Existential Threats To Mankind Multiply

At this point it can be lost on no one, whether of a religious or secular bent, that the end of the world is at least a possibility in our own lifetimes. Of course, “the end” is perpetually “nigh” for a certain breed of doomsaying prophet, and they’ve been consistently wrong up until now...or we wouldn’t be here to worry about it today!

But the more powerful science has made man (who retains his flawed nature...just read any version of the Faust legend for a pretty incisive look at the trade-off we’ve made), and the more it’s enabled him to see the universe as it is, the more aware we become of what a fragile miracle life on this Earth is. Here are just a handful of the ways it could go down:

1. Thermonuclear war

This is the one that defined the era from 1945 (when the U.S. first “demonstrated” the bomb) or at least 1949 (when the rival Soviets, thanks to Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, showed off theirs) to the ostensible end of the Cold War in 1991. For fifty years, the world lived under the constant shadow of atomic holocaust. Thank God we survived. Yet is our complacency, since the bipolar conflict gave way to chaos, really warranted? Nuclear weapons did not go away, and the U.S. and other countries remain locked in the logic of endless competitive new weapon development. Who even knows what they’re up to now, in our own country or abroad? Someday, surely, all these technological wonders of murder will be used.

2. Environmental collapse

Here is an issue that has been absurdly clouded by our left/right paradigm, the ridiculous “enemy of my enemy is my friend” logic that divides us so neatly into two parties. You’re not supposed to be a conservative and care about the environment. Well, it doesn’t take an etymological genius to see that “conservation” and “conservative” share a root. Personally, I’m an agnostic leaning toward believer in global warming. But to me that’s almost a moot point; we’ll certainly find out the truth if we just hold on.

The larger question is: even if this particular catastrophe is a false alarm, will there ever be any externality created by the behaviors of every-man-for-himself capitalism that will kill us if we don’t regulate it? If so, and the global warming debate is the dress rehearsal, I don’t want to see the show. We need to take the idea of “freedom” more seriously by soberly considering its limits. The tragedy of the commons is a real problem, and there must be some middle ground between Big Brother and anarchy.

3. Supervolcano / Meteor strike / Solar event

I have refrained in this post from postulating a Biblical apocalypse per se because I don’t pretend to be qualified to assess such a possibility. But it is possible to imagine a TEOTWAWKI scenario without invoking religious paradigms, that involves no direct human cause and is unpreventable. If the supervolcano under Yellowstone were to erupt, or a giant meteor were to appear and no Bruce Willis to stop it, or a solar flare lashed out and fatally irradiated our planet, it would mean that, whatever your beliefs, for all practical purposes, God had ended us. And it’s not only possible, it’s inevitable, especially now that the dream of human spaceflight is being mothballed: the sun will eventually (though we’re talking about billions of years here) engulf the planet, and there’s nothing we can do about it.

Rather than letting this fact, or the equally incontrovertible small-scale equivalent of our own certain death, cause us despair, we should allow it to throw into relief the tremendous preciousness of our lives, and live them as if they were fleeting, for they are.

Melissa Miller is a blogger and freelance education reporter. Bewildered by the proliferation of accredited online associate degrees? Melissa can help break it down for you. Send any feedback to melissamiller831@gmail.com.

The U.S. Military Forbids Active Duty Troops From Sharing The Gospel Of Jesus Christ

Did you know that the U.S. military forbids active duty troops from sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ? Did you know that the U.S. military has admittedly burned Bibles? The truth is that the United States is increasingly becoming an openly anti-Christian institution, and that should be of great concern for all of us.

Most American Christians are totally shocked when they learn that active duty troops in Afghanistan and Iraq are absolutely banned from sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with anyone. U.S. Central Command's "General Order Number One" absolutely forbids any active duty troops from trying to convert people to any religion.

That means that all of those Muslims that the U.S. military is "liberating" are absolutely prohibited from hearing about Jesus Christ from the people who are supposed to be helping them.

But not only that, the U.S. military has also admittedly burned Bibles.

That's right.

Stacks of Bibles that were printed in the two most common Afghan languages and that had been sent to Afghanistan were burned by the U.S. military because there was fear that they would get off the base and ultimately convert some of the Afghans.

Oh, the horror!

What hope are we bringing to these people if we forbid the spreading of the gospel of Jesus Christ?

"The decision was made that it was a 'force protection' measure to throw them away, because, if they did get out, it could be perceived by Afghans that the U.S. government or the U.S. military was trying to convert Muslims," Lt. Col. Mark Wright told CNN.

A CNN report about this Bible burning is posted below.....



As stunning as this report was, the truth is that it is only part of a larger campaign by the U.S. military to repress religious expression.

Just consider the U.S. army regulation below.....

"Distinctive religious symbols, such as crosses, crucifixes, the Star of David, menorah, and other religious symbols, will not be affixed or displayed permanently on the chapel exterior or grounds."

(Army Reg. 165-1, 13-3.d)

The truth is that it is the official policy of the U.S. Army to tear down crosses and other Christian symbols from their chapels worldwide.

And we wonder why the U.S. military is not blessed anymore.

In another incident last year, a U.S. marine was handing out coins to Iraqis that had a positive message about Christianity on them.

So how did the U.S. military respond when they learned of this?

They removed that marine from duty as fast as they could.

The U.S. military can't seem to stop the terror attacks over there, but they sure seem to be effective in stamping out any expression of Christianity as quickly as possible.

The U.S. military may be fighting in the name of someone's "god", but they are making it abundantly clear what God that they do not follow.

Barack Obama And George W. Bush: Partners In Torture

Now that the first few months of Barack Obama's administration has passed, one thing is becoming exceedingly clear. By covering up the torture of terror suspects under the Bush administration, by choosing not to hold anyone responsible for those crimes, and by continuing many of the same despicable practices, Barack Obama has now become George W. Bush's partner in torture and war crimes.

This is not what a lot of voters were expecting. After all, wasn't it Obama who promised that he would do away with the "military commissions" that denied almost all rights to terror suspects?

Well guess what? Obama has decided to restart those military commissions. The following is what one civil rights attorney had to say about that.....

The proposed changes to the military commissions are merely cosmetic and do not erase the spectacle of the Department of Defense presiding over trials where coerced statements and accusations by unnamed accusers are permitted, and where detainees are not permitted to speak about their torture at the hands of the CIA or the military. Military commissions unfairly deprive detainees of meaningful defense resources. This "due process light" is particularly indefensible in death penalty cases.

Not only that, but President Obama is thinking of going farther than George W. Bush even did. Obama is actually considering a “preventive detention” system that would establish a "legal basis" for the U.S. to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely who are deemed a threat to national security but "cannot be tried".

That means locking someone up, throwing away the key and never, ever giving them a trial.

How American!

This comes on the heels of Obama's announcement that he is going to resist the release of any more torture photos.

Why doesn't Obama want to release more of the torture photos? Maybe because what they may show would completely shock the world.

The truth is that what the American public has been told about Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay is nothing compared to the actual truth.

If you want to read about some of the really disgusting things that American personnel have been doing to their prisoners, then you will want to read this article:

http://signsofthelastdays.com/archives/american-christians-approve-of-torture

But Obama has stopped all of that torture, right?

Well, first of all, by covering it up and by openly refusing to prosecute anyone, Obama has become a party to the crime.

It is a national disgrace how he is trying to sweep this under the rug.

Secondly, Obama talks a good game, but the reality is that there are reports that torture of terror suspects is still going on.

The media is making a big deal out of the fact that Obama is changing some of the techniques and is planning to close Guantanamo Bay, but what about all the other secret prisons the U.S. has around the world?

Is Obama going to close those?

No.

The truth is that Obama is not doing the things that the American people voted him in to do.

If you look at what this administration is doing issue by issue, the reality is that this might as well be the third Bush administration. The media wants us to believe that things have changed, but the truth is that we are still headed on the exact same course.

Shame on Obama and shame on America if we do not demand an end to this torture.

Could Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons End Up In The Hands Of The Taliban?

Could Pakistan's nuclear weapons end up in the hands of the Taliban?  As unlikely as that sounds, the reality is that Pakistan is in chaos tonight.

Thousands of Pakistani citizens are fleeing areas of Pakistan where fighting between the Taliban and government-backed forces is raging, and Pakistani officials now expect that the total number of refugees will number into the hundreds of thousands.

Taliban forces recently came within 60 miles of the Pakistani capital and American leaders are becoming concerned.  General David Petraeus, the head of Central Command, which covers all U.S. forces in the Middle East and south Asia, is now saying that there may be just two weeks left to prevent the Taliban from overthrowing Pakistan’s increasingly fragile government.

Renewed fighting between government forces and extremist forces has left dozens dead in just the past few days.

General Petraeus is now saying that “the Pakistanis have run out of excuses” and that they are going to have to take the militants head on if they want their government to survive.

Even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is talking tough. Last week she publicly accused the Pakistani government of “abdicating to the Taliban”.

In a recent interview with Fox News, Clinton made this stunning statement: "If the worst, the unthinkable, were to happen, and this advancing Taliban encouraged and supported by al-Qaeda and other extremists were to essentially topple the government for failure to beat them back, then they would have the keys to the nuclear arsenal of Pakistan."

The majority of Americans have totally ignored what is going on in Pakistan, but the situation is becoming quite dire. Just check out the following news report.....



The truth is that there is NO WAY that the U.S. is going to let Pakistan get taken over by radical Islamic forces. Pakistan has a substantial nuclear arsenal, and while the U.S. would be quite hesitant to commit U.S. troops to Pakistan, the reality is that the U.S. government does not believe that they can afford to allow nuclear weapons to fall into the hands of the Taliban.

Previously, President Barack Obama had expressed a willingness to expand the U.S. presence in Pakistan, but he does not seem eager to commit U.S. soldiers there.

Shortly after his administration began, Obama claimed that "the safety of people around the world is at stake" and that it was important for the U.S. to maintain a strong military presence in the region. Obama called the mountainous Pakistani side of the Afghan border "the most dangerous place in the world" and reaffirmed the U.S. view that in order for the war in Afghanistan to be successful, the U.S. military would have to go after al-Qaeda forces in Pakistan.

Obama also said this at the time: "Let me be clear: al-Qaeda and its allies -- the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks -- are in Pakistan and Afghanistan."

This came on the heels of the announcement that 4,000 more U.S. troops will be sent to Afghanistan, in addition to the 17,000 increase that had already been announced.

Obama's plan also includes a goal of boosting the Afghan army from 80,000 to 134,000 troops by 2011.

The U.K. is also now offering its full backing for a comprehensive military campaign inside of Pakistan.

In fact, U.K. Defense Secretary John Hutton says that there must now be “an equal focus on both countries”. Current government plans call for the U.K. to send an additional 2,000 British troops to Afghanistan.

Up until now, most people in both the U.S. and the U.K. have mistakenly believed that their governments were only involved in two wars - in Iraq and in Afghanistan. However, the truth is that both governments have been deeply involved in a covert war against Islamic militants inside Pakistan that has been going on for quite some time now.

The reality is that U.S. special forces based in Afghanistan have been carrying out regular missions into Pakistan’s tribal areas since early September 2008. The New York Times even goes so far as to call what was happening as a "covert war run by the Central Intelligence Agency inside Pakistan" - and if even the New York Times is admitting it, then the U.S. government is not even really trying to hide it anymore.

But it is not just U.S. forces that are deeply involved in the covert war inside Pakistan. A stunning report has revealed that British agents colluded in the torture of Pakistani terrorism suspects by the ISI inside Pakistan. Officially the British government is "against torture", but apparently they have no problem letting ISI agents torture the living daylights out of Islamic militants while they watch.

In addition, it has now been revealed that the CIA was covertly using the Shamsi airfield in Pakistan (which is 30 miles INSIDE the Pakistani border) to launch operations against targets within Pakistan.

Wow.

How could the U.S. deny that they were at war inside Pakistan when they are using bases inside Pakistan to launch attacks on Pakistani soil? Well, with the newest announcements by Obama, the U.S. is not even trying to deny it anymore.

The U.S. is at war inside of Pakistan.

However, at the same time the U.S. has expanded their war against Islamic militants, the central government in Pakistan is seeking to appease them.

In a very curious move, the Pakistani government is promising to impose Islamic law and to suspend military operations against extremists in areas known to be havens for terrorist organizations.

Now why in the world would the Pakistani government be doing that?

It seems that the goals of the Pakistani government are directly opposed to the goals of the U.S. and the U.K. at this point.

The truth is that the Pakistani government tried to win over the Islamic militants through appeasement, but that only seemed to embolden them. Pro-Taliban leaders in Pakistan now claim that they want to impose Sharia law on the whole country.

So what will come of all this?

Nobody really knows, but for now it seems as though the situation seems likely to become more volatile in the near future.

Just what the American taxpayers need - another costly war to pay for.

American voters believed that they were going to see less war with Obama in office, but now it seems as though the reality is that we are all going to see a lot more war.

But more war may be unavoidable if the Pakistani government cannot defeat the Taliban.  After all, is there anyone who actually wants to see the Taliban in control of an arsenal of nuclear weapons?

Nuclear Iran

The deadline for western nations to decide what to do about Iran's nuclear program is closer than ever. Based on Tehran's announcement that they now have 7,000 centrifuges in operation to enrich uranium, intelligence sources are now warning that Iran could have a nuclear weapon in as little as 60 days.

This 60 day estimate is based on projections of what would be possible if the 7,000 centrifuges were to work at top speed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. So if Iran was to go all out over the next two months, they could produce enough weapons-grade uranium to build a nuclear weapon.

Even without running the centrifuges 24 hours a day, experts now believe that Iran will be able to produce as many as 60 nuclear bombs and warheads in 12 to 18 months.

That is frightening.

I don't think most people in western nations realize what it would mean for a fanatical Islamic regime that is dedicated to worldwide conquest to possess a full fledged nuclear arsenal.

The truth is that Iran supports terrorist groups and supplies them with weapons. What would happen if Iran started supplying them with nuclear bombs?

It's not like Iran would be sad if terrorist groups started nuking targets in the United States or Israel.

And the truth is Iran is doing whatever it can to accelerate their nuclear program.

Check out the following intelligence report from Debka.....

Japanese sources recently reported that a North Korean boat shipped a large quantity to Iran earlier this year. According to the big-circulation The Nikkei, the North Korean vessel's hold carried a secret cargo of uranium highly-enriched to 50-60 percent. The ship set out for Iran in December, moving moved at a leisurely pace so as not to call attention from Western spy satellites, surveillance vessels and warships. Earlier this year, the illegal consignment was dropped at an Iranian port for transport to a facility near Tehran, according to the Japanese paper.

Can the western nations allow nuclear weapons to fall into the hand of a madman who has spoken publicly numerous times about how he envisions the absolute destruction of Israel?

The following are actual quotes from Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about the state of Israel.....

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury."

"Remove Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations."

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land. As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

"If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d' tre, Israel will be annihilated."

"Israel is a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed."

"Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm."

Up to this point, Barack Obama has shown no indication that he plans to strike Iran, and there are reports that his Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, is totally against hitting Iran's nuclear program.

So that leaves Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu has left no doubt that he will not accept a nuclear Iran.

Even without the United States, Israel does have the capability to hit Iran's nuclear program and wipe it out.

So what can we expect?

What we can expect is that the U.S. will probably wimp out, and that Israel probably will strike Iran's nuclear program by itself at some point before Iran gets nuclear weapons.

Based on these new reports, that deadline could be in as little as a couple of months.

Israel's Real Goal For The Gaza War: A Palestinian State?

When Israel invaded Gaza, most analysts and observers around the world were left scratching their heads. What could Israel possibly gain by invading Gaza?

Why send your troops into an urban meatgrinder where the resident population absolutely hates you? Why escalate a war which you know will infuriate much of the rest of the world? Why commit your military to a very costly campaign when you will just have to pull out again at some point anyway?

What is to be gained from all of this?

The truth is that Israel feels that it has a lot to gain from all of this.

With the backing and permission of the United States and Europe, Israel has launched an all out effort to destroy Hamas in order to pave the way for a Palestinian state and (what they hope will be) lasting peace.

You see, the United States, Europe and a large segment of the Israeli leadership are convinced that a Palestinian state is a huge part of an ultimate solution for lasting peace.

However, right now the Palestinian areas are under the control of two separate factions.

Gaza is under Hamas control, while Fatah controls the West Bank.

Israel and the western powers believe that a Palestinian state controlled by Fatah is ultimately what they think will bring true and lasting peace.

But there was something standing in the way of that.

The total control of Gaza by Hamas.

You see, Hamas has refused to ever recognize the state of Israel, and it continues to maintain that it will fight forever to take away every inch of land in Israel from the Jewish people.

Just consider this quote.....

"Israel is not a legitimate entity, and no amount of pressure can force us to recognize its right to exist."
-Dr. Mahmud Al-Zahar, Hamas leader in Gaza, Washington Times, February 4, 2006

Hamas will never, ever accept a compromise. There is no negotiating with them. It is either the destruction of the state of Israel or nothing.....

"Neither the liberation of the Gaza Strip nor the liberation of the West Bank or even Jerusalem will suffice us. Hamas will pursue the armed struggle until the liberation of all our lands. We don't recognize the state of Israel or its right to hold onto one inch of Palestine. Palestine is an Islamic land belonging to all the Muslims."
-Dr. Mahmud al-Zahar, Hamas leader in Gaza, The Jerusalem Post, August 18, 2005

So with Hamas in control of Gaza it would not be possible for Israel and the United States to give the Palestinians a state.

Who can negotiate with someone who is 100 percent fanatically committed to your destruction?

But if Hamas was destroyed, then Fatah would have the opportunity to gain control over both the West Bank and Gaza and that would pave the way for a Palestinian state.

After all, Israeli leadership has been incredibly eager to give up land for peace - they just have not been able to negotiate with Hamas. Ehud Olmert has repeatedly said that Israel must hand back land for peace with the Palestinians.

In fact, Olmert has insisted that Israel must eventually withdraw from "almost all" of the land captured during the 1967 war.

Olmert has even gone so far as to say that Israel must give up parts of Jerusalem.

Olmert represents a large section of the Israeli leadership that is willing to make massive concessions for peace.

But to do that they had to get Hamas out of the way and they had to get Fatah in control.

Perhaps you have noticed that Fatah has not jumped into the fray?

As Hamas gets hammered, Fatah is saying the right things, but they are staying out of the conflict.

Why?

It is because they know that they are going to benefit from this conflict and that makes them quite happy.

So if Hamas gets destroyed and Fatah gains control over both Gaza and the West Bank it is likely that we could see a Palestinian state sooner rather than later.

The world will think that it has found a peace solution.

But it won't work.

No matter what the world tries, war will continue in the Middle East.

In fact, a wider war involving Israel, Hezbollah, Syria and possibly even Iran could erupt at any time.

When that happens things might even get nuclear.

These are going to be harrowing times for the Middle East.

Let us pray for peace.