Never Seen Before Event? Oct. 8 2014 Blood Red Moon and the Third Temple

Folks, we are about to witness something that the ancients longed to live to see. For more on the blood moon and its Biblical connection to Jewish feasts and the end of days click here and here.

Concerning the new book Cauldron: Supernatural Implications of the Current Middle East, let me say from the outset that it’s been a long time since I felt so strongly that people purchase, read, re-read, study and then share a particular book, and to do so with a sense of urgency. This is because, with recent developments throughout the Middle East and especially those surrounding Israel, I have increasingly felt as a publisher that somebody (with qualifications to do so) needed to put into clear perspective for the rest of us the ramifications of what is currently unfolding in light of Bible prophecy. As I have spoken with the world’s most respected prophecy scholars over the past 12 months, I have learned that, to a person, there is a heightened sense of belief that global events not only seem torn from the pages of apocalyptic literature but truly are those foreseen by Scripture (the signs of the end times) and that they are now coming together with such precision and speed that it has several well-known Christian leaders beside themselves.

“Something is in the wind,” they say, pointing to such developments as the recent call by Jewish leaders (even in the Knesset, the legislative branch of the Israeli government) to build the Third Temple in Jerusalem; a simultaneous effort by the United States to push Israel into a peace agreement this year; political and religious leaders advocating for a single global, financial, and political authority; and even what now appears to be intentional movement by global powers that could initiate the battle of Armageddon. Please understand that within the degrading relationship and saber rattling between the United States, Russia, the European Union, and China exist the very components necessary for the final global conflict, called in Ezekiel 38 “the battle of Gog and Magog.” Ezekiel foresaw this supernatural contest occurring in the latter times after Israel would be “gathered out of many people and nations” and recognized as a nation once again. During that generation in which Israel is so reunified—which was accomplished in 1948—the Battle of Gog and Magog occurs. But if a biblical generation is approximately seventy years (see Psalms 90:10, Daniel 9) and if seven years is also needed for a coming “Peace” plan (called a “covenant” in the book of Daniel) to be enforced upon Israel, counting forward from 1948 seems to indicate these decisive events leading to the Great Tribulation and “battle of Armageddon” have already started their countdown. Ezekiel even tells us who the instigators of the battle will be—Iran (Persia), which becomes the number-one confederate with Russia (Gog) in this invasion of Israel

Are you prepared? Ever-ready?

If Ebola only spreads via direct contact, how did the nurse in Spain get infected while wearing protective gear?

Authorities in Spain have confirmed that a member of a medical team working in a modern hospital somehow managed to contract Ebola from a patient she was treating. As Associated Press reports: [1]
Spanish authorities said they were investigating how the nurse became infected at a hospital with modern health care facilities and special equipment for handling cases of deadly viruses.

“…Staff at the Carlos III hospital where she worked claimed the protective suits they were given were not good enough,” reports the Daily Mail. [2]

“Unnamed sources told Spanish daily El Pais the suits did not meet World Health Organisation standards. They said the suits they were issued with were permeable and lacked breathing apparatus.”

Modern health care facilities didn’t protect this nurse from Ebola

It is apparent from the reporting of this incident that:

• The nurse was wearing medical isolation gear, and she knew she was treating an Ebola patient.

• She had access to all the advantages of “modern health care facilities.”

• She was fully versed in infectious disease safety protocols and practices.

And yet, despite all these advantages, this nurse still got infected by a virus that the CDC insists can only be transmitted via “direct contact.”

Medical staff infected when removing protective gear?

As the Daily Mail reports, Dr. Ben Neuman, Lecturer in Virology at the University of Reading, has theorized that the nurse in Spain may have been infected by coming into contact while removing her protective gear:

Nurses face a problem in that a person who is sick with Ebola can make quite a lot of highly infectious waste, as the patient loses fluid through diarrhoea and vomiting.

Those bodily fluids can contain millions of Ebola viruses, and it only takes one to transfer the infection. The protective suits that Ebola workers wear provide excellent protection, but there is a danger when it is time to take the suit off. It is also possible that a tiny amount of Ebola-containing liquid splashed on the protective garments, and then was transferred to her skin while removing the protective clothing.

What Dr. Neuman is describing, of course, is infection via INDIRECT contact — a scenario that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control continues to claim is impossible.

CDC director Tom Frieden continues to publicly claim that Ebola can only be contracted from “direct contact.” This false claim is one of the five biggest lies about Ebola that the U.S. government continues to spread.

The danger in this lie is that it encourages Ebola to spread more rapidly because citizens and front line health care workers are failing to take appropriate steps to protect themselves from acquiring the virus. If the CDC really wanted to halt Ebola in America, it would be demanding that all health care workers wear full face respirators when coming anywhere near an Ebola patient. But instead, we get the mantra of denial: “Ebola can only spread through direct contact.”

Tell that to the nurse in Spain.

Learn pandemic preparedness today with the free, downloadable MP3 files fromwww.BioDefense.com

Sources for this article include:
[1] http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_SP…

[2] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2783…

[3] http://www.naturalnews.com/047089_Ebola_pand…

Credit to Common Sense

"2nd Blood Moon Rising" Prophetic Hour

How Police Justify Stealing American Citizens' Money

Police confiscating Americans’ hard earned cash, as well as a wide variety of other valuables, without an arrest or conviction is a disturbing and growing practice throughput these United States. Since cops get to keep the seized funds and use the money on pretty much anything they want, the practice is becoming endemic in certain parts of the nation. The theft is often referred to simply as civil forfeiture, orcivil asset forfeiture. Incredibly, under civil forfeiture laws your property is incredibly “guilty until you prove it innocent.”

The extent of the problem came to my attention last summer after reading an excellent article by Sarah Stillman in the New Yorker. The article struck such a chord with me, I penned a post highlighting it and addressing the issue, titled:Why You Should Never, Ever Drive Through Tenaha, Texas. That article ended up being one of my most popular posts of 2013.

Fast forward a year, and many mainstream publications have also jumped on the topic. Most notably, the Washington Post published an excellent article last month titled, Stop and Seize, which I strongly suggest reading if you haven’t already.

Fortunately for us all, the issue has also caught the eye of the always hilarious, John Oliver of Last Week Tonight. The following clip from his show is brilliant. Not only is it hilarious, but it will hopefully educate a wider audience about this insidious practice so that it can be stopped once and for all.

As one officer admitted in an affidavit justifying his confiscation of an innocent driver’s cash:

“Common people do not carry this much U.S. currency.”

Enjoy:

Credit to Zero Hedge

"Public Schools Introduce Islam" In Mississippi

Ebola: Why Has the President Still Not Shutdown Incoming Flights?

Dancing Without A Floor - "Sooner Or Later A Crash Is Coming... And It May Be Terrific"

Excerpted from John Hussman's Weekly Market Comment,

There’s really no point in trying to convert anyone to our viewpoint. Somebody will have to hold stocks over the completion of the present cycle, and encouraging one investor to reduce risk simply means that someone else will have to bear it instead.

But for those who understand the narrative of the recent half-cycle, where our challenges have been, and how we’ve addressed them, I do encourage reviewing all risk exposures from the standpoint of the losses that have repeatedly occurred over the completion of market cycles that have reached valuations anywhere near current levels (1929, 1972, 1987, 2000, and 2007). The point is not to discourage stock holdings entirely, but rather to ensure that exposure is not so large that a steep market loss would be intolerable. It’s important to recognize that the market is not only at a point where unusually rich valuations are already in place, but also where market internals and our measures of trend uniformity have clearly deteriorated. This is the most hostile set of market conditions we identify, and it closely overlaps periods in which the stock market has been vulnerable to abrupt air-pockets, free-falls, and crashes.

As I did in 2000 and 2007, I feel obligated to state an expectation that only seems like a bizarre assertion because the financial memory is just as short as the popular understanding of valuation is superficial: I view the stock market as likely to lose more than half of its value from its recent high to its ultimate low in this market cycle.

...

At present, however, market conditions couple valuations that are more than double pre-bubble norms (on historically reliable measures) with clear deterioration in market internals and our measures of trend uniformity. None of these factors provide support for the market here. In my view, speculators are dancing without a floor.

A final note: There is a danger in ignoring the concerns of value-conscious investors as a bubble proceeds. The danger is that the longer these concerns are “proven wrong” by further advances, the more severely they are likely to be proven correct by an even deeper loss over the completion of the cycle. Roger Babson offers a useful lesson in that regard. Babson, whose first rule of investing was to “keep speculation and investments separate,” is known not only for founding Babson College in Massachusetts, but also for a speech at the National Business Conference on September 5, 1929, at the peak of the market, saying “sooner or later a crash is coming, and it may be terrific.”

The back-story, however, is that Babson’s presentation began as follows: “I’m about to repeat what I said at this time last year, and the year before…” The fact is that Babson had been “proven wrong” by an advance that had taken stocks relentlessly higher during the preceding years. Over the next 10 weeks, all of those market gains would be erased. From the low of the 1929 plunge, the stock market would then lose an additional 75% of its value by its eventual bottom in 1932 because of add-on policy errors that resulted in the Great Depression. As a side note, those policy errors were not that banks were allowed to fail, but that policy makers allowed them to fail in a disorganized way, forcing loans to be called in rather than taking banks into receivership and restructuring existing debt. It's a distinction our own policy makers still haven't learned, and simply obscured and papered over in the 2008-2009 crisis through distortionary monetary policy, bailouts, and FASB accounting changes. As a consequence, the debt overhang is still very much intact, as the Center for Economic Policy Research recently warned in its 16th annual Geneva Report. But that's now a problem for another day.

In any event, be careful in believing that a market advance “proves” concerns about valuations wrong.

What further advances actually do is simply extend the scope of the potential losses that are likely to follow.  That lesson has been repeated across history. The chart above offers a visual of this story, and may serve as a useful reminder that valuation concerns are generally not durably proven wrong by further advances, particularly when market valuation concerns have been ignored for a long while.

Credit to Zero Hedge