Peters in Jihad in Classical And Modern Islam, two groups deserve correction—first, those under the Imam (Muslim leader) refusing to follow Allah’s laws. Second, those unbelievers (kuffar) outside Islamic control who can only be conquered for god by conflict. These kuffar are outside the uma (Muslim polity) and therefore the enemies of Allah. And G.E. Von Grunebaum, in Classical Islam, A History 600-1258, explains how from the earliest period, despite instability, jihad was always practiced:
...it did not allow the jihad, the “battle on the path to God” to rest in its duty to incorporate the unconquered “war region” (dar al-harb) of the unbeliever into thedar al-islam. Guerilla warfare, apart from several larger expeditions, continued without interruption.
II. Two Realms of Islam: House of God v. House of War (Dar al-Islam v. Dar al-Harb)
There can be no doubt that the doctrine of jihad emanates from several key facts about Islam. First, there are only two kinds of people in the Muslim world—believers and infidels. Second, there are only two abodes—the House of God and the House of War. Third, no doctrines resembling human rights ever existed within Islam. Instead, persons only have status based upon their relationship with Allah. In other words, the rain does not fall upon the just and unjust, as it were. Therefore, compunction in things religious is no shame. Bernard Lewis comments upon this:
The world is divided into the House of Islam and the House of War, the Dar al-Islam and the Dar al-harb. The Dar al-Islam is all those lands in which a Muslim government rules and the Holy Law of Islam prevails. Non-Muslims may live there on Muslim sufferance. The outside world, which has not yet been subjugated, is called the “House of War,” and strictly speaking a perpetual state of jihad, of holy war, is imposed by the law. The law thus divides unbelievers theologically into those who have a book and profess what Islam recognizes as a divine religion and those who do not; politically into dhimmis, those who have accepted the supremacy of the Muslim state and the primacy of the Muslims, and harbis, the denizens of the Dar al-harb, the House of War, who remain outside the Islamic frontier, and with whom therefore there is in principle, a canonically obligatory perpetual state of war until the whole world is either converted or subjugated.
III. Legal & Religious Elements of Jihad
Abu’l-Walid Ibn Rushd, aka Averroes (1126-1198), is the preeminent Muslim philosopher. He wrote a legal treatise on jihad in Bidayat Mudjtahid. Rudolph Peters sums this up in the following manner.
A. Legal Jihad—Seven Aspects
Rudolph Peters lists seven aspects of the legal doctrine of Jihad:
Legal Obligation: Muslim communities are everywhere held responsible when called to wage violent Jihad, even if all members cannot bear the sword. The compulsory nature of jihad is founded upon sura 2:216: “Prescribed for you is fighting, though it be hateful to you.” This is a group responsibility. Since everyone cannot bear the sword, the duty falls upon adult, healthy men who can afford to wage war. The man’s parents must also give permission.
The Enemy: Targeted enemies to be fought in jihad are all pagans—ie polytheists (everyone not Muslim, or dhimmi, being Jew or Christian). Christians and Jews can also be targeted under many circumstances. This is based uponsura 8:39: “Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is God’s entirely.”
Damage Allowed: The damages allowed doled-out to heathens in jihad depend upon their status. Generally permitted are all confiscations or destruction of property—and the enslavement, jailing or death of enemies—except women and children. Particularly fascinating is the right of the Caliph, head of the Muslim state, to treat captives in any manner he likes. Captives may be slain, enslaved, pardoned, or held for ransom. In battle, all able-bodied adult men may be killed, reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s plans to kill all Kuwaiti men after conquering Kuwait (see Iraqi Military Planned to Murder All Kuwaiti Men, LA Times). As to why Islam allows the killing of all infidels, it is simply because of their unbelief. Writes Peters,
The only reasons an unbeliever should be put to death…is their unbelief. This motive then goes for all unbelievers…Enemies must not be tortured nor their bodies mutilated. The Muslims agree they may be slain by weapons. Controversy exists, however, concerning whether it is allowed to burn them by fire
Prerequisites of Warfare: The enemy must hear first the call to Islam before being attacked. This is based upon sura 17:15: “We never chastise until We send for a Messenger.” The Prophet called for three things before launching an attack: Ask the non-believers to convert to Islam. If they consent, then do not attack. Then, inquire if they will travel to the abode of Emigrants, ie Medina, where any immigrant will have all the rights of any other believer. But if they refuse to relocate, then put a poll tax (jizyah) upon them. If they refuse the latter, then pray Allah’s help and attack them. This is based upon sura 9:29. Therefore, the goal of jihad is conversion, collecting taxes, or death of the enemy.
Maximum Number of Foes One Must Not Retreat From: Double the size of the forces of the Muslims.
Truce: A truce may be entered into by Muslims either for advantage or from fear of extinction. But the longest truce Allah allows is ten years. And at any time, if it is to the benefit of the Muslim truce-signers to breach the covenant, they must do so.
Aims of Warfare: All scholars agree that the reason Islam may go to war with Christians or Jews (Dhimmis) is to convert them or force their payment of the war-truce tax, ie jizya. The last option is tokill them. This is based upon sura 9:29:
Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
B. Religious & Moral Elements of Jihad
Jihad is not one of Islam’s Five Pillars, yet it is considered the greatest free will act a Muslim can perform. Writes Peters:
The command to participate in jihad and the mention of its merits occur innumerable times in the Koran and the Sunna. Therefore it is the best voluntary [religious] act that man can perform. All scholars agree that it is better than the hajj (greater pilgrimage) and the ‘Umrah (lesser pilgrimage), than voluntary Salaah and voluntary fasting, as the Qur’an and the Sunnah indicate. The Prophet, Peace be upon him, has said,The Prophet, has said: “The head of the affair is Islam, its central pillar is the Salaah and the summit is the Jihad.” And he has said: “In Paradise there are a hundred grades with intervals as wide as the distance between the sky and the earth. All these Allah has prepared for those who take part in Jihad.” There is unanimity about the authenticity of this Tradition.
Peters goes on to develop this subject of the religious significance of jihad to Allah, at length:
This is a vast subject, unequaled by other subjects as far as the reward and merit of human deeds is concerned. This is evident upon closer examination.1. The [first] reason is that the benefit of Jihad is general, extending not only to the person who participates in it but also to others, both in a religious and a temporal sense. 2., Jihad implies all kinds of worship, both in its inner and outer forms. More than any other act it implies love and devotion for Allah, Who is exalted, trust in Him, the surrender of one’s life and property to Him, patience, asceticism, remembrance of Allah and all kinds of other acts [of worship]. And individual or community that participates in it, finds itself between two blissful outcomes: either victory and triumph or martyrdom and Paradise. 3., all creatures must live and die.Since lawful warfare is essentially Jihad and since its aim is that the religion is entirely for Allah [2:189, 8:39] and the word of Allah is uppermost [9:40], therefore, according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.
IV. Modern Jihad
The classic texts and history both reveal how Islam has developed its doctrine of jihad. But what is the modern application? A recurrent theme of battling against colonialism occurs in much modern Islamic terrorist literature, according to M.A. Khan, in Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery. Interestingly, some scholars believe Islam itself is trying to erect a global, imperial tyranny.
The modern application of jihad is rooted in classic Islamic texts, and reveals that there is a group of persons who deserve perpetual war. Those who are not simply unbelievers, but who have dedicated themselves to changing the one true religion, thereby disrupting the Muslim Mission, and therefore stymieing Allah’s plans for the salvation of mankind. Consider such verses as sura 2:190-193:
2.190. Fight against those who fight against you in the way of Allah, but do not transgress, for Allah does not love transgressors.2.191. Kill them whenever you confront them and drive them out from where they drove you out. (For though killing is sinful) wrongful persecution is even worse than killing…but if they fight against you kill them, for that is the reward of such unbelievers.2.193. Keep on fighting against them until mischief ends and the way prescribed by Allah prevails. But if they desist, then know that hostility is only against the wrong-doers.
Virtually any Western country would fit into this category, but especially the United States, with our hegemony and control of entire Muslim nations.
V. American Jihad
After the most recent Muslim attack on US soil in Boston, it is time to take stock. Can we generalize over the various Muslim terrorist activities launched in America over the last ten or so years? What is their purpose? For example, do Muslim radicals really believe if they continuously attempt to bomb and intimidate Americans, we will be more likely to accept their beliefs? Or, conversely—do the radicals actually believe they can overcome our government and launch a coup? Or is there some other explanation?
M.A. Khan presents his thesis of Muslim Imperialism, that Islam wants to convert the entire world to Islam, and force those who will not capitulate to Muhammad into slaves:
The doctrine of Jihad as revealed by Allah in the Quran calls for forced conversion, particularly of idolaters, for establishing an imperial rule on a global scale with an integral purpose of economic exploitation of non-Muslim subjects and for engaging in slavery, including slave-trade and sex-slavery. All commands of the Quran, including for Jihad, must stand for all times. Therefore, the Islamic institutions of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery—if Allah’s commands are to be obeyed—must persist for eternity. As for forced conversion, it must continue until such times that there remain no more infidels to be converted. Regarding Islamic imperialism, the perpetuation of a global Islamic rule for eternity is the ultimate goal of Allah.
If Islam seeks the armed subjugation of the entire world by taking on its leading defender of liberty, shouldn’t Americans finally get ready to fully defend ourselves?!!
When I heard that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the second and younger terrorist responsible for the Boston Marathon Massacre came from Dagestan about ten years ago I knew he was Muslim (83% of their population is Muslim). I know I'm jumping to conclusions, but if he were Russian Orthodox then after coming here as a child of nine after a decade he would have been a good American.
Muslims however, no matter how young they come here or even if born here, are never truly Americans. Some of my readers may protest, "Hey, Bernie, what about patriotic American Muslims who join our military, aren't they good Americans?"
Yes, they appear to be good Americans until they become overcome with Sudden Jihad Syndrome; recall Nidal Malik Hasan, who was born in this country, went to our schools, joined the military and after 39 years as a "good American" murdered 13 people and wounded 30 others at Fort Hood, see my article Muslim Atrocities Are Not Done By Muslim Extremists.
Christians, Jews, Hindus and others who come to America eventually assimilate, eventually integrate, eventually become good Americans. But Islam is not just a faux religion, it is a way of life: it is Mohammed's way and never the way of the host country. That's why I know my conclusion jump is not that big of a leap.
However because he lived among us and moved about without suspicion, Dzhokar was more dangerous than foreign terrorists. We at least try to detect foreign extremists coming to our shores. Sadly, we do not have enough police resources to watch every Muslim in our country. I do not know how many of these attacks we will certainly face in the future before we take the only action that we will definitely have to take: forbid any further visas for Muslims, and eventually the deportation of all devout Muslims.
Yes, I know how it sounds - in the 1940s my relatives were forcibly removed from their homes to concentration camps where most of them died. However the difference between the Jews of that time and Muslims of our time is that Jews were not blowing up German buses or restaurants or other public places. If they truly were a threat to the German people then I certainly would not blame Germany for deporting their Jews. The death camps however were egregiously evil.
One day, my view will not appear bigoted or extreme. Things are only going to get worse. Ignoring Terrorism Is Not the Answer
The day before the Marathon Massacre, the New York Times had scored plaudits for running an op-ed by one of Osama bin Laden’s bodyguards complaining about his hard life in Guantanamo Bay.
On April 14th, the paper of broken record paid 150 dollars to an Al Qaeda member for the opportunity to complain about being force fed during his hunger strike. On April 15th the bombs went off.
The attacks of September 11 introduced a dividing line. There was the world of September 10 and the world of September 11. There was no such clear dividing line when September 11 faded from memory and we returned to a September 10 world. Nor is there an exact date for when we will return to an April 14 world in which it is okay to pay a terrorist in exchange for his propaganda. But if the media has its way, that day can’t come soon enough.
A day after the bombings, media outlets wrote that a decade without terror had come to an end. But the terror had never stopped or paused. The FBI and local law enforcement had gone on breaking up terror plots to the skepticism and ridicule of the media which accused them of violating Muslim civil rights and manufacturing threats.
Some of those plots seemed laughable. A man setting up a car bomb near a Broadway theater where crowds waiting to see The Lion King musical, kids in tow, were lining up. Underwear bombers. Shoe bombers. It became fashionable to laugh at the silly crazies trying to kill people in ridiculous ways. Almost as silly as trying to hijack planes while armed only with box cutters and then ramming those planes into buildings.
Liberal urbanites stopped breathing sighs of relief every time a terror plot was broken up and turned on law enforcement. They were suspicions that these were just setups. Representatives of Muslim groups complained that law enforcement was taking confused kids and tricking them into terrorist plots that they never could have carried out on their own.
But there was only one way to find out.
Last year the Associated Press won a Pulitzer for its attack on the NYPD’s mosque surveillance program. But that was the April 14 mindset. Now after April 15, the police are once again heroes and any editorials from imprisoned terrorists complaining about the lack of new Harry Potter novels at Gitmo have temporarily been placed on hold. But the police know better than anyone that it will not take very long for them to go from the heroes to the villains.
The long spring in which Americans didn’t have to turn on the news and see bloody body parts everywhere was made possible by the dedicated work of the very people the media spent a decade undermining. The media was undermining them on April 14, but two days later it was acknowledging that the temporary peace brought about by the work of the very people they despised had made their temporary ignorance of terror possible.
We don’t know who perpetrated the Marathon Massacre, but many of the Muslim terrorist plots broken up by the authorities would have been as deadly. And there will be others like them in the future.
While law enforcement pores over the wreckage, the media is waiting for the time when it will once again be safe to pay terrorists for their propaganda. If the bomber turns out to be anything other than a Muslim terrorist, then they can turn the calendar back to April 14 when it was safe to support terrorists. If he turns out to be in any way associated with the right, then they can celebrate hitting propaganda pay dirt. But even if he’s only another Unabomber or another Bill Ayers, the false spring of April 14 will still beckon.
Three days later in the New York Times, columnist Thomas Friedman used Israel as an inspirational example of getting back to business as usual while leaving no reminders that an act of terror took place. Friedman wasn’t the only one to use Israel as an example, but it’s a very bad example. Israel’s peace process locked it into a cycle of terrorism. The threat of violence is constant and no one dwells on it.
A decade after the Hamas bombing that Friedman mentioned, Obama was able to pressure Israel into cutting a deal with Turkey that will help Hamas. That is the sort of terrible mistake that gets made when you don’t dwell on terror, but pick up the pieces and move on as quickly as you can.
Refusing to dwell on terror doesn’t defeat the terrorists. It locks you into an April 14 mentality where you strive to put April 15 out of your mind as fast as possible. To move past September 11 and all the other dates like it, you must learn how to stop them from happening again; rather than forgetting that they ever happened.
What Friedman really wants is to return to April 14 as soon as possible. And he’s not alone. Few people really want to live with terror. Even the liberal desire for a more conventional “white dude” bomber is perfectly understandable because that bomber, even if he is another Bill Ayers, is part of a more conventional and controllable world.
A homegrown monster, an Eric Rudolph, Bill Ayers, Timothy McVeigh or Ted Kaczynski, would be understandable. Even Charles Manson makes more sense to liberals than Mohammed Atta, Nidal Hasan, Najibullah Zazi, Faisal Shahzad or the legion of less familiar names who plotted to carry out their own terrorist atrocities.
They cannot be talked about in terms of class, race, gender or any of the other familiar lenses that the optometrists of the left put in the glasses with which they insist we see the world. They are at war with us.
And war changes everything. War ushers in a September 11 world. An April 15 world.
April 14 is a world where terrorism really isn’t that serious, but a terrorist hunger strike is. It’s a world where terrorists are goofy men with bombs in their underwear or their shoes, where global warming is the biggest threat to the human race and we all need to think more about our white privilege.
It’s the world that the New York Times understands.
The media narrative is built on preserving that world. September 11 dealt a blow to that world, but the wound has scabbed over and the old comfortable liberal verities have come back. Now the media has its fingers crossed hoping that another “white dude” will be led out and that he will have a motive dealing with abortion or race that fits comfortably into their worldview of good lefties and evil righties. What they fear is another Islamic terrorist, another promising twenty-something from Pakistan or the Middle East, with a middle class background and a graduate degree, reciting Koranic verses.
They don’t understand him, but they fear him. Not for his ability to kill them, but for his ability to destroy the world that they have built up. A world where left is right and right is wrong and diversity solves everything and the only thing we have to fear is being frightened of people who are different than us.
They fear that the long utopian dream that they fell into after the memories of September 11 faded has come to an end with another blast and another shout of Allah Akbar. Boston, Islam and Terrorism
In my earlier piece on the Boston bombings I mentioned that it was too early to apportion blame. Well, it no longer seems to be, with two Chechen brothers now clearly linked to the attacks. Brothers Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26 are now history: the former is in police custody while the latter was killed in a gun battle with the police.
We know they are Muslims who come from a region near the republic of Chechnya in Russia, which has been a hotspot of Islamic insurgency. They have been in the US for a decade, and have posted jihadist and anti-Western material on the Web.
And there may even be an Australian connection: “Two videos from controversial Sydney Sheik Feiz Mohammed, one condemning Harry Potter, appear on a YouTube channel under the name of bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev.”
So it seems once again we have another example of the religion of peace in action. In fact, since 9/11, just 12 years ago, there have been over 20,000 Islamic terrorist attacks – 20,730 to be exact. Consider the month of March just passed: there were 189 jihad attacks in 21 countries resulting in 988 deaths and 2093 injuries.
Yet once again the secular leftists, the mainstream media, and Western dhimmies are telling us these are just isolated incidents, and not representative of Islam. President Obama has been peddling this line for years, and we will hear much more of it in the days to come.
These apologists for Islam are quite wrong however. The good Muslim, the faithful Muslim, as the Koran, hadith and sira make quite clear, are the ones who fully follow the example of the ideal man, the perfect example, the prophet Muhammad.
All true Muslims are to pattern their lives after what Muhammad has done. Thus if he had many wives, so too the devout Muslim. If he married young girls, so too can Muslims. If he killed for the faith, led raiding parties, and killed his enemies, then so too the true Muslim today.
Indeed they are commanded to do such killing in the authoritative Islamic documents. Slaying the infidel for Allah is not only enjoined upon the faithful, but if one dies in the attempt, it is the only sure guarantee of making it into paradise. So there is an extra added incentive for Muslims to follow in the footsteps of their prophet here.
But we will keep hearing the usual claptrap that these jihadists are not real Muslims, or are only the “extremists,” or are just a radical minority. So the lamestream media and the other Western dhimmies will play down if not ignore altogether the Islamic connection with these Boston bombers.
Mark Steyn spoke about this recently with Rush Limbaugh and his words are worth citing here. As one write-up puts it: “Steyn reminded his listeners of the media reactions to other terrorist attacks tied to Islam, including U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who was accused in the November 2009 shooting of 13 people and wounding of 29 others; the so-called ‘underwear bomber’ Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who attempted to detonate plastic explosives hidden in his underwear on Christmas in 2009; and the Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, who was a Pakistani-American citizen arrested for an attempted May 1, 2010 car bombing.
“‘None of these guys, none of these lone wolves, none of these lone wolves stretching as far back as the eye can see, are ever typical of anything,’ Steyn said. ‘We don’t know that any of these lone wolves belong to the United Amalgamated of Lone Wolves and Isolated Extremists. They’re all just one-offs — all jihad is local.’ Steyn compared that to the treatment of conservatives when anything else as happened, even if there isn’t necessarily a direct link to conservatives.
“‘[I]f some guy shoots up a grade school, even if he has nothing to do with the NRA and he has nothing to do with the tea party and he’s not the father of Sarah Palin’s youngest child, he is nevertheless, those people are nevertheless responsible for the entire conservative movement. Sarah Palin, NRA, tea party is always responsible and that is why we need to gut the Second Amendment’.”
Yes that is exactly how the MSM operates. Indeed, they are all so greatly disappointed that these bombers did not turn out to be white Christian conservatives. Plenty of these media lefties had said just that. Here are a few quotes: -“Domestic terrorists … tend to be on the far right.” Chris Matthews, NBC -The Tea Party was behind the bombings. Michael Moore -“Let’s hope the Boston marathon bomber was a white American.” David Sirota, Salon com -Rightwing extremists are likely responsible. Peter Bergen, CNN
On and on it goes. It must be the work of Christian conservatives – the religious right is obviously behind it all. But now we know who the real culprits are. So do we hear any apologies from the left and the MSM? I have not heard any so far. And what you are also unlikely to hear is any reference to the religion of peace as these brothers are further discussed in the media in the days ahead.
So we should not be surprised that the Boston bombings have turned out to be yet another Islamic terror attack. And we should not be surprised that it is basically left to the alternative media to get the truth on these matters out there into the wider public.
Dhimmitude and creeping sharia are alive and well in the US and the West. And so is the rising body count. US probes ties between Boston Bombing, Chechen group
Some 24 hours after the capture of the surviving suspect in the Boston bombings, questions are being asked regarding the motives for the heinous attack. Unnamed sources told Fox News network that FBI investigators were checking for possible connection between the Chechen brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and the Caucasus Emirate terror group.
Tamerlan, 26, was killed in a shootout with authorities; while the younger son, Dzhokhar, 19, was injured and taken into custody. Both have left a trail on the internet suggesting they were devout Muslims, proud of their Chechen heritage and supportive of the region's bid for independence from Moscow.
The group, led by the Chechen warlord Doka Umarov, dubbed "Russia's Bin Laden," is affiliated with al-Qaeda .
President Barack Obama's administration placed Umarov on a terrorist leaders' list after he took responsibility for the double suicide bombing of the Moscow subway in March 2010 that claimed the lives of 40 people, and the November 2009 attack on a train, killing 26.
The investigation was reportedly based on Tsarnaev's Youtube uploads, and his trip to Russia on 2012, during which he visited Dagestan and Chechnya.
Dzhokhar, 19, is still being treated at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, suffering from serious wounds. It is not clear when he would be charged. He was reported in serious but stable condition and could not face interrogation. Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick said Tsarnaev was most likely "not able to communicate yet."
The brothers spent their early years in a small community of Chechens in the central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan, a mainly Muslim nation of 5.5 million. The family moved in 2001 to Dagestan, a southern Russian province at the heart of a violent Islamist insurgency and where their parents still reside.
The FBI confirmed Friday that agents had interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and other family members in 2011 at the request of an unnamed foreign government and “did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign.”
"The Caucasus Emirate group employs explosions, shootings and assassinations to spark a revolution and expel Russian government from the North Caucasus," US government ruled when labeling Umarov 's group a terrorist organization.
A senior US intelligence source said that Russia was "convinced" the Tsarnaevs had a direct relationships with Chechen rebels, predominantly natives of the Dagestan region. Meanwhile, US authorities are looking for links between the older brother's radicalization and his six-month visit to Russia.
The conflict in Chechnya dates back to 1994 during the war where rebels sought to achieve independence for the region, but soon grew into an all-out Islamist insurgency aimed to establish an Islamic Caucasus.
Russian forces withdrew from Chechnya in 1996 after the First Chechen War, and left behind massive disarray with virtually no one dominant governing force. Three years later, Russian forces entered Chechnya in the wake of the blasts in Moscow and other cities, the responsibility for which was assigned to the Chechen rebels.
With Ramzan Kadyrov, a former rebel whose rule enjoys the support of the Kremlin, stability returned to Chechnya, though Kadyrov was accused of multiple human rights abuses. But the Islamic insurgency has spread to neighboring provinces, with Dagestan – sandwiched between Chechnya and the Caspian Sea – now seeing the worst of the violence. Militants launch daily attacks against police and other authorities.
Fighters from Chechnya and neighboring provinces carried out a series of terrorist attacks in Russia, including the hostage crisis in a Moscow theater in 2002, when 129 people lost their lives, the school hostage crisis in the southern Russian town of Beslan, which claimed 330 lives, and numerous terror attacks in Moscow and other cities.
The US security think tank Stratfor said Friday that if the Tsarnaev brothers had any link to al-Qaeda, or one of its franchise groups, it would "likely be ideological rather than operational, although it is possible that the two have attended some type of basic militant training abroad."
Stratfor added that the Boston bombings highlighted the fact that "the jihadist threat now predominantly stems from grassroots operatives who live in the West rather than teams of highly trained operatives sent to the United States from overseas, like the team that executed the 9/11 attacks."
"There will always be plenty of soft targets in a free society, and it is incredibly easy to kill people, even for untrained operatives," it said.
On his social media web page, Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev joked about the reputation of people from the North Caucausus for conflict with the authorities: "A car goes by with a Chechen, a Dagestani and an Ingush inside. Question: who is driving?"
The answer: the police.
Caucasus rebels on Sunday denied they were involved in the Boston blasts. A Dagestani rebel commander was quoted by AFP as saying "We are not working against the United States, only against Russia."
I’ve made it no secret. I believe Barack Obama is a colossal fraud and that his true mission leading up to, and during his reign as president, is far more sinister than most people are willing to believe.
Arguing about the legitimacy of Barack Obama always gets mired in minutia — single issues – because people don’t stand back and look at the big picture. We argue Reverend Wright, or Bill Ayres, or socialism or the suspicious birth certificate, and so on. The left accuses the right of dirty politics. The right accuses the left of protecting a non-patriot.
To understand the real person behind that endearing facade is to know every segment of his life and look at him in a mosaic. Mosaic art is made of many tiles fitted together. Each tile has shapes and colors but no form. It’s those formless tiles that we waste time arguing about because none of them show the big picture. But in order to know the truth we must see all the tiles in place, for then they are no longer just shapes and colors, they show the entire mural of who and what Barack Obama really is.
So let’s start with one tile after another and put them together like a jigsaw puzzle.
1) Obama’s mother had an affair with and married an African-Kenyan, a Muslim.
2) There is also plethora of literature to suggest that Obama’s father was a committed communist at the time he and Obama’s mother were involved in their relationship.
3) Obama’s mother divorced his father, and then remarried to another man who was also a Muslim and citizen of Indonesia.
4) Barack Obama lived mostly in environments dominated by Islam until he was ten years old.
5) Obama’s religion was listed in his Indonesian school as “Islam.” With an Islamic father and stepfather, and registered as an Islamic, it is reasonable to assume he was subjected to Islamic indoctrination and teachings.
6) He went by the name Barry Soetoro during the years he was adopted by his stepfather.
7) After age ten, his mother left the stepfather and Barry Soetoro returned to Hawaii where he was cared for by his maternal grandparents.
8) Obama’s grandparents were known to have strong political/socialist leanings
9) Obama’s close mentor during his high school years was Frank Marshall Davis, an ardent member of the CPUSA (Communist Party)
10) Obama’s roommates during his first two years at Occidental College, California, were Muslims from Pakistan.
11) In 1981, Obama traveled with his Muslim friends to Pakistan on vacation, when Pakistan was in political turmoil and most American visas were not accepted. (This was in addition to a leg of his journey to see his mother in Indonesia) This leaves open the yet unanswered question of what passport he traveled with. (Unlikely it was American)
12) I have found no evidence that Barack Obama ever legally changed his name back from Barry Soetoro
13) There is no evidence that Barry Soetoro, AKA Barack Obama, changed his citizenship back from Indonesia to the United States or that he traveled and/or entered college with an American passport and/or I.D.
14) Following Occidental College, he enrolled in Columbia University and later Harvard. To this day, Obama does not explain why he — this “transparent” president — refuses to release any college/university records regarding his registration, finances, passports, birth records, school papers, writings, grades — nothing.
15) Despite many Columbia U. enrollees interviewed from that period, same major (political science), including George Stephanopolous, no one remembers Obama on campus or in class.
16) The former president of Manhattan Borough, Percy Sutton, a prominent attorney, (now deceased) revealed in 2008 that in the 1980's, Obama was being supported and promoted by notorious radical Muslim cleric Dr. Khalid Al-Mansour who acted as an in-between for a wealthy Saudi named Al Waleed Bin Talal. The Saudi was interested in helping Obama get into Harvard. Sutton wrote a letter at the Al-Mansour’s request to help the Saudi, Bin Talal, get Obama into Harvard.
17) Raised by atheists and Muslims, never a Christian, Obama strangely becomes a Christian and joins the Trinity Christian Church headed by anti-American, Marxist, racist, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, in 1988. Obama not only attended this church for 20 years, he was deeply involved in its activities. Note: Being labeled as a “Christian” strongly helps achieving political power, certainly more than atheist or Muslim.
18) 1992, Wright presided over the marriage of Barack and Michelle Obama. However, there is no record that can be found of a prior relationship Obama had with any other women, until Michelle. No past girl friends.
19) Obama becomes deeply involved in Chicago politics, primarily mustering blacks to register to vote.
20) In 1991, Obama graduated law school and began writing his biography, “Dreams Of My Father”, an autobiography which is published in 1995. But why? Curiously, he’s a young man who has yet to accomplish much of anything significant, but he writes and publishes an autobiography?
21) Obama was instrumental in assisting the Jew-hating leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrahkan, in formulating the Million-Man March on Washington in 1995.
22) With very little, or no experience as a practicing attorney, Obama decides to run for state senate. He is hand-picked by then state senator, Alice Palmer, D – Ill., to succeed her as she runs for the U.S. congress. Palmer wrote for the Communist Party newspaper, “People’s Daily World” and had appeared in the Soviet Union to attend the 27th congress of the Communist Party in 1986.
23) 1995, Obama’s political career for the Illinois State Senate was launched by communist advocate Alice Palmer at the home of William Ayres and Bernadine Dorn, known anti-American Marxists/Activists, and past terrorists. Obama also shares a table and worked closely with terrorist Ayres on the board of directors of the Woods Foundation
24) During his seven-year tenure as a state senator, Obama voted “Present” 129 times, thereby avoiding a left/right stand on selected issues.
25) Obama developed a close relationship with radical Islamic professor, Palestinian, Rashid Khalidi, who he associated with at the U. Of Chicago. In 2000, Khalidi held a fund raiser for Obama during his failed bid for the U.S. Congress.
26) Obama runs for and wins U.S. Senate seat in 2004. Almost immediately, he hits the ground running for president.
27) During the campaign, Obama is endorsed by many radical organizations, including the American Communist Party, while Palestinians in the Middle-East form phone banks to raise money for his election. Gaddafi refers to Obama as a Muslim.
28) Obama’s half brother Obongo “Roy” Obama is a Luo activist, militant Muslim and Marxist.
29) Obama’s Kenyan cousin, Odinga, whom Obama later supported in his quest for political power, is an avowed Marxist and militant Islamist dedicated toward establishing Sharia (Islamist) courts in Kenya.
30) After his election, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit says that Obama privately told him in confidence, “I am a Muslim.” (As reported in Israel Today, May 2010)
31) During his first trip as president to the Middle East, Obama speaks passionately to the Egyptian assembly, lauding his early life in a Muslim land….claiming that Islam has always been a great part of the American experience. (?)
32) During an interview on TV, Obama misspeaks: “John McCain has not made an issue of my Muslim faith.” To which George Stephanopolous corrects him, “You mean, your Christian faith.” (How many of us have made such a slip?)
33) Obama has hired one at least one devoted communist to be a part of his Czar team, Van Jones, who has since resigned. Many others are questionable. His 38 czars are not vetted by congress and supercede many of the functions normally within the purview of cabinet posts.
34) Obama has employed devout Muslims with connections to the Muslim Brotherhood in his White House staff and within the Department of Homeland Security. These people have access to the inner workings of our government and the highest of classified information. The top aide to Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is a devout Islamic woman with family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Sisterhood.
35) Obama ( and Eric Holder) do not permit the mentioning of Islam in any references to terrorism. Mentioning Islam in terrorist training for federal officers, is banned. The military’s Fort Hood massacre report — where 41 people were shot — does not mention Islam, or terror, or the Muslim shooter, Nidal Hassan, anywhere in the report, despite the obvious motivations. Eric Holder, when questioned in congress, will not acknowledge the existence of Islamic terrorism. Janet Napolitano is under orders to avoid the use of terms like “war on terror” or “Islamic terrorism” and instead, call it “Man-Caused Disasters”
36) Every act/decision of Barack Obama before and during the so-called Arab Spring has been to the advantage and support of the notorious Muslim Brotherhood, including the removal of Mubarak of Egypt, Gadaffi of Libya, the leader of Tunisia and now the effort toward removing Assad of Syria. In all these places, the Muslim Brotherhood is now rising to power. Interestingly enough, Obama did not call for regime change in Iran when their citizens took to the streets to demonstrate in 2009 and 2011.
The Muslim Brotherhood’s formative documents, and their many secret manifestos recovered by law enforcement agencies since, show — unambiguously — that their goals are to spread Islamic caliphates, and Sharia law, across the western world, to conquer from within, using deception and infiltration. This is a known fact to those who endeavor to pay attention.
Get the picture?
These are but the highlights, to keep it short. A more detailed list of horrors regarding Barack Obama could be found in any number of books, including:
These books are crammed with researched and documented facts, not off-hand right-wing opinions as some might claim. See for yourself.
In this article, I chose to omit any references to Obama’s legitimacy for holding the office of president in order to avoid distractions from the focus of this mosaic. There remains cause for many doubts in that areas as well, not limited to just the birth certificate.
The focus of this mosaic is simple: Obama’s highest of priorities are tied to a surreptitious socialist/communist revolution and his strong leanings toward Islamist causes, and perhaps, he is a non-acknowledging Muslim himself.
To those who are inclined to vote for this person in November, I ask:
Is he worth the risk to America?
I could list dozens of links to support all the items listed above, but that would consume another two pages or more. People reading this who want to know, are welcome to use Google just like I do.
A recent assassination attempt in Turkey offers valuable lessons for the West concerning Islamist hate—and the amount of deceit and betrayal that hate engenders towards non-Muslim “infidels.”
Last January, an assassination plot against a Christian pastor in Turkey was thwarted. Police arrested 14 suspects. Two of them had been part of the pastor’s congregation for more than a year, feigning interest in Christianity. One went so far as to participate in a baptism. Three of the suspects were women. “These people had infiltrated our church and collected information about me, my family and the church and were preparing an attack against us,” said the pastor in question, Emre Karaali, a native Turk: “Two of them attended our church for over a year and they were like family.” And their subversive tactics worked: “The 14 [suspects] had collected personal information, copies of personal documents, created maps of the church and the pastor’s home, and had photos of those who had come to Izmit [church] to preach.”
Consider the great lengths these Islamic supremacists went to in order to murder this Christian pastor: wholesale deception, attending non-Islamic places of worship and rites to the point that “they were like family” to the Christian they sought to betray and kill. While some may think such acts are indicative of un-Islamic behavior, they are, in fact, doctrinally permissible and historically demonstrative.
Islamic teaching permits deceits, ruses, and dispensations. For an in depth examination, read about the doctrines of taqiyya, tawriya, and taysir. Then there is Islam’s overarching idea of niyya (or “intention”), best captured by the famous Muslim axiom, “necessity makes permissible the prohibited.” According to this teaching, the intentions behind Muslim actions determine whether said actions are permissible or not.
From here one may understand the many incongruities of Islam: lying is forbidden—unless the intention is to empower Islam; killing women and children is forbidden—but permissible during the jihad; suicide is forbidden—unless the intention is to kill infidels, in which case it becomes a “martyrdom operation.”
Thus, feigning interest in Christianity, attending church for over a year, participating in Christian baptisms, and becoming “like family” to an infidel—all things forbidden according to Islamic Sharia—become permissible in the service of the jihad on Christianity. History offers several examples of Muslims feigning friendship and loyalty to non-Muslims only to break faith at the opportune moment, beginning with Islam’s founder. When a non-Muslim poet, Ka’b ibn Ashraf, offended Muhammad, the prophet exclaimed: “Who will kill this man who has hurt Allah and his prophet?” A young Muslim named Ibn Maslama volunteered on condition that, to get close enough to Ka’b to assassinate him, he be allowed to deceive the poet. The prophet agreed. Ibn Maslama went to Ka’b feigning friendship; the poet trusted his sincerity and took him into his confidence. Soon thereafter, the Muslim youth returned with a friend and, while the trusting poet’s guard was down, they slaughtered him.
Likewise, Muhammad commanded a convert from an adversarial tribe to conceal his new Muslim identity and go back to his tribe—which he cajoled with a perfidious “You are my stock and my family, the dearest of men to me”—only to betray them to Islam. Such are the lengths some Muslims—past and present—go to in order to win the trust of those infidels they mean to betray. For example, in October 2012 in Somalia, a nation that has nothing in common with Turkey, neither race, language, nor culture—only Islam—this same story of betrayal recently took place. When a Muslim sheikh became suspicions that a woman in his village had converted to Christianity, he sent his wife to the apostate, instructing her to pretend to be interested in learning about Christianity. The trusting Christian woman was only too happy to share the Gospel with the feigning Muslim woman. After it was verified that the woman was Christian, the sheikh and other Muslims went to her house and shot her dead.
Such betrayals can only be understood in the context of the growing hate felt for infidels, Christians at the top of the list. In Turkey alone—a relatively “moderate” nation in comparison to other Muslim nations like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt—recent anecdotes of hate include the slaying of an 85-year-old Christian Armenian woman, who was repeatedly stabbed to death in her apartment. A crucifix was carved onto her naked corpse. This is the fifth attack in the past two months against elderly Christian women (one lost an eye), even though Christians make less than 1% of Turkey’s population.
The Turkish pastor targeted for assassination also explained the great enmity felt for Christians: “There is hate and this hate feeling continues from people here.” Muslim children often curse and throw rocks at his church and its congregation—which consists of only 20 members.
Then of course there was the Malatya massacre. In April 2007, several terrorists attacked a publishing house in Malatya, Turkey, for distributing Bibles. They bound, tortured, and stabbed for several hours three of its Christian employees before slitting their throats. Evidence also later emerged that the massacre was part of a much larger operation, including involvement of elements in Turkey’s military. One unidentified suspect later said: “We didn’t do this for ourselves, but for our religion [Islam]…. Let this be a lesson to enemies of our religion.”
Indeed, the true “lesson” is best captured by the following question: If some Muslims, including women, are willing to go to such lengths to eliminate the already ostracized and downtrodden non-Muslim minorities in their midst—attending churches and becoming like “family members” to those infidels they intend to kill—how much deceit and betrayal must some of the smiling Muslim activists of America, especially those in positions of power and influence, be engaging in to subvert and eliminate the most dangerous of all infidels, the original Great Satan?
And yet, according to the Obama administration, the only Islamic-related threat Americans need to worry about is al-Qaeda—open, bearded terrorists screaming “death to America” while toting their Kalashnikovs—not, of course, that the administration allows that al-Qaeda has anything to do with “radical extremist Islamism,” let alone Islam proper.
Hebrews 9:19 says that Moses sprinkled blood and water above the book of the law in order to confirm the old covenant at Sinai. This was a type of what Christ did when He confirmed the new covenant, which He did on the cross. So just as Moses sprinkled animal blood, and water above the book of the law in the type, Christ had to sprinkle His blood and water above the tables of the law in the antitype.
The following is the account of late, amateur archaeologist Ron Wyatt and his discovery of that very thing.
One day in 1978, Ron Wyatt was walking along Gordon's Calvary Escarpment in the Garden Tomb in Jerusalem, talking with a local authority about Roman antiquities. Without warning, Ron's left hand pointed to a site there and his mouth said, "That's Jeremiah's Grotto and the Ark of the Covenant is in there."
Even though these words had come from his own mouth and his own hand had pointed, he had not consciously said or done these things. The man with him, quite out of character, also reacted strangely. He said, "That's wonderful! We want you to excavate, and we'll grant you your permits, put you up in a place to stay and even furnish your meals!" Ron Wyatt knew that this was a supernatural event but he also knew that not all supernatural events originate from God (Revelation 16:14).
So he returned home to the US, and began to research as to whether or not the Ark could be in that area. He discovered that 2Chronicles 35:3 is the last reference to the Ark of the Covenant, and verse 19 tells us that this was in the year 621 BC, just 35 years before the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. It says that the Ark was in the temple at that time. When the Babylonian army besieged Jerusalem, they built a siege wall around the city, not allowing anyone or anything in or out of the city.
Therefore, the Ark of the Covenant most probably remained within the Babylonian siege wall. As it was not captured by Nebuchadnezzar and taken to Babylon, we must assume that it was hidden underground. This matched perfectly with the area that Ron Wyatt had pointed to, it would have been within the Babylonian siege wall, in an underground chamber. Ron Wyatt and his two sons dug several times at that site, uncovering a wealth of information. They began by digging straight down, at the base of a cliff face, a cliff face known to many as Golgotha. In the 1800's General Gordon recognized that the site matched the biblical description of Calvary, the site of the crucifixion of Christ. The Bible describes a tomb hewn out of rock, in a garden nearby, it was the tomb of a rich man who donated it to Jesus (Matt. 27:57-60). In the vicinity is just that, and the tomb has been hurriedly extended, suggesting that the person that lay in it, was not the person it was designed for.
The first find that they uncovered were recesses cut into the cliff face, three 'bookshelf-like' cut outs. Ron's thought was that these could be the recesses that held the signs that the Romans put above the cross of Christ. In Matthew 27:37, Mark 15:26 and Luke 23:38 the Bible says that the superscription was written "over" Jesus, which fits with what Ron Wyatt found. In the book of John, the Bible says that, "a title," was "put on the cross". The Greek word for "on" is "EPI". EPI can also be translated as "over" or "above". The translators in Matthew, Mark and Luke decided to translate EPI as "over", because it would have not made sense to say that a sign was put (EPI) on his head, but in John they translated EPI to mean "on" because it would make sense to put a sign on the cross. However, they could have translated EPI to say, "a title" was "put above/over the cross".
Further excavation revealed an altar stone protruding from the cliff face like a shelf. Ron Wyatt felt that perhaps this was the remains of a Christian altar, suggesting that the early Christians knew that this was a place of significance. The foundation to a first century building was also uncovered, which was believed to be a church, again adding more significance to the site.
At last Ron Wyatt uncovered the clinching evidence that convinced him this was the site of the crucifixion. Four cross holes cut out of the rock, one higher up than the rest on a platform and set back. The other three were in a line lower down and infront. The upper cross hole would have held the 'featured' criminal, and we know from the Biblical account that the two cross holes either side held the two thieves when Christ was crucified. In this case, only three of the four cross holes were used.
Ron's attention was drawn to the cross hole that was higher than the others. If this was the site of the crucifixion of Jesus, then this would undoubtedly be His cross hole. A square-cut stone had been placed in the cross hole, acting as a plug. It had finger grips on each side, and when Ron Wyatt removed it he noticed a large crack in the bedrock, extending from the cross hole. It looked to Ron Wyatt like an earthquake crack, and the Bible does say, in Matthew 27:51, "and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent".
One day during the excavation Ron Wyatt was feeling very down-hearted, as if God could not use him any more. He thought that he must have done something wrong and that God had decided to take him off the job. Whilst sitting at the site and contemplating the circumstances, he heard a voice that said, "God bless you in what you are doing here Ron Wyatt." More than startled, Ron Wyatt turned to face the man. He was surprised as he wondered how anyone would know his name, and furthermore, Ron Wyatt had never told anyone else what he was doing there. Ron Wyatt replied, "Thank you, are you from around here?" and the stranger simply replied, "No." Trying to prompt a conversation, Ron Wyatt said, "Are you a tourist?" and again the stranger replied, "No." But this time continued to say, "I have come from South Africa and am on my way to the New Jerusalem." Ron Wyatt was shocked, knowing that the New Jerusalem is a city referred to in the Bible as being in heaven. After the man had left, Ron Wyatt asked the others in the Garden if they had seen this man. Surprisingly they all answered, "No." but there was only one way in, and one way out of this area, through which the man would have had to have exited. This was a great encouragement for Ron Wyatt at a time when he needed it most as he felt that God was now still blessing his work.It became too dangerous to continue digging down the cliff face. So, Ron Wyatt had to dig down at various angles. He soon found himself within a cave system. He worked with a small Arab man who would crawl in through the gaps that were too tiny for Ron Wyatt to easily enter. The conditions were damp, with plenty of dust and little oxygen. Sometimes Ron Wyatt had to squeeze himself through the smallest of holes. One day he asked the man to crawl in through a tiny entrance to a cave, as usual. When he had done so, he rushed out with terror in his eyes, screaming, "What's in there! What's in there!" The man hurriedly exited the cave system and refused ever to return.
Excitedly, Ron Wyatt extended the entrance to this chamber and crawled in. He found himself crawling across rocks that were piled up almost to the roof. Growing more and more tired, Ron Wyatt began to move the rocks aside, in order to reveal what was underneath. He uncovered some dry rotted wooden boards which when he moved aside revealed animal skins. Something shiny was under the animal skins. Moving them aside, Ron Wyatt uncovered the Table of Shewbread, from the first temple. Continuing to shift aside more rocks and wood, he then found a stone casing. The lid had cracked and had been moved aside. Ron Wyatt shone his flashlight down through the crack and saw a chest of beaten gold. He knew he was looking at the Ark of the Covenant. Overwhelmed with emotion and suffering from pneumonia Ron Wyatt passed out for 45 minutes in that chamber. It was January 6th 1982, when Ron Wyatt made this amazing discovery. He tried to photograph it with a Polaroid, but the photos turned out foggy. He returned with a colonascope, but again the pictures turned out foggy.
Ron Wyatt noticed a dried, black substance in an earthquake crack in the roof, above the Ark of the Covenant. He noticed that this black substance was also on the lid of the cracked stone casing. Obviously, this substance had dripped from the crack in the roof, and provision had been made for it to land on the Ark of the Covenant, as the stone lid had been cracked and moved aside. Ron Wyatt wondered what substance could be so sacred, that God made provision for it to land on the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant. He remembered the earthquake crack at the foot of the cross hole, and suddenly an awesome realisation as to what had happened, came over him. Ron Wyatt traced the earthquake crack, and indeed it was the same crack as the one at the cross hole. The dried black substance in the crack was tested and proved to be blood, apparently the blood of Jesus Christ. The Bible says that when Jesus died there was an earthquake and the rocks were rent (Matt. 27:51). A Roman soldier speared Christ in His side in order to make sure He was dead, and blood and water poured out (John 19:34). Ron Wyatt discovered that this same blood and water poured down through the earthquake crack and fell upon the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant.
Ron Wyatt returned to the cave 3 more times, and since his first visit, to his absolute surprise, the cave had been completely tidied up. Four angels stood before him and he was told that the time is not yet for the world to see this discovery with their own eyes, but the time is coming when the inhabitants of the world will have a universal, religious law enforced upon them. This law will force man to break God's law, by penalty of disenfranchisement - being unable to buy or sell, (Rev. 13:17). Ron Wyatt was told that some time after this law has been passed, God will allow the tables of stone (The 10 Commandments) and a good clear video of the Ark of the Covenant to be put on public display. For more information on the proposed law download a small booklet here."It is time for thee, LORD, to work: for they have made void thy law." Psalm 119:126.
This is the very same law that Ron Wyatt referred to in the last interview he ever gave. The full interview is available here. The interviewer asks Ron, "...you took the tables of stone out, and then the angel told you something about the tables of stone?" And Ron Wyatt answers, "Yeah, he told me that it had to do with when these were to be shown to the world... when the mark of the beast law was in force, that shortly after that, was when this would take place... it wasn’t stated as the mark of the beast law, it was stated, “when the Sunday law...”. The interviewer wanting to make absolutely sure that the angel himself said the words "Sunday Law" then confirms with Ron, "But the angel said “Sunday law”?" And Ron Wyatt confirms, "That’s right."
As we mentioned earlier, the blood on the mercy seat was tested. Human cells normally have 46 chromosomes. These are actually 23 pairs of homologous chromosomes. In each pair of chromosomes, one of the pair is from the mother and the other member is from the father. Therefore, 23 chromosomes come from the mother and 23 from the father. In each set of 23, 22 chromosomes are autosomal and one is sex-determining. The sex-determining ones are the X chromosome and the Y chromosome. Females are XX, so they can only contribute an X chromosome to their offspring, whereas males are XY, which allows them to contribute either an X or a Y. If they contribute an X, the child is female, whereas if they contribute a Y, the child is male. The fascinating finding in this blood was that instead of 46 chromosomes, there were only 24. There were 22 autosomal chromosomes, one X chromosome and one Y chromosome. This evidences that the person to whom this blood belonged to had a mother but no human father, because the normal contribution of paternal chromosomes is missing.
1John 5:8-11 says the water and the blood of Christ were in the earth at the time of writing, approximately 35 years after the cross. "And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." Furthermore it says that this water and blood is the testimony, or witness of God to the world, testifying to us that His Son died, "If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son...And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. "
Most importantly of all, what message does God have for this world in these last days, and how has He given the key to understanding it in Hebrews 9:19? Deathbed Confession of Ron Wyatt
An archaeologist who claims to have found the Ark of the Covenant directly below the crucifixion site of Jesus Christ has died after giving a deathbed interview to WorldNetDaily. Noah's Ark, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Ark of the Covenant, the crucifixion site of Jesus Christ, and more have been the subject of controversial claims made by an archaeologist who spent much of his life documenting sites and events from the Bible. Ron Wyatt died after a lengthy battle with cancer last Wednesday, but his quest to provide information that would lead to more people accepting the teachings of the Bible continues at Wyatt Archaeological Research, a non-profit, non-denominational organization in Tennessee. Reached just before his death, the telephone interview with Wyatt was to last only a few minutes because of his very weak condition. He actually spoke for nearly an hour. A few days later, Wyatt succumbed to the disease. The evidence of the various finds Wyatt claimed to have made has been debated by religious leaders, scholars and lay people, for at least a decade. There are many who believe his findings are genuine, and there are a few who are not so willing to accept his claims.
According to Wyatt, he was able to physically locate the Ark of the Covenant, the container for the original tablets of the Ten Commandments, with the Mercy Seat intact on the top. It was found in a chamber just outside the walls of ancient Jerusalem about 20 feet below what Wyatt also claimed was the actual site of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Wyatt said he found an earthquake crack directly below where the cross would have been. It extends down through the rock to the resting place of the Mercy Seat atop the Ark of the Covenant, he told WorldNetDaily. The blood of Christ would have flowed through that crack after his death and after his side was pierced by a soldier's spear. The site of the crucifixion appears to have evidence that it was once enclosed in a first century building, apparently a church. The site includes a large round stone which perfectly fits the Garden Tomb -- accepted by many as the place from which the body of Christ rose from the dead.
The Bible teaches the concept of sacrifice of animals, symbolic of the actual blood sacrifice Christ would make. The act of Christ, regarded by some as the great High Priest, permitting himself to be sacrificed and placing his own blood upon the Mercy Seat was the great and final act in the process of blood sacrifice, according to the writings of Wyatt. Wyatt believed that the Ark of the Covenant, along with other sacred objects from the first Temple in Jerusalem, were all secreted away just prior to the entrance of the Babylonians into the city about 600 years before the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. There are many tunnels beneath Jerusalem even to this day. These most sacred objects were protected in a chamber and the entrance was sealed and hidden. "When Christ died, the earth quaked. The rock was split right below His cross and this crevice extended right down into the hidden chamber which contained the undefiled 'earthly' Throne of God -- the Ark with its Mercy Seat," explained Wyatt in one of his research letters. "After He was dead, when the centurion stuck his spear into Christ's side and pierced His spleen, the blood and water came out, falling down through that crack and was sprinkled on the Mercy Seat." Wyatt explained that in the former Temple service, the high priest sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice on the Mercy Seat. Wyatt said Christ, as the great High Priest, was the only one who could physically sprinkle the blood on the Mercy Seat. It was an act of God that everything was in the right place, and that there was an earthquake which enabled Christ to spill his own blood onto the Mercy Seat in fulfillment of this ancient rite, he explained.
Wyatt did not make any claims of grandeur, nor did he claim to be a prophet. He said his only role was to be a willing servant. "God has a way of communicating his wishes to people, and I'm not the only one able to do that so I don't flatter myself to think that I'm something special. I was there, I was willing, so therefore God allowed me this privilege. There are others who are in communication with him. There are others who are familiar with this material who will see that it is presented," Wyatt told WorldNetDaily by phone just before his death, indicating that more of his evidence and findings will soon be made public.
It was back on Jan. 6, 1982 when Ron Wyatt realized what he had found during the excavation of the Ark of the Covenant. "I just went from stunned to more stunned I guess," he described. "When I started making the excavation I wasn't looking for the Ark of the Covenant. I had no idea or intent to be looking for the crucifixion site, so as I proceeded with the excavation and found this crucifixion site, it was a thrill and a happy set of circumstances, and I didn't make the connection with the blood on the mercy seat until I actually saw it." He said the significance of the find took on a new meaning when he actually found the crack which extended from the Mercy Seat all the way up through solid rock to the location he had found above where the crucifixion took place.
Wyatt claimed that he was authorized to make his excavations by the Antiquities Department, but that bureaucrats within that agency insisted that his findings must be kept secret. He was told that Jewish extremists might view the discovery as a sign that it was time to rebuild the ancient Temple in Jerusalem. The Muslim Dome of the Rock now sits on the site that Jewish fundamentalists believe must one day be destroyed and a new Jewish temple built.
Wyatt has made public a significant amount of his research and findings, but he has withheld certain documents and photographs to comply with the agreement he made with Israeli officials. His refusal to provide everything resulted in criticism from some. The day after the death of Wyatt, one detractor sent an e-mail to WorldNetDaily saying, "The world has lost one of the most colorful charlatans of all time." He predicted that nothing will ever come of the discoveries and even claimed that Wyatt is not with God now because he must account for his lies. "There's nothing can be done to prevent ridicule that I'm aware of. I don't think it would be appropriate to deny people the opportunity of using ridicule because I think that's part of showing their true character," Wyatt told WorldNetDaily of those who have attacked his claims.
This discovery of the Ark of the Covenant and the crucifixion site are more important to the non-Christians than to the believing Christians, according to Wyatt. He believes the discovery will help to bring people of other faiths to Christ. "They've been taught something else all their life. So God is doing this show-and-tell through these revelations and these discoveries to prove to them real quick that the Bible is historically accurate and divinely inspired," Wyatt explained. He quoted from Jeremiah 16:19-22 predicting unbelievers will come from all parts of the earth to learn of the discoveries. "Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods," quoted Wyatt.
"This last revelation is for the inhabitants of the earth who don't have a clue, as well as for those of us who do have a clue and have been commissioned by Christ to reach out to help bring these people who don't have a clue into the fold. So these are tools that God has given the believers to strengthen their faith and to reach out with. They are tools that will be extremely effective in these the last pouring out to the entire population, all inhabitants of the earth," he explained.
Wyatt has been involved in a number of significant archaeological studies of biblical sites and artifacts. These have included Noah's Ark, the crossing of the Red Sea by Moses, Mount Sinai, Sodom and Gomorrah, and others. Nothing else has the significance of the Ark of the Covenant and its tie to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, he explained. "My personal assessment is that this is the culmination of the whole plan of salvation. I believe it's the finishing off and the final proof and evidence for what has happened here on this planet. And I think that it's being presented at a time just before probation's closed while people can still decide to go along with God," Wyatt stated.
WorldNetDaily made contact with sources within the U.S. Intelligence community that have been reliable in past investigations. Experts on both Israeli and Muslim politics and beliefs were contacted to determine their assessment on the impact of Wyatt's discoveries. Both sources expressed disbelief that the Israeli government wanted to hide the discovery for the reason they gave Wyatt. Instead both agreed that it was likely the Israelis are concerned that when Jews learn of the connection of the crucifixion site with the Ark of the Covenant there could be large conversions which would threaten Jewish control of the government, assuming that the discoveries are true. Neither source was aware of the discoveries previously.
WorldNetDaily was not able to convey that assessment to Wyatt prior to his death for his reaction. Wyatt did say that he did not expect the Ark of the Covenant would ever be removed from its current resting placed. The access tunnel used by Wyatt's archeological team has been sealed. The pictures and videos of the find are what he said would soon be shown worldwide. "The blood and all of that part will be shown, all of that, on video. The only thing that will be shown typically that people will be able to have a look at and maybe touch, you know I don't know what the restrictions will be on that, and that's the tables of stone," said Wyatt, referring to the tablets containing the Ten Commandments found inside the Ark of the Covenant itself. Wyatt said he did not believe the Jews will ever successfully rebuild the Temple because they would want to resume the practice of blood sacrifice within the Temple, something that he says God would not permit to happen. "I believe that if they do set about to do a Temple thing, it will be part of Satan's deception," he added. He said that when the Ark of the Covenant and the Temple furnishings were moved to the hidden chamber, that location became the Temple of the Lord, or the Holy of Holies. It remained untouched and undefiled so that Christ could complete his ultimate sacrifice.
He is confident they remain where he found them. He does not believe they have been secreted away. "Let me say this, and this is a touchy point and I try to avoid it. There's some 14 to 16 individuals that have died because they have tried to in some way to manipulate this," he explained without providing the details. "Some have had to do with withdrawing a permit and others have had to do with, shall we say, trying to actually get in there and move the furnishings. So I believe that God has adequately demonstrated, at least to me, that He is not going to allow this to be moved. I do know this, and that is that nothing will happen to this that is not in God's plan because this is the most important part of the plan of salvation that has been carried out. This is it, the heart and soul of it. There's no way he's going to allow people, demons, or any other forces to interfere with it being done exactly as he wants it done," he stated. The crucifixion site was found on the side of the Golgotha hill, or Place of the Skull just outside the old north wall of Jerusalem, not far from the Garden Tomb. It was discovered under many feet of soil with actual holes in the rock where crosses were placed, and niches in the rock wall behind where three signs were placed. The large circular stone used to cover the garden tomb was also located there, and it was all surrounded by the foundation of a first century building. The central, main cross hole has an earthquake crack beside it.
Photographic evidence was obtained, and then the site was covered back over with 12 feet of dirt and a garden established. Wyatt says it was landscaped to avoid controversy. The entrance to the system of caves and tunnels, found by the Wyatt team in the cliff wall was also sealed over. In conclusion, Wyatt was asked to describe his spiritual growth since his discoveries. What is the difference in his gospel understanding before the discoveries and since?
"Basically, getting to know God and complying with his required character changes and all of that. I was experiencing those things, and of course I had a hunger and a thirst. I had a big curiosity. To be perfectly honest that may have outweighed the other consideration and then the difference between what I felt then and now is I believed what the Bible said. I believed what it says to be true, that's the Authorized King James by the way. However, now I know that what it says is true," he concluded. Wyatt added that it has been his role to do more than just dig up interesting artifacts. He accepted the added responsibility to explain the religious significance of the items he found.
The Wyatt Archaeological Research group maintains a small museum in Tennessee where the evidence and work of Ron Wyatt can be examined and studied. The death of Mr. Wyatt is not expected to stop the effort of telling the world about the findings, according to a spokesman. WorldNetDaily has examined extensive evidence regarding the various claims and discoveries made by Wyatt for several weeks. Several critics have been found who have voiced their opinion that the work of Wyatt Archaeological Research is fraudulent, but evidence to support those charges cannot be found. The evidence is sufficient to conclude that Wyatt's team conducted the claimed archaeological digs and investigations. WorldNetDaily is not qualified to determine the value of the evidence.
Wyatt was given a deathbed opportunity to either reaffirm or recant his claims. He chose to reaffirm all that he has claimed without hesitation.
