The “O”ccult
...it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I John 2:18
Obama Versus Adolf
June 21, 2009 (Sept. 17, 2008)
Effluent Rants and Politics.
http://fredshelm.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/barack-the-black-hitler/
“A human group transforms itself into a crowd when it suddenly responds to a suggestion rather than to reasoning, to an image rather than to an idea, to an affirmation rather than to proof, to the repetition of a phrase rather than to arguments, to prestige rather than to competence.” Jean-François Revel was not referring to the United States when he wrote those words, nor to his own France, but to human beings in general. He was certainly not referring to Barack Obama, whom he probably never heard of, since Revel died last year (2007). To find anything comparable to crowds’ euphoric reactions to Obama, you would have to go back to old newsreels of German crowds in the 1930s, with their adulation of their fuehrer, Adolf Hitler. With hindsight, we can look back on those people with pity, knowing now how many of them would be led to their deaths by the man they idolized. ...Barack Obama is truly a phenomenon of our time–a presidential candidate who cannot cite a single serious accomplishment in his entire career, besides advancing his own career with rhetoric.
Obama and Hitler both have displayed a penchant for eliminating “undesirable” infants. Hitler’s case is well known; he believed he could create a master race through selective breeding, mandatory sterilization of “undesirable parents” and abortions. Obama’s methods lack the scope of ambition but the end result is similar – Obama has legalized the murder of already-born infants. In 2002, an important bill known as the “Induced Infant Liability Act” cropped up in the Illinois senate. The purpose of the bill was to protect infants who had been born alive after a failed abortion from being “aborted” after birth. In the United States, the second a person is born, they become a U.S. citizen. Taking the life of such a citizen is murder. That is something both pro-choice and pro-life advocates can agree on. Even the most pro-abortion lobby in the country, NARAL, did not oppose it nor the federal version of the law. Obama on the other hand, did oppose it, TWICE. In doing so, he helped establish the legality of murder of infant Americans in his state.
Which of these quotes was said by Hitler and which was said by Obama? A. “…our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition.” B. “Our nation can achieve permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: The common interest before self-interest.” If these two statements seem similar, it’s because they both derive from the same philosophy: socialism. NAZI stands for “National Socialist German Workers’ Party.” The socialists of Hitler’s era aren’t much different from those of today in terms of ideology, though most socialists of the modern era are called “latte liberals.”
Indeed, Hitler would’ve fit right in with such a group. He was a vegetarian, pro-abortion, an advocate for strict gun control, desirous of universal health care, and continually extolling the virtues of state control. Someone once asked me how Obama could become a socialist. I replied by asking how he could not. Obama has been surrounded by marxists his entire life. I’m not sure that he has contacted non-marxist/socialist ideas within his close circle of friends even once. His father was a communist. His mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist. Obama explicitly admits to seeking out marxist professors in his autobiographical work and attending socialist meetings. His close friends, like Bill Ayers the former terrorist, leadership at Trinity, all hold distinctly socialist/marxist views. Obama had the most left-wing voting record in the entire senate for 2007. He was even more radical than senators who were openly socialist.
Hitler’s anti-Semitism is well documented. But what of Obama’s? In the 1930’s, Hitler ran on a platform that included open anti-Semitism. At that time and place, it was politically viable to do so. In the modern era and in the U.S., it is not viable to be openly opposed to any race, including Jews. Nevertheless, Obama has knowingly jeopardized his chances for the presidency by willfully associating himself with countless anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Rashid Khalidi, Samantha Powers, Robert Malley, Bill Ayers, Louis Farrakhan, El-Hady, etc. Some of his own advisors have called for the U.S. to cut off funding to Israel, have been caught negotiating with known Islamic extremist groups, and have expressed sympathy and praise for Hamas. There appears to be only two conclusions we can reach from this: A. Obama is anti-Semitic but hides it from voters. B. Obama is incredibly tolerant of anti-Semitism. Regardless of Obama’s true feelings, this sort of approach to something as poisonous as racism is disturbing and dangerous. “Obama has taken no steps to moderate his church’s anti-Israel invective. Obama’s affiliation with Wright aligns with his choice of financial backers and foreign policy advisors. To varying degrees, all of them exhibit hostility towards Israel and support for appeasing jihadists.”— Jerusalem Post.
Name this leader: The nation was in shambles. A previous ruler had led the country into an unnecessary war, the economy was failing, and a sense of depression filled the air. Then, a new leader emerged. He was a powerful speaker, offering hope, change, and a fix to the economy. He wrote two books about his experiences and used his literary work to propel him to success. He was an open Christian with some Muslim friends. He called for unity and considered himself an advocate of peace. Some of his political opponents cast him as naive and inexperienced. He also had a lot of radical ties, but the media, and ultimately the voters, were willing to overlook that.
Who is he? The answer is Hitler. It’s something of a trick question, because nothing in the characteristics of the above described character bear any distinction between Obama and Hitler. Look at Hitler's campaign early on, it didn't blatantly support facism. The Nazis promised to clamp down on Big Business and end the class struggle (sounds familiar). It appealed to the young most, they thought they would fight the evil bourgeois and and establish a youth dominated culture. The uprising of the poor and beaten down, crushed by the evil corporations and industrialist (again, sounds familiar). Along with the youth idea, the NAZIs would use the slight of hand trick, accusing their opponents of facism; evil creatures who hoped only to increase the wealth gap and control the downtrodden proletariat. Hitler gained the young and the old alike with idealism.
The biggest similarity is the idea of Nationalism and Socialism. Americans are naturally nationalists, and it is a good side to appeal to. Also, Obama is in favor of many socialist initiatives. Both claimed to be “Christians” and quoted scripture. Both were given the title of savior and both came from poor backgrounds. Both followed a national economic crisis, run on a platform of "Change," promise to help the poor working guy and punish the rich, and try to register or outlaw guns....
Obama: A 'Nod' From The Craft And The Altar Of Zeus
June 17, 2009
President Obama: A 'Nod' from the craft and the altar of Zeus
By Thomas R. Horn
NewsWithViews
http://cuttingedge.org/news_updates/nz2288.htm
It would be pleasant to think that using the Bible during the US Presidential Oath of Office actually means something to who place their hand on it and swear to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States …so help me God." But Obama, who had to repeat his swearing in ceremony after the word "faithfully" was garbled by Chief Justice John Roberts during the inauguration, did so the following day in the Map Room of the White House before a press pool and a small group of aides, and this time, the Oath was administered without the use of a Bible, insinuating to some that the Good Book was only public "eye-candy" in the first instance and also that the Oath of Barack Hussein Obama was biblically invalid.
While this may seem trivial to the average person, what it means to secret orders is consequential. Groups such as Masons (who honored Obama with the first-ever-inaugural ball in Washington, DC, January 20th, 2009) esteem rituals, gestures, the use of books such as the Bible, and Oaths taken by heads of State to be of the highest mystical importance. This is why everything they do is administered through appropriate rituals, initiations and incitations. Ethereal power—including supernatural agents—can be manipulated, bound and released to execute blessings or curses as a result of proper oaths. Breaking an oath can likewise result in dire repercussion in their opinion. Because this is not taken lightly by occultists, members of the Craft would have a difficult time believing the Oath of Office of the President of the US—one of the most hallowed American traditions—was so easily flubbed. The very beginning of the Oath, "I do solemnly swear," is a spiritual petition. The word ‘solemn’ means ‘an invocation of a religious sanction’ or entreaty before deity to witness, sanction and bless the binding nature of the ceremony to carry out the office or duty. The oath also binds the individual before "God" to faithfully execute the covenant. Thus government representatives make an oath before taking public office, and witnesses in a court of law take an oath to "swear to tell the truth" before offering testimony.
These principles are deeply rooted in the Judeo-Christian faith as well as most other religions. Though there is no way of knowing what the Presidential Oath of Office deeply means to Obama or whether the blunder and redo of the swearing in ceremony was anything more than an accident, the unprecedented gaffe was suspicious to some as possibly representing important hidden meaning. Misgivings over it were additionally compounded when reflected against other curious activities and declarations by Barack Obama, which most of the media missed, downplayed, or simply refused to report on, that strongly connected his emergence with occult mythology identified in the Bible as both prophetic and demonic. During the 1930s, Hitler commissioned Albert Speer "the first architect of the Third Reich" to design the new capital. As part of the plans, the "Siegessäule" or Berlin Victory Column—a 226-foot monument topped by a golden winged figure representing Borussia, the female personification of Prussia, and Victoria, the cult goddess of military victory—was removed from its location in front of the Reichstag building in 1939 and relocated to its current location in the Tiergarten, a 495 acre park in the middle of Berlin where Obama gave his speech in front of the Nazi symbol.
The site was offensive to educated Germans as well as to Christians and Jews because of its ties to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. It was nevertheless oddly appropriate, for it was upon this exact location that Hitler had planned to enthrone himself in the Welthauptstadt Germania—the new "World Capital" upon winning World War II. Rainer Brüderle, deputy leader of the liberal political party Free Democrats in Germany complained to the newspaper Bild am Sonntag: "The Siegessäule in Berlin was moved to where it is now by Adolf Hitler. He saw it as a symbol of German superiority and of the victorious wars against Denmark, Austria and France." This represented a serious question In Brüderle’s mind as to "whether Barack Obama was advised correctly in his choice of the Siegessäule as the site to hold a speech on his vision for a more cooperative world." Another German politician named Andreas Schockenhoff was equally disturbed, saying, "It is a problematic symbol."
Evidently it was not problematic for Obama, who stood in front of it and saluted the German audience in a way eerily similar to what Adolf Hitler used to do, followed by thousands returning the salute, which is against German law. When Obama ended his speech in front of the war goddess, he said, "With an eye toward the future, with resolve in our hearts, let us remember this history, and answer our destiny, and remake the world once again." This is exactly what Hitler had promised to do and exactly where he had planned to memorialize it. Of greater significance and not far from where Obama delivered his rousing speech, is the Great Altar of Zeus in the Pergamon Museum. According to several reports, Obama visited the Great Altar while in Berlin, which is especially important given what he did on returning to the United States. Before we examine Obama’s revealing actions, consider carefully what the Bible says about the Altar of Zeus in the letter to the church in Pergamos.
"And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and has not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth" (Rev. 2:12-13).
The phrase "where Satan’s seat is" literally means, "where a throne to Satan is." Scholars identify this throne or ‘seat’ as the Great Altar of Zeus that existed in Pergamos at that time. So important was the worship of Zeus in ancient Pergamos that perpetual sacrifices were offered to him upon the towering and famous 40-foot high altar. Antipas, the first leader and martyr of the early Christian church is believed to have been slain on this altar, slowly roasting to death inside the statue of a bull, the symbol and companion of Zeus. The phrase in Revelation 2:13 "wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth" is considered a citation of this event.
Approximately two-thousand years after Revelation 2:13 was written, German archeologists removed the massive altar of Zeus from the ruins of Pergamos and took it to Berlin, where it was restored as the centerpiece of the Pergamon Museum. It is here that Hitler first adored it, later building an outdoor replica of it from which he gave a series of speeches that mesmerized many Germans. "Fast forward about another 75 years," says blogger El Gallo. "Another charismatic young politician mesmerizes huge German crowds with a rousing speech in Berlin. Barack Hussein Obama…. [and] did Barack Obama visit… the Great Altar of Zeus…? Presumably he did."
Whether Obama received inspiration from the throne of Satan while in Berlin or not, what he did next was astonishing. Upon returning to the United States, he immediately commissioned the construction of a Greek-columned stage from which he made his acceptance speech for his party’s nomination. Because Greek temples such as those built to honor Zeus were thought to house the patron deity, the GOP ridiculed Obama, mocking him as playing Zeus of "Mount Olympus" and accusing his supporters of "kneeling" before the "Temple of Obama." The New York Post ran an enlightening Convention Special supplement on August 28th, 2008 with the telling headline: ‘O’ MY GOD: DEMS ERECT OBAMA TEMPLE blazoned across the front cover.
But it was not until blogger Joel Richardson pointed out how the design of Obama’s stage was a dead ringer for the Great Altar of Zeus that Obama’s campaign managers tried to explain away the design as being a conglomeration representing the portico of the White House with the U.S. capital building. "But experts agreed with Richardson," Gallo wrote, "it was a replica of the Great Altar of Pergamum." Thus, incredibly, like Hitler, Obama had honored the goddess Victoria with his presence before ordering a replica of the biblical throne of Satan built, upon which he accepted his date with destiny.
A final troubling disclosure at the conclusion of this entry may cast light on why Obama seemed fascinated with such anti-Christian symbolism in the lead-up to his election victory. A Hadith (tradition) sacred to Shiite Islam from the 17th century contains a prophecy from Ali ibn Abi-Talib, which predicts that just before the return of the Mahdi (the end-times redeemer of Islam), a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." This leader will command "the strongest army on earth" and will bear "a clear sign" from the third imam, Hussein. The prophecy concludes that: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us."
Does this Islamic prophecy identify Obama as the "promised warrior" who comes to help the savior of Shiite Muslims conquer the world? Amir Taheri asked this very question for Forbes Magazine in October, 2008, pointing out how "Obama’s first and second names—Barack Hussein—mean ‘the blessing of Hussein’ in Arabic and Persian" while his "family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means ‘he is with us,’ the magic formula in Majlisi’s tradition. Leap forward to 2009, and Barack Hussein Obama on June 4 gave an unprecedented speech to the Muslim world from Cairo, Egypt declaring that he is launching a new era between the United States and the Muslim world. For the first time, Obama was forthright about his Muslim heritage and stated that the United States—which he is on record as saying is "no longer a Christian nation"—is now "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." Newsweek editor Evan Thomas followed the president’s speech with a declaration reflected in the opinion of many, that "Obama is standing above the country, above the world, he is a sort of God."
Is Barack Obama The "Promised Warrior"
Coming To Help The Hidden Imam Of Shiite Muslims Conquer The World?
Obama and Ahmadinejad
Amir
Taheri 10.26.08, 1:33 PM ET
Forbes.com
http://www.forbes.com/2008/10/26/obama-iran-ahmadinejad-oped-cx_at_1026taheri_print.html
As reported in Forbes: Is Barack Obama the "promised warrior" coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world? The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam. According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us." In a curious coincidence Obama's first and second names--Barack Hussein--mean "the blessing of Hussein" in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means "he is with us," the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition.
Mystical reasons aside, the Khomeinist establishment sees Obama's rise as another sign of the West's decline and the triumph of Islam. Obama's promise to seek unconditional talks with the Islamic Republic is cited as a sign that the U.S. is ready to admit defeat. Obama's position could mean abandoning three resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council setting conditions that Iran should meet to avoid sanctions. Seeking unconditional talks with the Khomeinists also means an admission of moral equivalence between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic. It would imply an end to the description by the U.S. of the regime as a "systematic violator of human rights." Obama has abandoned claims by all U.S. administrations in the past 30 years that Iran is "a state sponsor of terrorism." Instead, he uses the term "violent groups" to describe Iran-financed outfits such as Hamas and Hezbollah. Obama has also promised to attend a summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference within the first 100 days of his presidency. Such a move would please the mullahs, who have always demanded that Islam be treated differently, and that Muslim nations act as a bloc in dealings with Infidel nations.
Obama's election would boost President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's chances of winning a second term next June. Ahmadinejad's entourage claim that his "steadfastness in resisting the American Great Satan" was a factor in helping Obama defeat "hardliners" such as Hillary Clinton and, later, it hopes, John McCain. "President Ahmadinejad has taught Americans a lesson," says Hassan Abbasi, a "strategic adviser" to the Iranian president. "This is why they are now choosing someone who understands Iran's power." The Iranian leader's entourage also point out that Obama copied his campaign slogan "Yes, We Can" from Ahmadinejad's "We Can," used four years ago. A number of Khomeinist officials have indicated their preference for Obama over McCain, who is regarded as an "enemy of Islam." A Foreign Ministry spokesman says Iran does not wish to dictate the choice of the Americans but finds Obama "a better choice for everyone." Ali Larijani, Speaker of the Islamic Majlis, Iran's ersatz parliament, has gone further by saying the Islamic Republic "prefers to see Barack Obama in the White House" next year.
Tehran's penchant for Obama, reflected in the official media, increased when the Illinois senator chose Joseph Biden as his vice-presidential running mate. Biden was an early supporter of the Khomeinist revolution in 1978-1979 and, for the past 30 years, has been a consistent advocate of recognizing the Islamic Republic as a regional power. He has close ties with Khomeinist lobbyists in the U.S. and has always voted against sanctions on Iran. Ahmadinejad has described the U.S. as a "sunset" (ofuli) power as opposed to Islam, which he says is a "sunrise" (toluee) power. Last summer, he inaugurated an international conference called World Without America--attended by anti-Americans from all over the world, including the U.S. Seen from Tehran, Obama's election would demoralize the U.S. armed forces by casting doubt on their victories in Iraq and Afghanistan, if not actually transforming them into defeat. American retreat from the Middle East under Obama would enable the Islamic Republic to pursue hegemony of the region. Tehran is especially interested in dominating Iraq, thus consolidating a new position that extends its power to the Mediterranean through Syria and Lebanon.
During the World Without America conference, several speakers speculated that Obama would show "understanding of Muslim grievances" with regard to Palestine. Ahmadinejad hopes to persuade a future President Obama to adopt the "Iranian solution for Palestine," which aims at creating a single state in which Jews would quickly become a minority. Judging by anecdotal evidence and the buzz among Iranian bloggers, while the ruling Khomeinists favor Obama, the mass of Iranians regard (and dislike) the Democrat candidate as an appeaser of the mullahs. Iran, along with Israel, is the only country in the Middle East where the United States remains popular. An Obama presidency, perceived as friendly to the oppressive regime in Tehran, may change that.
...it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I John 2:18
_____________________________________
Are you saved? Are you ready for the tribulation to come? Are you headed to hell without hope and God?
Click here to go to our salvation page and learn how you can become born-again and live eternally.