Their are indeed two groups in the world today when considering Muslims as I outlined above. Which do you want to be?

In the Old Testament Bible it states that in these end time Israel would be hated by all nations and the enemy will be knocking down their doors from house to house. Keep in mind that it is referring to all of the 13 tribes of Israel and not just Judah! To mention too that England is where the Tribe of Epherim settled with some of the Royal Tribe of Judah. (The Royal Family) via Scotland and Ireland. And the USA is where the Tribe of Mennaseh came and settled from England on the Mayflower.

So all Israel will be hated and surrounded by the enemy. Russia to our north via Alaska and Cuba to the South and China to our south, via the Panama Canal and the South seas. Europe will stand off and wait for Israel to be defeated and then come to collect the spoils like vultures.

But, then read (2 Chron. 20:29) And the fear of the GOD (Father) was on all the Kingdoms of those Countries when they had heard that the LORD fought against the enemies of Israel. Israel is God's chosen people in the end times to fulfill His final works! Are You An Enemy of Israel and GOD?

Can't you now see that we are in the last days as mentioned in Prophecy? Open your heart and eyes my friends, God has already taken His "blessings and protections" away from "America in 1992" because she went a hoaring and allowed the dog (homo-sexuals) See (Rev. 22:15) in the military camps and did not put them out! Also see Re. 21: and read all about the seven vials and seven plagues be poured out on man at this time. Both scripture and news below will confirm all!

• World Government Plans and Humanity on hold:

  The fact or quality of being humane; kindness, mercy, sympathy, etc.

  During this time of world globalization, the human race is even more interconnected with one another than ever before, through economic and mass communication mediums. It is obvious that we depend on one another in order to maintain a stable economy and we all feel the ripple effects of a failed economy equally all through out the world. This also holds true with regards to our humanity.

  Mass communication today delivers to us first hand information for us to witness upfront human suffering that unfortunately still exists in the world today. It is unavoidable for us not to be witness. Though, unlike the world economy, we do have a choice to either assist those who are suffering or to shut them out completely from our conscience.

  Our individual choice to help or ignore human suffering is completely up to us and we must take responsibility for our actions on behalf of all mankind. It should be our obligation. Let us not leave our human rights in the hands of soldiers who are trained to kill and to politicians who train us to accept and justify the killing of children. Take humanity off hold by affirming in solidarity that all human beings shall enjoy fundamental rights and freedoms without discrimination. Until then, humanity is on hold.

• Prophecy:

  See Revelation 12:7-10 "satan and his 7000 angels cast to earth. Revelation 9:3-11, satan's rule for 5 months, Revelation 11:3-10 The two physical witnesses of the end times and their death after 3 1/2 years. Then satans reign comes to an end at the battle of Hamongog and Armageddon. 1st Cor. 15:52 Our physical bodies are all changed to spirit bodies at Christ return!

• The Final Great World War:

  Armageddon at the Valley of Meggido in Israel and Hamongog is Alaska.

• This website is written for and by both Christian, Jewish and Muslim editors. Our goal is to present the real truth that is hidden to mankind and let the world know that only God will bring about total peace. Yes and it will be in the next few short years. He who endures all things and sufferings will be of survice in God's Kingdom for a Millennium. See (1 Cor. 15:52) and you will know when!
  1. What is terrorism?
  
  

  Terrorism is hard to define. In its broadest sense terrorism can be thought of as the use or threatened use of force against civilians designed to bring about political or social change. Moreover, while we think of terrorism as being both a political and irrational act (especially suicide terrorism), terrorism can also be thought of as a rational act conducted specifically because of the impact -- fear, confusion, submission -- it will have.
  
  Given the U.S. government's pledge to wage a war against terrorism, it is important to look at its definitions. According to both the Department of Defense (DOD) and the FBI, terrorism is "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." The DOD definition adds that a goal of terrorism can be "inculcating fear" (thus the psychological dimension), while the State Department is more elaborate, specifying that terrorism may include the use of biological, chemical or nuclear devices as well as the act of "assassination."
  
  The latter would suggest that assassinating bin Laden would be a terrorist act by our definition of the word; the former that allied forces in the fire bombings of cities in Dresden, and specifically the U.S., through its use of nuclear weapons to end World War II and of chemical weapons in Vietnam, has already engaged in terrorist activities, although the moral calculus and justification for these actions varies widely and in comparison with the terrorism of the enemies, such as Nazi Germany.
  
  This is the grand conundrum of defining terrorism; it is very difficult to separate it from acts of war, just or unjust. We all have heard the saying, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." And indeed, Osama bin Laden and his comrades were hailed as freedom fighters in the 1980s by the American government at a time when politicians like Dick Cheney considered Nelson Mandela a terrorist.
  
  Further, the UN definition of terrorism states that "all war crimes will be considered acts of terrorism," in which case most every government in the world (especially the major military powers, Pakistan, Israel, the major Muslim states, most Latin American governments) has committed terrorism, though few have ever faced justice or even opprobrium for doing so.
  
  2. What is the history of terrorism?
  
  The first recorded use of "terrorism" and "terrorist" was in 1795, relating to the Reign of Terror instituted by the French government. The use of "terrorist" to signify anti-government activities was recorded in 1866 referring to Ireland, and in 1883 referring to Russia.
  
  Throughout history humans have terrorized their neighbors to generate fear and compel changes in behavior. At the dawn of China's imperial age, T'ai Kung, the first Chinese general and progenitor of strategic thought, described the "spreading of civil offensives" to sow dissension, demoralize the populace and incapacitate the government.
  
  In the modern period, all regular armies have recruited "irregulars" to do their dirty work: Cossacks, hunters, Hussars, all were used to draw a civilized veil over the actions of their sponsors as they raped and pillaged in towns and across countrysides. (Ironically, Ivan the First had to subdue the very Cossacks he used to pacify the Muslim regions of Russia; today the U.S. is forced to "subdue" the Muslims we used to pacify Russia.)
  
  Today terrorism must be viewed within the context of the modern nation-state. Indeed, it was the rise of a bureaucratic state, which could not be destroyed by the death of one leader that forced terrorists to widen their scope of targets in order to create a public atmosphere of anxiety and undermine confidence in government. This reality is at the heart of the ever more violent terrorism of the last 100 years, from anarchists' assassinations to hijackings and suicide bombings.
  
  3. Who and where are terrorists today?
  
  According to the U.S. State Department, there are at least 45 terrorist groups outside the United States. Currently, at least seven "rogue states" -- Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, North Korea, Cuba and now Afghanistan -- are accused by the U.S. of "supporting terrorism."
  
  But the label of who is and isn't a terrorist is still fuzzy. Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat was a terrorist, and now isn't. Jerry Adams of Ireland's Sinn Fein and Nelson Mandela of South Africa were terrorists, now they're statesmen. At least three Israeli Prime Ministers were either self-avowed terrorists or could be legitimately accused of engaging in terrorist activities. Our newest ally in the war against terror, Russian President Vladimir Putin, continues to lead a dirty war in Chechnya that could be described as terrorist in the ferocity of its atrocities against civilians.
  
  Thirty years ago Noam Chomsky reminded us that two thirds of the national-security states using torture and terrorism were clients of the United States. Moreover, almost every Middle Eastern government, including our strongest allies, engage in state-terrorism against its people or its neighbors. To cite just one small example, Pakistan, our major security partner in Central Asia, is about to execute Dr. Yunis Shaikh, a leading humanist and peace activist [ go to http://free-drshaikh.org/ for more information and to help free him ] on concocted charges of "blasphemy," precisely in order to stifle any dissent against the government's policies. And yet President Bush has ignored this human rights abomination, waved American sanctions imposed after the detonation of the Pakistani bomb and is putting together new aid packages for the Pakistan government.
  
  4. From where does the trail of Osama bin Laden, and terrorists more generally, originate?
  
  We are only beginning to understand the incredibly complex logistical, financial and personnel network behind the likes of Osama bin Laden. This complexity suggests the deeper we dig, the wider the circle grows. What has long been clear is that bin Laden's main support comes from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, both major U.S. allies and pivots in our Middle Eastern and Central Asian security system.
  
  The U.S. remains the lead arms supplier and patron of the Saudi regime, and was close to Pakistan during the Afghan war, while the dictator Zia ul-Haq (one of the world's more ruthless) was in power. The CIA was a main funnel of over $3 billion in funds to the Afghan resistance, which became the core of the current terrorist network. The Soviet Union was likewise a supporter of the previous generation of Arab terrorists, such as Abu Nidal, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and other Palestinian groups.
  
  The U.S. alliance with the Saudi royal family goes back to the 1940s, when the Roosevelt administration pledged to ensure the survival of the royal family as long as it ensured a supply of cheap oil. Thus was born the petrodollar-arms cycle, in which dollars sent to the Saudis in the form of oil revenues were recycled back to the U.S. through arms purchases. To understand the finances of terrorism it is important to keep in mind this petrodollar cycle, which keeps the vast majority of oil revenue in the hands of corrupt regimes and thus out of reach of most citizens of the region.
  
  If we turn to the question of who is harboring and financing terrorists, once again the West and its allies in the Middle East and global south are implicated. For its part, the U.S. is involved, through foreign aid and weapons sales totaling hundreds of billions of dollars during and since the Cold War (from just 1993 to 1997, the U.S. government sold, approved or gave away $190 billion in weapons to virtually every nation on earth). The same has been true for the Soviet Union, though on a smaller scale. Whether in Latin America, Africa, Asia or the Middle East, regimes that have engaged in acts of terror could not have survived without the support of the two (and now one) superpower and our G-8 allies.
  
  But blame cannot just be laid with superpowers. If bin Laden could not survive without the Taliban, the Taliban could not exist were it not for Pakistan's patronage and support of hundreds of "madrasas," or religious schools, that train thousands of young men to do little else other than hate and kill in the name of God. In fact, the major financiers of the bin Laden and the Taliban have been Saudi intelligence and eminent Saudis such as the Governor of Riyadh and the Grand Mufti of the country. Ironically, bin Laden has been linked to Saddam Hussein.
  
  Yet it is not only princes and sheiks who are to blame: average people through small donations have helped to sustain myriad terrorist organizations, whether its Arabs giving to duel-function groups like the Muslim Brotherhood or the Hamas that provide social services and support violent activities, or poor Pakistanis who still manage to give a rupee or two to add to bin Laden's millions. It could also be argued that average citizens in France, Israel or the U.S. do likewise through their tax dollars that pay our policies.
  
  5. What do Judaism, Christianity and Islam have to say about terrorism?
  
  The concept of terrorism arose centuries after the classic texts of the three religions were handed down to humanity, so it is difficult to discuss the concept of terrorism in this sense. However, all three Abrahamic faiths allow war and set limits on when, how and against whom it can be waged.
  
  If we start with Judaism, certainly the Bible, in the Ten Commandments, admonishes "thou shalt not kill," which clearly would prescribe any sort of violence against non-combatants. Indeed, the Prophet Hosea warned Israel that her sins would cause "the tumult of war [to] arise among your people, and all your fortresses shall be destroyed… mothers dashed in pieces with their children." Yet the Bible also describes the Lord as "a man of war" who orders Israel to "go and smite Am'alek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." In one sense, this is not an act of terrorism, since the goal isn't political. Yet in the larger context of teaching a lesson to Israel's enemies by making Am'alek an example, it would seem to meet the criteria. Moreover, if we consider the Egyptians' killing of all the first born of the Hebrews, and God's doing likewise to Egypt as the tenth plague preceding the Exodus, both could be interpreted in a modern context as "terroristic" because they involved the killing of innocent non-combatants for political ends -- i.e., the changing of attitudes and policies on each side.
  
  Of course, by definition God cannot engage in an act of evil, yet when Job questioned God, He did not answer directly, but instead replied, "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand... Would you discredit my justice? Would you condemn me to justify yourself?" Even the prophets could not answer the question of evil and innocent suffering in a world created in God's image.
  
  If we turn to Christianity, the example of Jesus's doctrine of blessing peacemakers and turning the other cheek has influenced pacifist movements to this day. Instead of an "eye for an eye," Jesus said, "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." Yet he did not challenge the Roman soldiers to give up their profession—which certainly included "terrorism" as a matter of course—while Paul in Romans exclaims that "He beareth not the sword in vain: for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil."
  
  As Christian theology developed with Augustine and later Aquinas, the doctrine of "just war" helped define the rules and limits of war, and are now being used by the Vatican to indicate its support for the war against terrorism. Augustine explained, "We do not seek peace in order to be at war, but we go to war that we may have peace. Be peaceful, therefore, in warring, so that you may vanquish those whom you war against, and bring them to the prosperity of peace."
  
  Such solipsisms are easily distorted to justify any sort of barbarity, even as the just war doctrine prohibited "private individuals" (like Osama bin Laden) from "summoning together the people," to quote Aquinas. Yet Augustine's definition of a just war as "one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly" sounds just like the justifications offered by terrorists everywhere for their extreme actions. And indeed, the commonly accepted contemporary criteria for a just war -- having a "just case," being under "proper authority," fighting for justice and not reasons of self-interest or aggrandizement -- can all be claimed by terrorists as well as "just" states. Finally, we should remember that the Crusades or Inquisition, which were executed largely through terroristic means, were authorized directly by the Church.
  
  Arriving at Islam, the concept of Jihad, or "struggle," which in recent decades has been at the theological core of justifying Muslim acts of terrorism, traditionally meant the spiritual and moral struggle of an individual Muslim against his or her evil inclinations. The lesser jihad, that is, war against other human beings, is in classical Muslim sources a "defensive" war with limits that cannot be "transgressed," even when fighting those who "try to force you to adopt another religion or to leave your home." In fact, the conservative Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran just called the fight against terrorism a "holy war" -- that is, a jihad.
  
  Yet while the Koran has plenty of verses that talk about peace, even with Muhammad's enemies, there are also verses that advocate war and violence. Indeed, God exclaims in Sura 8:12, "I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them." Moreover, while the Koran prohibits suicide, and the Prophet clearly prohibited killing noncombatants, women and children, destroying property or even poisoning wells (the precursor to chemical warfare), there are hadith (prophetic sayings) that list jihad as among the highest religious duties, higher even than performing the pilgrimage to Mecca, which is one of the five pillars of the faith. And although it is not always clear which jihad is being spoken of, the fact that the Prophet is quoted as saying that booty will be the reward for "Jihad for God," and that women should make the pilgrimage instead of jihad, one can assume that the martial sense of jihad is intended at least some of the time.
  
  Ultimately, the theological roots of terrorism or war in general would seem to be moot, for religion has long been used to justify politics and warfare. Nonetheless, this has not stopped the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center and Pentagon from considering themselves to be good Muslims, nor the Jews who uproot Palestinian homes or Serbs who kill Muslims in Bosnia from considering themselves to be good Jews or Christains. Arguing with them about the "true" nature of their religion is a waste of time. They might indeed by "good" Christians, Muslims or Jews, but are in the end bad human beings.
  
  6. What are the most common acts of terrorism?
  
  Since 1968, when the United States government began keeping such statistics, more than 7,000 terrorist bombings have occurred worldwide. The State Department currently lists 30 "designated foreign terrorist organizations" and another 14 as "other terrorist organizations". [ report containing full list at http://www.state.gov/www/global/terrorism/1999report/appb.html ]
  
  According to the State Department, the number of terrorist acts has hovered between 300 and 500 per year during the 1980-1999 period. Perhaps surprisingly, about two thirds of all acts of terrorism are against business, numbering five-fold more than attacks on diplomatic, military and government personnel or property, or civilians. Moreover, while the Middle East dominates media coverage of terrorism, in fact Latin America, followed by Western Europe, suffered the most attacks in 1999 (96 and 30 respectively out of a total of 169), with bombings the most popular method of attack, followed by firebombing, kidnapping, arson, and hijacking.
  
  But the State Department numbers are misleading, because an incident is classified as international terrorism only if it involves the citizens or territory of more than one country; thus terrorism within countries not harming foreign nationals is not counted. A more accurate accounting comes from Pinkerton Security's Annual Risk Assessment, which show an average of almost 5,000 incidents per year during the last decade, with terrorism confined to one country. Yet even these numbers don't account for terrorist actions by governments. Indeed, while hijackings and suicide bombings get the most attention, the fact is that the most common act of terror is torture committed by states against their own citizens, as Amnesty International reports that tens of thousands of cases of torture and extra-judicial killings occur each year (and complains that more often than not, the U.S. "shares the blame" for them).
  
  7. What are the most renowned acts of terrorism?
  
  The attacks of September 11 may become the most famous acts of terror ever perpetrated, and are linked to other terrorist attacks apparently sponsored by bin Laden on U.S. embassies in Africa and the USS Cole in Yemen. Yet many of the most famous terrorist attacks of the modern era were attacks on individual political leaders. The turn of the 20h century, like today, was rife with terrorism, as evidenced by anarchist killings of a French and Spanish Prime Ministers (Sadi Carnot and Antonio Canovas), Empress Elizabeth of Austria, Italy's King Umberto I, and the assassination of the Arch Duke Ferdinand on June 28, 1914, which sparked the first World War. Anarchist mail bombs in the U.S. started the Palmer Raids in 1920, one of the worst violations of civil liberties by U.S. government in U.S. history.
  
  In the post-war period, acts of terrorism have included the Munich Olympic massacre in 1972, plane hijackings and airport shootings throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the 1993 World Trade Center attack, the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City and the murderous acts of the Ted Kazinsky, the "Unibomber," the latter three of which signaled the arrival of large-scale terrorism as permanent fact of life on American soil.
  
  Finally, the Tokyo sarin subway attack by Aum Shinrikyo in 1995 has augured a new era in terrorism, now crowned by the September 11 attacks. Yet while we focus on high-tech problems and responses, these attacks reveal that the new dynamics of terror combine devoted militants, often well-educated, using relatively primitive means to commit acts of extreme and indiscriminate violence.
  
  8. Does terrorism work; and if so, how can it be stopped?
  
  Terrorism by the IRA, the PLO and other Palestinian groups, Sikhs, Tamils, Basques, Philippino Muslims -- none of these has succeeded in altering the policies of the affected states. Neither has state-sponsored terror by Rogue states led to the defeat of an enemy. However, if the goal of terrorist acts by these groups is to prevent peace and reconciliation, terrorism has worked.
  
  The variables determining the success or failure of acts of terror are thus indeterminate and complex. Perhaps the most we can say is that terror can help the stronger party in a conflict win more quickly and with less loss of life on its side (the rationale underlying the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings or the massacre of Palestinians in 1948). Yet as perpetrators of terrorism move away from single issue causes (freeing Northern Ireland or Palestine) and become more apocalyptic, hoping like Osama bin Laden to start war on a global scale, the standard for measuring success changes, as the worst possible scenario on all sides is exactly what is hoped for.
  
  In such a situation it becomes all the more important for citizens and leaders in the West and its allies in the Muslim world -- in fact, all people everywhere -- to understand the role their policies, and indeed the whole world system as presently and unequally structured, plays in the fostering and sustaining this new generation of terrorists. Yet the scope and horror of the violence inflicted by the new terrorism makes such introspection all but impossible. In this sense, Osama bin Laden and his comrades around the world might achieve their goals through their very destruction.
  
  9. Does violence stop terrorism?
  
  All we have to do is look at both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian divide to understand that violence, including terrorism by a state or occupied population, rarely stops further violence as long as the grievances motivating them are not addressed.
  
  In that context, 15 years ago Connor Cruise O'Brien warned that "the free, or capitalist, world provides highly favorable conditions for terrorist recruitment and activity." Why? Because the number of frustrated were increasing along with their awareness of how good life was for the few and better off. Ten years later, Bill Clinton made the "war on terrorism" a lynchpin of his reelection campaign just as the neo-liberal paradigm of globalization he championed achieved unparalleled power in international policy-making. It should come as no surprise, then, that in pushing for Star Wars funds, the U.S. Space Command's pamphlet "Vision for 2020" argues that "the globalization of the world economy" will widen the gap between haves and the have-nots, and thus the U.S. government has a mission to "dominate the space dimension of military operations" in order to protect the U.S. from the rest of the world.
  
  In the context of a world were conservative estimates declare half of humanity to be living on less than $2 a day, asking the CIA or other military agencies to fight terrorism is probably not going to work, as the "blowback" from policies that produce ever-widening gaps between rich and poor between and within countries will likely be at least as bad as the blowback produced by the CIA overthrow of the Mossadeq Government and installation of the Shah of Iran in 1953.
  
  Even on an operational level, as former CIA officer Reuel Marc Gerecht wrote only months before the 9/11 attacks, it has proved impossible to place even the best trained Muslim operative into the tight-knit structures that constituted contemporary terrorist organizations. As for America's technological supremacy, President Clinton sent dozens of cruise missiles after bin Laden, none of which hit their target.
  
  From a broader perspective, the ever growing world trade in arms, which fuels violence at all levels, has multiplied opportunities for anyone with a grievance to spread terror anywhere, including here. Yet our entire military-industrial system is based on the large-scale trade in arms, which helps to fund our own defense budget. Finally, since much of the rest of the world, especially citizens of the Global South, harbor deep resentments against the United States for its "cultural invasion" as much as for its economic and foreign policies, using unilateral acts of large-scale violence in the war against terrorism will only feed that hatred.
  
  10. What are the alternatives to our current policies on terrorism?
  
  There have been two phases of the U.S. approach to fighting terrorism. The first, lasting until September 11, has been a "defensive approach" (also called "antiterrorism") that sought to protect against terrorism through increased security measures in airports and cooperation among intelligence services. With the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. has officially changed its policy to a more "offensive approach" (called "counter-terrorism") that focuses on the "sources of violence," that is the terrorists themselves and those who harbor them. A host of bills have also been proposed, including the "Combating Terrorism Act," the "Anti-Terrorism Act" and the "Public Safety and Cyber Security Enhancement Act," all of which civil libertarians argue go well beyond any necessary response to terrorism.
  
  However, in terms of international law, there is a clear recourse in situations of this sort: going through the UN Security Council, the only body under international law that can authorize military action, or even authorize the equivalent of an international arrest warrant. Moreover, there are at least nine international multilateral terrorism conventions that the U.S. can use as the basis for a legal war against terrorism through international law, rather than unilateral war. [ report containing list at http://www.state.gov/www/global/terrorism/980817_terror_conv.html ]
  
  There is also the International Criminal Court in the Hague, which has the moral and legal basis to enter this process, be it state of non-state actors who are ultimately accused of engaging in and/or supporting terrorism. This would clearly constrain the range and freedom of action of the U.S. government in prosecuting its war on terrorism, but that is precisely the point of the UN -- to limit the use of violence by member nations to secure international peace and security.
  
  In the last analysis, breaking the cycle of terrorism, and the incredible violence that fuels it, requires a radical rethinking of a world system that forces half of its members to live in abject poverty and destroys ever more of the earth that sustains it. Today we all stand under judgment: colonizer and colonized, exploiter and exploited. As the philosopher Slavoj Zizek wrote in the wake of 9/11, "the only way to ensure that it will not happen HERE again is to prevent it going on ANYWHERE ELSE." Only then will the war on terrorism see victory.
  
  

  The Mark of the Beast

  This page is largely about the meaning of Revelation 13:16-18 - Some translations of The Bible talk about 'the number of man' which is accurate, and others (such as the King James Version) 'the number of a man'.

  "He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, freeman and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand (meaning your works) or in his forehead, (what is in tour head? Your brain, mind!) so that no-one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast (Satan's controlled government) or the number of his name.(Satan = 666) This calls for wisdom, if anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a person (Satan) and it's number is 666." Rev 13:16-18

  Testimony from a Greek Monastery - The Schengen treaty, barcodes and Electronic ID's The End of Death: 'Soul Catcher' Computer Chip Due...

  ---

  In Hebrew and Greek - the 'gammatria' code:

  The standard numerical code for letters in Greek and Hebrew followed this pattern: A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4, E=5, F=6, G=7, H=8, I=9, J=10, K=20, L=30, M=40, N=50, O=60, P=70, Q=80, R=90, S=100, T=200, U=300, V=400, W=500, X=600, Y=700, Z=800. (Quoted by David H Stern in the Jewish New Testament Commentary) [TG]

  Use the 666 calculation machine on the web to try various names against various letter/number codes

  And why not get these up-to-date resources to help in your studies:

  Jewish New Testament Commentary, David H Stern, pub. Jewish New testament Publications, ISBN 965 359 008 1
  Complete Jewish Bible, trans. David H Stern, Jewish New Testament Publications Inc., ISBN 965 359 015 4

  See also http://www.dccsa.com/greatjoy/anti.html

  ---

  A message from Don - an independent researcher on 666 and Revelation

  'This is where wisdom is needed; those who understand should count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a person, and its number is 666.' Revelation 13:18 (Jewish New Testament)

  Hello, I am Don Huard And there is no organisation is behind me, but please read the following comments regarding the number of the beast, which is the number of a man, or man´s number or a human number or even the number of mankind.(I found all these different translations).

  Maybe, you can send this information to some of your friends and people whom you think are interested in the earnest of our times...

  Info in Relation to 'the Number of the Beast is 666'

  Try following words: (A=6, B=12, C=18, D=24 etc...... Z=156 - I found this calculation scheme maybe at 8 - 10 different places...)

  Calculate also JESUS (In Greek it is = 888)

  LUCIFER (the name of the devil).

  SANTA CLAUS

  KISSINGER Board of Bilderberg (see www.bilderberg.org) Board of Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, his company in NEW YORK has its fingers in a lot of World dealings. One of the major players. Committee of 300 as well. Related to the British Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA).

  GORBATCHOV (original German way of writing) He still is a major player in the drive for One World. President of the Green Cross International. The Gorbachev Foundation gets money from the Rockefeller as far as I understand.

  VAN DEN BROEK (Committee of 300 <the ultimate secret society> - you find the complete story by former intelligence officer Dr. John Coleman. - This committee is central in the drive for one World Government. VDB participated several times at Bilderberg meetings. Was the EU Commissioner who got the job to unify Europe - had to leave the job last year when scandals in the EU Commission became public. Was the President of the MAASTRICHT meeting. MAASTRICHT was the birthplace of the United Europe. Old German (?) way of writing MAASTRICHT is MASTRICHT (I have a picture and a map like that). Was the spokesman for Europe at the "Peace" Conference between the Arabs and the Israelis 1991, when the KISSINGER led George Bush government worked for "Peace" in the Middle-East.). Bush and GORABTCHOV were also there.

  LUSTIGER. Cardinal of France, archbishop of Paris. From the tribe of Levy. One of the most powerful man in the World Church according to the Jerusalem Post. Was long considered as possibly becoming next pope. But now he is a bit old. According to what I know he was much influenced by Freemason and Jesuit thinking. Then we have the word KATHOLISCHE in German, what means catholic. Another equivalent of 666. And we have the official title of the Pope (Vice of the Son of God) in Latin you write in VICARIVS FILII DEI, in Latin values again 666. The catholic church is the Great Harlot (who has many daughters as well...). But I believe each pope was also a false prophet, and got also the value of 666 writen in letters on his papal crown (Tiara)...!!! Another title of the Pope is Pontifex Maximus which was the title ot the pagan highpriest who adored Jupiter.

  We have also CESAR NERON (Emperor Nero) in Aramaic or Hebrew letters which is again a value of 666. I personally believe he is the Beast who was and is not (when the Revelation was written) and comes from the abyss and will go to destruction. Please read Rev. 17,6-18. Also Rev. 11,7. The great city in 17,18 can be nothing else then Rome according to my understanding.

  I PERSONALLY KNOW WHO WILL BE THE TWO PERSONS AT THE END. WHOM THE BIBLE CALLS THE BEAST FROM THE SEA AND THE BEAST FROM THE EARTH (according to Rev. 19,20 the 2nd Beast destroys the False Prophet, I consider him as being the Antichrist, Satan) the one who declares himself to be Messiah). It could not be any that we find them above. This is sure. It easely could also be that the False Prophet (= the Messiah) should be calculated in Hebrew. By the way, if you transcribe Shirinowsky to Hebrew it is again an equivalent of 666... DEUTSCHLAND (= Germany) was after World War II totally down. They destroyed it so completely that they believed they have finished with it. But wonder over wonder. Germany rose up in rather short time. And when I understood in 1988 that DEUTSCHLAND is an equivalent of 666. I started to speak about in early 1989 that the Wall in Berlin will fall soon and that Germany is soon reunited. People laughed at me, but it happened already in late 89 resp.1990. Germany is reunited and is the driving force in the European Union which is according to many biblical scholars nothing else than a kind of rebirth of the Roman Empire. But you will a "letter calculation machine" in the Web, find it and try HITLER. I believe Germany will play a leading role in the end.- Think about and please comment.

  Try for exemple NEWYORK (you have to write it like that in the calculating machine, elsewhere you get a wrong number) and think about. The United Nations are already now a kind of provisory World Government (you find some information regarding the UN Commission on Global Governance on the Net).. The Rockefeller Empire is there (Bilderberg, Trilateral, Council on Foreign Relation, Chase Manhattan <biggest bank of USA, EXXON>). The Kissinger Associates are there - who are very powerful. The Wall Street ist there. And I think the Lucis Trust - which originally was called Lucifer trust !!!! - is still there. Before he was in the building of the United Nations. Now he is a UN NGO as far as I know. - Is New York the Capital of the Beast already now ??? - The seat of the NEW YORK FEDERAL RESERVER who dominates the FED completely and the Fed of New York has its seat in the very important Bank for International Settlements in Basle/CH. Is New York the Capital of the Beast already now. In Revelation we see the beast coming from the sea. The word coming means it takes some time. How many decades or even longer is the beast coming out of the sea??? - According to Daniel 7 there is always a beast in power - but not the two final persons who according to Rev. 19,20 are called the Beast and the False Prophet. (According to all serious biblical scholars we still are in the time of the 4th Beast of Daniel 7, which is the Roman Empire).

  Then we have the Image of the Beast - how far did we come?

  We have TV full with devilish and bestial indoctrination and one world ideology. We have the COMPUTER by whom you soon can do everything. We have the TELETEXT. We have the INTERNET (alphabetical reversed conversion.). And the World Wide Web (www) is in Hebrew 666..... So the very serious question is how far can we go without adoring or worshiping the Image of the Beast. This is a serious question which we have to answer in front of the living God. - If you have another opinion please state! Thank you. Read in this connection Rev. 14:9-12. So there will be a great grace upon mankind when this angel will speak to all people - but unfortunately, only part will hear and obey.

  Then we have the Mark of the Beast.

  The products of daily life in the supermarkets etc. are marked with bar-codes (EAN-Code (which stands for European Article Number Code), the EAN-Code International and the UPC-Code (Universal Product Code)). All of them containing hidden 666. Do the goods already belong to the nowbeing beast??

  Animals are more and more marked with microchips. People as well. US-Patent 5 878 155 is a tattoo for people, for example a bar-code with three six, with invisible ink for sales transaction.

  Where does this numerological code originate?

  In the ancient manuscripts in Hebrew, The Old Testiment!

  

Something sounds and smells rotten in the news regarding Osama bin Laden!