This Happened On Planet Earth…May 2019…End Times Signs


Published on May 19, 2019

Please Help Support This Ministry: Please subscribe to my backup channel:… Current Events Linked To Biblical Prophecies. Everything is unfolding just as the bible foretold. Wars, Volcanic Eruptions, Earthquakes, Extreme Weather, Christian Persecution, Violence and more!
Matthew 24:3-14 3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” 4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumours of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all[a] these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences,[b] and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows. 9 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake. 10 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another.
11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.





China ‘Re Writing’ the Bible To Make Communism Seem ‘More Divine’


Published on May 18, 2019

#Christianity #Prophecy The ruling Chinese Communist Party is supervising a five-year plan to make Christianity more compatible with socialism in which there will be a major “re-translation” or “rewrite” of the Bible, a prominent religious freedom activist has told Congress.


WEBPAGE ADMINISTRATOR:  I feel that the Chinese Government needs to sit down and think this out, they can probably mess with the World Leaders and gain some ground, but if they mess with God, “As they will if they Change the Bible”, then They are messing with “Destruction”.    

Rev. 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Rev. 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book





2019 05 19 Pastor Mike Clapham The Eschatology of John, Part 1

Published on May 19, 2019

This week finds Pastor Mike Clapham continuing his in-depth teaching on the end times which began with a 4 Part Series entitled “The Eschatology of Paul” with the first installment of a new series entitled “The Eschatology of John.” We hope that you find these teachings both educational and inspirational as you continue on your journey with Christ. Thanks for watching!






John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free
“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6)
1Cor. 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: AND THAT NO MAN CAN SAY THAT JESUS IS THE LORD, BUT BY THE HOLY GHOST.
Eph. 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Eph. 3:5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
Eph. 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption


Luke 12:37 Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them
(Romans 12:2) to seek God’s will, the Lord says, Do not worry about what you’ll eat or drink or wear. But seek first His Kingdom and His righteousness and all these things will be given to you as well
(Matt. 6:31-33).
Rev. 3:10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth:
so won’t you accept Jesus now and be removed from that event and live forever with Jesus in the Family of God?
2 “(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)” (2nd Corinthians 2:6)





QUESTION:    Where did the concept of eternal punishment for all but 1% of the worlds population throughout history come from…because it wasn’t the bible. What does this mean in the face of Jesus saying ‘it is finished’; and the stated will of God to save all men; or the fact that Gehenna, Sheol, or hades do not depict eternal punishment but grave, pit, and a Greek concept from their pantheon. Please comment.
ANSWER:    In the first place let’s agree that your 1% number is just something you made up. No one knows the real number. But more importantly whatever the number turns out to be will be up to man, not God. Jesus said that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16) He died for everyone and God wants everyone to be saved, (2 Peter 3:9) but it’s not up to Him, it’s up to us. The Bible clearly states that belief is a requirement for eternal life, and that everyone who believes will receive it. (John 6:28-29, 40)
When Jesus said, “It is finished,” He meant that the price for our salvation was paid in full. Now each of us has to accept it for ourselves. Sadly, some will and some won’t.
Sheol (Hebrew) and Hades (Greek) are two names for the same temporary place where people went to await Him before Jesus came. Now only unbelievers go there. Believers go directly into the presence of God because they accepted His death as payment for their sins.
Gehenna comes from the Hebrew words ge hinnom and means Valley of Hinnom. It was Jerusalem’s garbage dump and was nearly always on fire. It became a euphemism in the Jewish culture for the place of eternal punishment, the so-called lake of fire. Isaiah 66:24 says that all who rebel against the Lord will go there.
Matt. 25:46 says that all unbelievers alive on Earth when the Lord comes back will be taken to a place of eternal punishment. Rev. 20:11 says that at the end of the age all whose names aren’t written in the Lamb’s Book of Life will be thrown into the Lake of Fire. This includes those in Hades. Many (but not all) scholars believe that the place of eternal punishment and the Lake of Fire are the same.

QUESTION:    I was surprised to see you state the following and this is the first time I’ve ever come across this perspective.
“This is why Jesus told His disciples not to fear those who can only kill the body, but rather fear him who can kill both body and soul (Matt. 10:28). He was talking about Satan of course, but those who reject the Lord’s pardon for their sins turn themselves over to Satan for his disposition”.
Did you understand the word in this verse to be Hades? The word for ‘Hell’ here is not Hades but Gehenna, where Satan will be tormented for ever as its his final destination. If the word for Hell was Hades, then your point would stick, but then again, maybe I’m missing something here. Please let me know. My understanding has been that once Satan is tossed into that Hell he is suffering himself, and will be too busy to be involved in anyone else’s torment. The Word says many times we are to “Fear the Lord” but not Satan. Surely “Him” in this verse refers to the Lord Himself? Am open, but can’t see what you see – please show me.
ANSWER:    I really think we’re splitting hairs here. God is the Author of life and doesn’t want any to perish but for all to come to repentance. Satan, on the other hand, introduced death into the world.
When man rejects God’s truth, it means that he accepts Satan’s lies. He believes Satan, follows him, and shares his destiny. When he spends eternity in the place prepared for the devil and his angels is it because God made him go there, or is it because Satan lied to him and caused him to wind up there? You may argue that it’s the man’s own fault, and I would agree with you. But who started him down the path that led to his spiritual death? Certainly it wasn’t God.
By the way, while confirming that the Greek word translated hell in Matt. 10:28 is indeed Gehenna, I also discovered that the personal pronoun for who ever it is we should fear is implied, not actual. Although it appears as “the one” in some translations and “him” in others, and some capitalize it while others don’t, it literally means “this” or “that” and is most often translated “which”. I believe the translators inserted the personal pronoun to show that our destiny is impacted by someone or something else, but it’s not at all clear that God should be the one.
Personally I would have translated it “fear that which can kill both body and soul” implying that we should fear making the wrong choice about God.



Tracking bible
Rapture Ready News
Main News Channels
End Times Headlines
Other Christian Sites




Zech. 12:2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
Zech. 12:3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it
God is in control, and He told the nations the consequences of dividing the Promised Land and declaring peace and safety on their own terms (Joel 3:1-2; I Thess. 5:3)





2Chr. 7:13 If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people;
2Chr. 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land
·        Miami’s flying car port is almost finished. And the flying cars are not far behind
·        Oroville Dam Crisis Worsens-Last Ditch Effort to Save the Dam Is Underway


Matt. 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.
Matt. 24:10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another

·        Senator Feinstein (D) Is An Unregistered Agent for Communist China








Matt. 24:6 And ye shall hear of WARS AND RUMOURS OF WARS: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
Matt. 24:7 FOR NATION SHALL RISE AGAINST NATION, AND KINGDOM AGAINST KINGDOM: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Matt. 24:8 All these are the beginning of sorrows


Matt. 24:6 And ye shall hear of WARS AND RUMOURS OF WARS:
Muslim Countries in the Middle East will launch an attack on Israel
PROPHECY OF ELAM – (Attack on Iran’s Nuclear Program
EZEKIEL 38 & 39



Saudi Arabia and Gulf states have agreed to deploy US forces to deter Iran
Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have agreed to a request for a renewed deployment of US forces to deter Iran, the London-based daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported Saturday.
According to the report, the deployment of the forces comes as part of the cooperation agreement between Washington and the Arab states in the Gulf, and will take place both at sea and on land. A Saudi source told the London-based newspaper that “the agreement was aimed at deterring Iran from a military escalation, including attacking American targets… and not with the aim of entering into a war with it.”  
Iran videotaped US aircraft carrier on its way to the Gulf, saying that although the Pentagon claims that it can attack thousands of targets, in a real situation it will not be the case. They claimed that the Iranians have been trained in this kind of fighting and use thousands of speedboats called Panthel, capable of launching a large number of mortars towards targets, and serve as a firewall for radar and warships.
The leader of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, Qassem Soleimani, met with leaders of Shi’ite militias in Baghdad and ordered them to “prepare for war by proxy,” The Guardian reported Thursday evening. Two intelligence sources told the newspaper that Soleimani had summoned the Iranian-backed militias about three weeks ago in light of the tension in the region. The move aroused concern in the US that there was a threat to American targets in the Middle East.
The United States has increased its forces in the Middle East, including aircraft carriers, B52 bombers and Patriot missiles, in response to intelligence information that the Iranian regime ordered its proxies to attack American forces in the region. 



So what changed for Iran between March 21 and last week that brought it to up the ante with the US and impose its own deadline?
By Yonah Jeremy Bob
ran’s 60-day deadline that it gave the parties to the 2015 nuclear deal to grant it sufficient economic benefits and protection from the US pressure campaign is the first one that has mattered in the standoff in a long time.

Thus, just under 60 days from now, everything could change in the nuclear standoff between the Islamic Republic and Washington. The deadline and an exchange of threats and initial military moves by the US and Iran have also heavily heightened tensions.

Recommended by
It is true that the Trump administration’s exit from the nuclear deal in May 2018 and its various deadlines in August, November and May 2 earlier this month all signaled an increase in pressure on Tehran.
But these were all tools to impact Iran’s behavior; and until now, its behavior and position on the issues in dispute were unchanged.
As late as March 21, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei gave a major speech signaling strategic patience. Despite all of the US steps to pressure Iran, it would remain in the nuclear deal based on the hope that it could outlast Trump and get a more favorable new US president in November 2020. 
Incidentally, that Khamenei speech was a major annual speech, equivalent in some ways to the US president’s State of the Union speech. In other words, a lot of thought and consideration went into the decision to present Tehran’s policy as being patient with the nuclear standoff.
So what changed for Iran between March 21 and last week that brought it to up the ante with the US and impose its own deadline? What new developments led it to start its first public minor violations of the nuclear deal and to threaten larger violations or even to pull out of the deal if the situation does not improve by early July?
A piece of the answer is that the EU countries’ special purpose vehicle, the Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX), a mechanism designed to circumvent US sanctions on Iran, has been nearly useless to date.
Top Iranian officials, including Central Bank of Iran Governor Abdolnaser Hemmati, publicly urged the EU to finally make INSTEX count for something so it will actually help Iran defray the impact of US sanctions.
But this is a small piece of the answer. As usual, the bigger piece of the answer seems to be China.
CHINA DID condemn the US’s May 2 decision to end its waiver of sanctions for doing business with Iran, and initial estimates were that it would ignore the sanctions.
Yet the first two weeks since have unexpectedly seen China toeing the US sanctions line.
Reports indicate that China Petrochemical Corp. (Sinopec Group) and China National Petroleum Corp. (CNPC), the country’s top state-owned refiners, are skipping receiving Iranian oil purchases in May, including from Tehran’s ships which are waiting to unload their oil right outside Chinese ports. 
China is Iran’s largest oil customer, with oil imports of around half a million barrels per day.
Sinopec and CNPC have skipped receiving cargoes they were due to receive in May, as the companies worried that receiving Iranian oil could trigger US sanctions and sever them from the global financial system.
Of the five supertankers that loaded Iranian crude in April for China, only two have discharged, while another two are waiting off Ningbo and Zhoushan in eastern China to discharge. A fifth tanker is reportedly heading to Shuidong in southern Guangdong province.
The only silver lining for the Islamic Republic might be that the two firms initially took a similar move last October. Back then, they skipped shipments for November as the US was reimposing sanctions on Iran, but later resumed bookings after the US granted waivers to China. China even purchased additional cargoes to make up the delayed shipments.
Beijing seems to be analyzing the issue using a razor-sharp focus on national interests. No matter how important an ally Iran is to a variety of China’s long-term strategies, the relationship with the US is still infinitely larger.
Put differently, for Iran, China is a buyer of massive importance. But for China, Iran is an ally of secondary significance.
Moreover, while some might have thought that the trade war between the US and China might lead Beijing to penalize the US on the Iranian front, the opposite seems to have occurred.
China’s primary concern seems to be to resolve the trade war with the US favorably. So even as it is fighting for a deal with better terms for it, China seems more ready to lean toward the US on the Iran battle.
In other words, both sides care, but the US may care more about the Iran issue than China.
THOUGH THIS could change week to week, and China could suddenly start reimporting Iranian oil, so far it would not seem that Iran’s 60-day ultimatum is getting the reception that it expected.
The Islamic Republic finds that its military and diplomatic room to maneuver is much narrower than expected.
Iran may have thought that threatening US personnel in the Middle East, reportedly especially in Iraq, might deter the US from increasing pressure on it. However, it appears to have been unprepared for the US’s swift positioning of substantial naval and air assets in the Persian Gulf.
No one really knows what to make of news reports of the US considering a troop buildup in the Middle East of 120,000. The picture is especially hazy after Trump’s typically ambiguous denials. 
But US Democratic leaders took it seriously enough to publicly demand late Wednesday that Trump consult with them before a major new US use of force in the Middle East. 
All of this means that even if this is a bluff, Tehran cannot completely ignore it.
Khamenei may also be surprised that the EU pushed back so hard on the ultimatum.
Iran may have believed that after it showed “patience” by staying in the nuclear deal after a full year of Trump administration “provocations,” the EU would be sympathetic to its approach of rolling back its compliance with the deal gradually.
And its current violations, while significant, do not create any real danger.
By building up a stock of enriched uranium beyond the 300-kilogram limit, in a sense, Iran will simply have more unusable uranium.
The reason is that, at least for the next 60 days, it will still enrich the uranium only to the 3.67% level. This is not even to the 20% level it was doing before the 2015 nuclear deal, let alone the 90% level needed for nuclear weapons.
So more uranium enriched to a low level means it could eventually conceivably make more nuclear weapons. But Iran would not actually shorten the time significantly to getting to a first weapon, unless it starts enriching some of that uranium at a higher level.
In that case, Iran has achieved very little to date with its ultimatum and partial violation of the deal.
The real question is will the EU, China or both start to help Tehran more economically before the end of the 60 days, even if it means butting heads with the US?
Will they have greater fears that Khamenei will order enrichment of uranium upped to the 20% level, which would start to shorten the time needed for Iran to break out to a nuclear weapon?
If they do not boost Tehran enough from its perspective, are the Iranians really ready to up their enrichment level and risk a possible preemptive strike from the US or Israel?
How far would the US or Israel let Iran go before striking?
Some analysts say that the US forces moved to the region were more symbolic, to deter Khamenei from ordering an attack on US troops in Iraq. They would say that the US did not build up its forces to start a big conflict – something Trump has carefully avoided throughout his term, despite his often heated rhetoric.
Also, will Israel alter its carefully constructed 10-year defense budget plans, reallocating large funds to return it to having an indefinite immediate airstrike capability on Iranian nuclear facilities, as it had maintained before the 2015 deal?
So the 60-day deadline creates far more questions than answers.
But six weeks ago, it seemed that the turning point in the US-Iran nuclear standoff would be the November 2020 US presidential election. 
Under the new constellation of positions, getting the ultimate answers to these fateful questions and the fate of the region may have moved up substantially, and the answers may present themselves as early as July.


Syria says air defenses intercept Israeli missiles, in 2nd incident in 24 hours
Syria claimed its air defenses on Saturday night shot down a number of missiles fired from Israel, for the second time in less than 24 hours.
The official SANA news agency said the military intercepted “hostile targets coming from direction of occupied territories.” Syrian state TV said the missiles were shot down over Quneitra and near Damascus.
Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, said Israel fired at least three missiles. Two of the strikes targeted a Syrian army brigade which supervises the country’s Quneitra province, he told AFP, while the third missile was destroyed by Syrian defenses.
On Friday night, Syrian state TV reported sounds of explosions near the capital, and aired footage of what it claimed were air defenses intercepting missiles fired from Israeli jets seen over Quneitra in the Syrian Golan Heights.
“Aerial defenses detected hostile targets coming from the direction of Quneitra and dealt with them,” the official SANA news agency quoted a military source saying, referring to a Syrian town in the Golan Heights bordering Israel.
The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group reported several explosions in the Al-Kiswah area outside the city, in the vicinity of Iranian and Hezbollah storage facilities and air defense batteries. The group added that it was not immediately clear if the explosions were caused by Israeli airstrikes or surface-to-surface missiles.
There was no response from the Israel Defense Forces, which rarely comments on reported strikes.
Syrian state media says projectiles fired from Israeli territory
Syrian state media accused Israel of launching a strike against targets outside Damascus Saturday night and claimed the country’s air defenses intercepted a number of missiles, the second time in less than 24 hours.
The reports of additional airstrikes came a day after the regime accused the Jewish State of striking targets outside the capital on Friday night. 
Aerial defenses detected hostile targets coming from the direction of Quneitra and intercepted them,” a military source was quoted as saying on Friday.
The state television channel showed footage of the night sky with a point of light firing up into it and the sound of shooting, and reported that air defenses had brought down some objects. It did not immediately report casualties or material damage.
According to pro-opposition reports, the strikes targeted the First Division HQ of the Syrian Army near al-Kiswe, south of Damascus.
Other local reports said that the strikes targeted Iranian arms depots.
Israeli officials have repeatedly voiced concerns over Iran’s entrenchment in Syria and the smuggling of sophisticated weaponry to Hezbollah from Tehran to Lebanon via Syria, stressing that both are red-lines for the Jewish State.
In an effort to prevent sophisticated weaponry from reaching Hezbollah, Israel frequently carries out airstrikes against Iran and its allies in Syria. In January Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel has a set policy of preventing Iran’s entrenchment in Syria. 
In April Israeli planes targeted a military position near the province of Hama in Syria, but Syrian air defenses intercepted and downed some of the rockets, Syrian state television reported. 



Not Just a Trade War, But a Shooting War With China
The Chinese came from nothing; only 40 years ago, they had nothing but a billion impoverished peasants. No money. No technology. No power. Today, they’re on par with the United States. But, if this trend continues – which it will – their economy will be triple the size of the US economy in 20 years.
Not just a trade war, but a shooting war with the Chinese seems inevitable. Because when tensions build up between states they eventually fight with each other. China is the major rising power. It’s got four times the US population, it’s soon going to be more economically powerful, and it’s going to reach military parity. It’s of a different culture than the US. The US government may figure it’s best to take them out while the balance still favors them. It’s a bit like the situation was with the USSR in the ’80s. They could see they were going into decline, and some Soviet generals figured it was “now or never” for a successful war. Fortunately they collapsed first.
The Chinese don’t like seeing US aircraft carriers off their coast any more than we would like to see Chinese aircraft carriers in the Gulf of Mexico or off Santa Catalina Island.
The last thing that we need is a war with the Chinese. But if something that’s been called the Thucydides Trap is valid – and I think it is – then it’s highly likely. It refers to the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta, at the end of 5th century BC. The Trap is sprung when a reigning power strikes out at the advancing power while they still have a chance of winning.
The American military thinks that a shooting war is inevitable. And it probably is. Why? Well, 5,000 years of history teaches us that it’s better to start a war when you’re more powerful than your enemy rather than wait until they’re more powerful than you. It’s always been this way. The Golden Rule of statecraft is: Do unto others – but do it first. It’s a very dangerous situation.
The US may do something stupid, like fabricate an incident, and launch a preemptive strike against China. Or perhaps things just get out of control, as they did in World War I.
Nobody has a crystal ball, but I think you can see the dominos lining up. Will this be the big one, or will it just be another recession – an inconvenience, followed by even bigger bubbles? It’s a question of odds. And the more dominos that lineup – the political, economic, social, demographic, military, and cultural dominos – the more logical that this next one is going to be much bigger than what happened in 2008.
That’s why I use the analogy of 2007-2010 being the leading edge of this hurricane. We’ve had a very big eye of the storm because of absolutely massive money printing by central banks all over the world. It’s had the effect of throwing oil on the water.
When we go into the trailing edge of this hurricane, it’s going to be much worse, much different, and much longer lasting than the unpleasantness of 2007-2010. Why? Because that was caused by inflation and debt. We’ve had vastly more of that over the last decade to paper over the problems. I think we’re re-entering the hurricane now.
But there’s always some good news. Here the good news is that most of the real wealth in the world – skills, technologies, buildings, things of that nature – won’t disappear just because the economy collapses. Most of the real wealth will still be here. It’s just going to change ownership.
Let’s just hope that what’s coming this time, over the next few years, is limited to a financial crisis. But I don’t expect that’s the case. I think it’s going to be economic, political, and cultural as well.



Russia Announces Delivery Of More Supplies To Venezuela’s Military
Even after repeat threats issued to Moscow from President Trump himself  including recently saying bluntly “Russia has to get out” — the Russian military now appears so unconcerned by such warnings that it’s simply announcing its Maduro support actions ahead of time via state media. 
Russian news agency TASS said Friday, citing a military-diplomatic source, that Russia plans to supply Venezuela’s army with more than 16,000 field rations. This after a large Russian state-run arms exporter published a contract related to the re-supply deal. 
No doubt the very open publication of the supply deal is aimed at showing Washington that the Kremlin is not going anywhere in terms of its longtime military alliance with Caracas, which was controversially on full display last December when Russian two nuclear-capable “Blackjack” strategic bombers flew to Caracas, and departed soon after amid White House threats and demands. 
Russia also likely now feels emboldened given the embarrassing Guaido opposition led failed coup attempt launched but just as quickly fizzling out at the end of April.
The White House, especially through statements of John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave the full backing of the United States to the called for military uprising. Thus Moscow realizes the US simply doesn’t have leverage on the ground in Venezuela, and boldly announced the following late this week: 
On Thursday, Rosoboronexport, Russia’s state-run arms exporter, placed information about purchases of 16,500 field rations to be supplied to Venezuela. The initial cost of the contract is 14.38 million rubles (222,091 US dollars).
“The rations will be supplied in the interests of the Venezuelan army,” the source said.
The rations are being dubbed “humanitarian assistance to the Venezuelan government” according to the report. 
Though Venezuela has retreated from the headlines in recent days, and with Maduro in full control – reportedly hunting down the failed coup plotters – analysts fear the US and Russia are settling in for a protracted proxy war and “new Cold War” of sorts in Latin America.
Bolton had even invoked the throwback Monroe doctrine over fears that Russia and China were meddling in “America’s backyard” – to which Russia now clearly seems unfazed. 


8% of America is pushing us to civil war
In October 2018, an interesting summary piece appeared in the Federalist, written by its executive editor, Joy Pullmann, entitled “80 percent of Americans think political correctness is a national problem.” The poll Pullmann referenced was conducted by the international initiative More In Common, and was unusually comprehensive: 8,000 survey respondents, 30 one-hour interviews and six focus groups (the full report can be seen here).
The study listed political segments with distinctive sets of characteristics, from left to right on the ideological spectrum:
  • Progressive Activists: younger, highly engaged, secular, cosmopolitan, angry (8 percent of self-identified respondents)
  • Traditional Liberals: older, retired, open to compromise, rational, cautious (11 percent)
  • Passive Liberals: unhappy, insecure, distrustful, disillusioned (15 percent)
  • Politically Disengaged: young, low income, distrustful, detached, patriotic, conspiratorial (26 percent)
  • Moderates: engaged, civic-minded, middle-of-the-road, pessimistic, Protestant (15 percent)
  • Traditional Conservatives: religious, middle class, patriotic, moralistic (19 percent)
  • Devoted Conservatives: white, retired, highly engaged, uncompromising, patriotic (6 percent)
(I fit strongly into the “Traditional Conservative” group, the largest category except the “Politically Disengaged.” My husband, with the exception of “retired,” is more closely aligned with the “Devoted” crowd.)
The report noted “every single demographic studied showed overwhelming objection to political correctness,” and that opposition held across all racial groups, income brackets and educational levels. Contrary to common belief, racial minorities were more opposed to political correctness (82 to 88 percent) than whites (79 percent).
The exception – the only group who “strongly backs” political correctness – is progressive activists (note the description “angry” in the above breakdown). And these activists comprise 8 percent of the American population. Read that again: 8 percent.
Even more interesting, these activists are (to quote the article) “more likely to be rich, highly educated – and white. They are nearly twice as likely as the average to make more than $100,000 a year. They are nearly three times as likely to have a postgraduate degree. And while 12 percent of the overall sample in the study is African-American, only 3 percent of progressive activists are. [note: that’s 3 percent of 8 percent!] With the exception of the small tribe of devoted conservatives, progressive activists are the most racially homogeneous group in the country.” [Emphasis added.]
Do you understand what this poll means? It means 92 percent of America is being held hostage to the tyranny of 8 percent. Those 8 percent are driving the entire political system. They hold the Democratic Party, the big-government Republicans, the media and the education system in the palms of their greedy little hands, where they can bully and sue and intimidate the remaining 92 percent into silence. Talk about the ultimate in white privilege!
What does this mean in practice? It means shoving politically correct but highly offensive stuff in 92 percent of America’s faces. It means girls and women must lose in sports because they can’t compete against biological boys or men who “identify” as female. It means bathrooms and dressing rooms are no longer safe or respected. It means huge national corporations think it’s a great idea to alienate the vast majority of their customers by featuring a revolting drag-queen actor to peddle their products. It means social media companies can ban conservative subscribers, teachers can get fired, and professors can be disciplined simply for voicing opinions of which progressive activists don’t approve. It means waging war on a perfectly fine restaurant chain because it won’t fund abortions. And if Nancy Pelosi has her way and the so-called “Equality” Act passes, then practicing one’s religion could literally become against the law in America … which, if my mail is any indication, makes progressive activists rub their hands with glee.



Government Is An Illusion
Josh Sigurdson talks with Anam Paiseanta in Barcelona in front of the Segrada Familia, the famous unfinished architectural masterpiece by Antoni Gaudi.
Interestingly, with all the symbolism of a church, government builds great temples as well, but the doctrine of the structures is a far more exaggerated, coercive force. 
The state is a religion and it is nothing more than an illusion that people blindly give credit to. As Anam points out, when young people spend 5 days a week in a public government school with 2 days a week (and 3 hours a day on weekdays) with their families, it makes sense that people grow up to bow down to the state and see the state as a parental figure. It’s the indoctrination of the masses as the slow incremental frog boil towards complete collectivism takes place without anyone noticing the changes. 
Video Source
Considering people have been voting for a new master since ancient Greece under the notion of “change”, shouldn’t people consider that perhaps, the change they’re looking for isn’t going to be created by that which caused the problem that needs changing? Perhaps the problem itself is government and the change is individualistic rather than collective? 
These ideas are discussed in length in this philosophical video report on the shadow on the wall we know as government vs the individual.



Globalists Are Bringing Their One World Currency Plans Out Into The Open
People often ask me when they should begin to worry about the agenda for the “global economic reset” and the controlled demolition of the economy? If economic collapse is a process rather than an event, at what point in the process will we start to feel direct consequences? 
While crash conditions in economic fundamentals have indeed already started in the final quarter of 2018, culminating in faltering housing and retail numbers as well as an inverted yield curve, the average person is only affected so far in a minor way. It’s true – even during the greatest of financial depressions, only a part of the population suffers while the rest live somewhat normally.
This “relativity” in crisis changes, though, when we start talking about a currency collapse. In the event that the primary mechanism for exchange becomes unstable, as in Weimar Germany in the 1920’s or in Argentina in the early 2000’s, the damage to the public is almost universal except for the elitist class. In the midst of stagflationary headwinds, many people could still live a comfortable life given they are willing to make some sacrifices. But, in the midst of a currency implosion, anyone who is ill prepared will have to face the pain.
Much of the argument against a one world currency hinges on the notion that the US dollar is too entrenched to be replaced anytime soon. In terms of a deliberate collapse of the dollar, the concept is simply too much for some people to wrap their heads around. The dollar is the world reserve currency, how could it possibly come under threat?
King dollar bias is at its peak today, and the delusion that the dollar is some kind of untouchable and essential apparatus infects the economic world like a cancer. There are two kinds of people who argue that the dollar cannot be dethroned – those with an agenda who seek to keep the masses oblivious to the threat, and the useful idiots who have attached their egos to the fiat currency like it is some kind of national flag. Their arguments go a little something like this:
This is patently untrue. The dollar is nothing, just like any other fiat currency system. It is a fabrication, a fantasy. Its value is an arbitrary product of manipulated forex markets. Its buying power has dwindled to a shadow of its former glory in the past century. The globalists have resided over the life and death of multiple reserve currencies, and the dollar is no different.
For people who make this claim, I suggest they consider the dominance of the British sterling in the early part of the 20th century. It was a world reserve as well as the petro-currency of the era. The world’s central banks held sterling as the majority of their balances and its liquidity was strong. Its role was crushed, though, when globalists used British treasury bond holdings in America and France as leverage and forced oil producing nations in the Middle East to drop the sterling’s petro-status.
The shift away from the sterling began in the late 1930’s and was completed in the span of around five years when the Bretton Woods Conference established a kind of “shared reserve status” between the dollar and the sterling. The dollar took over quickly from this point on. 
When the dollar was decoupled completely from gold in 1971 under Richard Nixon and tied to oil through agreements with Saudi Arabia, the transformation was complete (I would also note that the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket was launched at the same time the gold standard was completely abandoned).
The idea that the international banking elites care about protecting any single currency is absurd. They create these currencies out of thin air, and they can kill them almost as easily as they bring them to life.
This fallacy relies on two assumptions – One, that no currency has the liquidity to match the dollar and fill the void in global trade if it were to fall. Two, the majority of reserves held in central banks around the world are denominated in dollars, therefore a replacement is unlikely because the world is “used to paying with dollars”.
First, liquidity is meaningless. Liquidity in any currency can be created on a whim. In fact, the Chinese have been ramping up the liquidity of the Yuan for the past ten years. Trillions in Yuan have been conjured from nothing, which is a development I have warned about repeatedly along with the Yuan’s inclusion into the IMF’s SDR basket.
This is not to say I think the Yuan will replace the dollar as the world reserve, far from it. That honor will go to another mechanism entirely, which we will discuss in a moment. The point is, fiat currencies are not limited by their liquidity, they are only limited by the restrictions that central banks set upon them. 
If global central banks decide in unison that they will dump the dollar as the world reserve and use another currency, then that is exactly what will happen. Liquidity can be created with the push of a button.
When one accepts the fact that the Bank for International Settlements dictates and coordinates the policies of all major central banks, then the idea that they might all drop the dollar as the world reserve at the same time becomes less difficult to grasp.
Second, as mentioned above, the vast majority of central bank forex holdings used to be in sterling, and yet, the sterling was toppled and the dollar became the world reserve very quickly.
First and foremost, the federal reserve and the dollar are merely a franchise of a larger system; they are but one tentacle writhing from the body of the globalist vampire squid. In the pyramid of banking power, the Fed is an errand boy, a workhorse, that is all. At the top if the pyramid sits the major global institutions which control policy, including the IMF, the BIS, World Bank and the UN.
While the US government does have “veto power” within the IMF, the IMF has made it clear this power is ceremonial, and can be taken away at a moment’s notice. In reality it is the Fed that answers to the IMF and BIS, and the IMF and BIS answer to no one.
Even with control of national currencies, the globalists are not satisfied. What they want is global governance. They don’t just want the masses to go along with it, they want the masses to BEG for it. This is about an ascendance to world empire, and if you have read my essays on the globalists and narcissistic sociopathy, then you know that these people want to be treated like gods, or god-kings, much like the pharaohs of ancient Egypt. It is not enough for them to stay in the shadows; they want to be worshiped in the light of day.
But before global governance can be instilled as a necessity in the public psyche and the banking elites established as the benevolent rulers of the planet, several things must be accomplished. One of the first steps to global government would be global economic management and a single world currency. After this is achieved, global government would become much easier to sell to the public.
Beyond this, the idea that the globalists have “total control already” is nonsense. The big secret the establishment does not want you to know about is that elitist power hangs by a thin thread, and that thread is public inaction and distraction. The establishment spends trillions of dollars and thousands of man-hours developing propaganda and launching wars in order to keep the populace preoccupied exactly because their control is an illusion. 
The globalists want total centralization and the subjugation of every nation under one system because this would make their illusory power more concrete. If the masses see them as saviors, and every nation is disarmed, docile and dependent on a single global monetary framework, who is going to snuff them out then?
Dollar exceptionalists ignore reality, they ignore evidence and they ignore history in their blind faith defense of the currency. Controlling the reserve currency did not stop the globalists from centralizing further and dumping the pound sterling post-Bretton Woods in 1944. Why would it stop them from dumping the dollar today? The argument over whether or not the dollar can be sunk is, in the end, pointless, because the decision has already been made.
The ultimate goal of the globalists is openly admitted. As I have examined in numerous articles including ‘The Economic End Game Explained’, the Rothschild owned magazine The Economist outlined the plan for a one world currency system 30 years ago in 1988.
This plan describes a shift starting in 2018, in which the US economy will be diminished to make way for a new system, rooted in the IMF’s SDR basket. The article mentions that the SDR will not be the world currency, but a “bridge” to the world currency.
Skeptics will say “Ah, but 2018 has come and gone, and there is no global currency!” But these people have not been paying attention.
In my article ‘The Globalist One World Currency Will Look A Lot Like Bitcoin’, published in 2017, I examined the suspicious origins of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. I also warned that this technology was key to the death of privacy in trade and the very cashless society that globalists had been lusting after for years. My position – That blockchain and crypto ARE the foundation for the one world currency system.
My position was confirmed by the IMF itself in 2018. In multiple white papers and articles, the IMF calls for the creation of a new digital currency system that would be based on blockchain technology. It is possible that this global crypto mechanism already exists and is being traded on the crypto-market today. Or, it is being held at the IMF as they wait for the right moment to put it into action.
Last month the General Manager of the BIS, Augustin Carsen, published a paper on ‘The Future Of Money And Payments’. In it he calls for a cashless society driven by digital currency issued by central banks. He also suggests that digital accounts could be offered directly by central banks, bypassing normal corporate banks. Our friend Steven Guinness recently wrote an excellent article covering this.
The SDR’s role as a bridge is also being confirmed in the mainstream. In 2017, globalist Mohamed El-Erian called for the SDR to act as a structure for a one world currency system, and stated that this would be useful in combating “the rise of populism”.
This past week, former UN Under Secretary General Jose Antonio Ocampo published an essay calling for the IMF to fully fund itself using the SDR, and then issue the SDR as a global currency mechanism.
Skeptics and dollar cheerleaders should argue with global bankers on what can and cannot be done with the greenback, because it is the global banks that are stating, unequivocally, that they are about to replace the dollar with something else. How would they go about doing this? 
In many articles I have suggested that the best way to kill the dollar’s reserve status would be to first kill its petro-status. This is part of what they did to the pound sterling when they made the dollar the world reserve, is it not?
It is perhaps no coincidence then that Saudi Arabia, the key to the dollar’s petro-currency dominance, has been cited as threatening to dump the dollar on multiple occasions the past few years.  The latest incident comes within days of multiple globalist sources calling for a new world currency system.  
Though the Saudis have recently denied this news as a misrepresentation of their plans, I suspect this is spin control as the story has gone far more viral than they would have liked.  The Saudi “Vision For 2030” requires de-dollarization in order to be completed.  And, guess who supplies the funding for the Saudi Vision For 2030 program?  Globalist corporations like Goldman Sachs and the Carlyle Group.
If the US government passes a bill exposing OPEC members to antitrust lawsuits, watch how quickly a monetary structure can disintegrate. And, watch how quickly the IMF and other globalist organisations swoop in to “save the day” with their own one world system.


Recent Posts