CNN Exposed – Emmy Winning Former CNN Journalist Blows The Whistle: CNN is paid by foreign and domestic Government agencies for specific content...

(THE CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE) -- [...] CNN is paid by the US government for reporting on some events, and not reporting on others.  The Obama Administration pays CNN for content control.

Let that sink in.

Additionally CNN and CNN International are also paid by foreign governments to avoid stories that are damaging, and construct narratives that show them in a better, albeit false, light.
Amber Lyon is a three-time Emmy winning investigative journalist and photographer. She accuses CNN of being “fake news.”
Back in March 2011, CNN sent a four person team to Bahrain to cover the Arab Spring. Once there, the crew was the subject of extreme intimidation amongst other things, but they were able to record some fantastic footage. As Glenn Greenwald of the UK’s Guardian writes in his blockbuster article from September 4th 2012:

“In the segment, Lyon interviewed activists as they explicitly described their torture at the hands of government forces, while family members recounted their relatives’ abrupt disappearances. She spoke with government officials justifying the imprisonment of activists. And the segment featured harrowing video footage of regime forces shooting unarmed demonstrators, along with the mass arrests of peaceful protesters. In sum, the early 2011 CNN segment on Bahrain presented one of the starkest reports to date of the brutal repression embraced by the US-backed regime.

Despite these accolades, and despite the dangers their own journalists and their sources endured to produce it, CNN International (CNNi) never broadcast the documentary. Even in the face of numerous inquiries and complaints from their own employees inside CNN, it continued to refuse to broadcast the program or even provide any explanation for the decision. To date, this documentary has never aired on CNNi.

Having just returned from Bahrain, Lyon says she “saw first-hand that these regime claims were lies, and I couldn’t believe CNN was making me put what I knew to be government lies into my reporting.”

Here is a segment of the Bahrain report that Amber Lyon and her team put together.  CNNi refused to allow it to air because the Bahrain Government had paid them not to show it.

When Amber Lyon recognized the extent of the reasoning, she challenged CNN. CNN told her to be quiet, and began to view her as a risk.   She knew, and found out, too much.

Amber is now trying to tell the story, the real story, of what is going on behind the closed doors of US Media entities. Amber has created her own website, and additionally as noted in the Guardian Article she is trying to share the truth of the deceptions.

What Amber Lyon describes is exactly the reason why CNN never aired the Nick Robertson interview with Muhammed Al Zawahiri in Egypt.

Amber recently did a web interview with Alex Jones on InfoWars.   Generally the TreeHouse does not appreciate Alex Jones.  He is wound up tighter than piano wire, and unfortunately much of his truth is diminished because of the hype he places upon it.

Alex Jones is easy to disregard as a “conspiracy theorist”, not because of what he says, but because of how he says it. Everything is desperate and dangerous with him.

That said, the words and explanations of Ms. Lyon in the discussion/interview are poignant and vastly informative.   So I share the video with you so you can hear from Amber herself exactly what is being described and articulated.

It is critical to listen to what she says, not just about Bahrain but also about what the Obama administration is specifically doing.    Just try to overlook the Alex Jones-ism, and focus on what Amber Lyon is sharing. Read the entire article via The Conservative Treehouse...

DRINKING “THE BLOOD OF SAINTS”

By Ted on March 12, 2014 in General, Highlight

Exclusive
By Walid Shoebat

How can I bring reconciliation between people who say they all love the Bible?
My dream is to reconcile the People of the Good Book while keeping the spirit of discussion in ironing out their differences.
My dream is to help my fellow Christian Arab to see that his enemy is not Israel, but that Islam desires to conquer all of us: Jews, Catholics and Protestants.
My dream is that Catholics could be as zealous to learn the Bible as Evangelicals do and that Evangelicals learn history as Catholics do and the Jews learn about Jesus as we all do.
But sharing such dreams are a sin that is met with much objection.
To my detractors I say, let me first confess my errors, before I point out yours.
Having been steeped into the error of Islam and coming out of it taught me something: to all who seek to find truth, here is how you do it: go and find what is most attacked and their you will find the truth. This is true regardless of that what you might find is something you do not agree with.
It is difficult to comprehend this unless you came out of error and you have a confessing spirit.
It is why I examine things for myself from honest sources. I do not follow a favorite preacher and I always try to listen to both sides, then I make up my mind.
I had to deal with my first errors when I joined a Baptist church, I learned what I learned when I met mostly Protestants who either grew up in the faith or dissatisfied x-Catholic migrants who were dissatisfied by a multitude of issues they found in the Catholic circles.
To these, the moment I said anything positive about Catholics and the first thing that happens is that the other side machine guns all the problems with Catholics, while they completely ignored the one positive point I made about them.
Is this how we iron out our differences?
But I assure you, machine gun comments is exactly what will be posted on my comment section; Mariology, Prayer to Saints, Icons, Statues, works and the killing of Christians throughout history …
While these are fine arguments, perhaps I will point one confession: as I investigated history, I could not find the supposed “blood of the saints” that the Catholic church have shed, instead I found that the blood of heretics became the “blood of the saints,” while the blood of millions of Catholics and Eastern orthodox fighting Islam was rendered worthless.
Having said this, this does not mean that mistakes did not happen, they did.
The main qualification we had for Vatican to be Harlot is that it was the Popes using their chalice “drank the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus” (Revelation 17:6).
For that to be true, we all conjured up what we claimed were “overwhelming” historic references in which Millions of copies of books circulated to the unsuspecting without disclosing the heretical theology of the sects that the Catholic Church eliminated.

Typical depiction of the Whore of Babylon

Let me explain. We argued for centuries that such saints were: Manichaeans, Arians, Cathars, Priscillianists, Paulicians, Bogomiles, Waldensians, Albigensians, Lollards and Hussites.
But as I examined, these were hardly saints by biblical standards and neither did we quote many valid historians to prove our case. Instead, we quoted theologians and propagandists while we pretended they were historians.
Do we think that tolerating the Cathars was the right thing to do?
The Cathars in their days were similar to Muslims.
The Paulicians, who were really Armenian Cathars, had fought in the ranks of the Muslims against the Crusaders during the First Crusade.
Were these the saints?
When we identify ourselves with the Cathars, is as if someone identifies themselves with the Philistines and the Ba’al worshipers that the Israelites removed.
To deny Israel that right is not only anti-God but also Anti-Semitic.
Neither can such groups be linked to any original first century church. These broke away from the Church and were never even pre-existent to it.
And I can show countless of examples of such error. Take for example, the famous preacher John MacArthur who rejects the biblical discourses of certain medieval theologians utters one example of such error; he amazingly accepts these heretical groups as orthodox Bible expositors:

While the period produced some famous preachers, such as Peter the Hermit, Bernard of Clairvaux, and Thomas Aquinas, none handled the text in an expository fashion. Faint hints of Bible exposition have been detected among independent groups such as the Paulicians, Waldenses, and Albigenses, despite the fact that these groups are commonly dismissed as “heretics.” (1)

The closest sects, who can even have a hint of orthodoxy, would be the Hussites and the Waldenses. But even if we take these two sects, they believed in Catholic and not Evangelical dogma.
I could also write a book on the violence committed by the Hussites and the Albigensians that would raise an eyebrow.
The Paulicians and the Albigenses were purely heretics. Considering this whole conundrum from our evangelical mindset, how could killing these be considered “drinking the blood of the saints”?
Take another writer, Tim LaHaye, who is touted and lauded as a brilliant prophecy analyst who knows virtually very little about such groups, even sympathized with the Cathars of southern France, who were repressed by the Catholics:

In the period immediately following [Pope] Innocent III the Inquisition did its most deadly work in Southern France (see under Albigenses) (2)

Dave Hunt even goes as far as accepting the Cathars, and the Bogomils (another heretical group by evangelical standards) as being a part of the first church:

Furthermore, millions of biblical Christians resisted Rome for fifteen years before Luther or Calvin. Albigensis, Waldenses, Bogomils, Paulicians, Baptists, and those who simply called themselves “Christians” or “brethren” traced their doctrines back to the apostles and never obeyed the popes. (3)

Expulsion of the Cathars

Didn’t Hunt know that there were no “Baptists” fifteen hundred years before Luther?
Most modern Evangelical writers lack in the field of history.
EXAMINING THE HISTORIANS

Even when examining the historians they quote, they usually leave out major crucial facts. Hunt for example, used Johann Joseph Ignaz von Döllinger, Will Durant, Henry Charles Lea and William Edward Hartpole Lecky who are certainly historians of note, but the quotes they use from these historians do not address the theology, motive and the violence committed by these sects who by using the evangelical scale would be heretical and terroristic from even an evangelical sense.
The Cathars like the Albigensians were so evil that Lea had to admit: “Had Catharism become predominant, its influence would infallibly have proved fatal” (History of the Inquisition, I, 117).
While such authors love to use quotes from Will Durant on how the Catholics eliminated the dualist Cathars who believed in two gods (4) they intentionally ignore that historian Will Durant wrote that for some time the Cathari were tolerated:

received a broad toleration from the ecclesiastics and the secular powers of southern France. Apparently the people were allowed to choose freely between the old religion and the new.

Durant then reports about these pagans’ acts of terrorism; how in “1171 Roger II, Viscount of Béziers, sacked an abbey, threw the bishop of Albi into prison, and set a heretic to guard him.” The pagans “drove abbot and monks from the abbey of Pamiers; his horses ate oats from the altar; his soldiers used the arms and legs of the crucifixes as pestles to grind grain, and practiced their marksmanship upon the image of Christ. Count Raymond VI of Toulouse destroyed several churches, persecuted the monks of Moissac, and was excommunicated (1196)…”
(5)
Was eliminating these qualify as “shedding the blood of saints”?
Must the Church tolerate all this terrorism?
Even Protestant England had it right as Lecky explained, in general so indulgent towards paganism in her colonies, could not tolerate the continuation among the Hindus of the ritual murder of children and the burning of widows (the Suttee), prohibiting the former under severe penalties in 1802 and the latter in 1829 (6)
The Protestants rightfully stopped such pagan practices through violence and war.
One could examine what England did to the Thuggees in India, who butchered millions of Indians as sacrifices to the demonic goddess Kali.

Thuggees killing their victims

Similarly, the only way we can argue for the rights of Cathars and Albigenses is by adapting what we espouse to fight—liberalism, religious tolerance and tolerance to terrorism.
Isn’t that what we are at war with as Christians?
Why do we reject first century Christian doctrine that was delivered to us by Policarp, Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome — who knew the apostles personally — yet accept the Cathars as Bible believing Christians?
Are we being honest here?
But its not only us who have a problem providing evidence for the monumental numbers of “millions” killed, these, like so many others, drank from the fountain of Dave Hunt which provided weak historic references like “E. H. Broadbent and Canon Llorente”:

In his History of the Inquisition, Canon Llorente, who was the Secretary to the Inquisition in Madrid from 1790-92 and had access to the archives of all the tribunals, estimated that in Spain alone the number of condemned exceeded 3 million, with about 300,000 burned at the stake. (7)

Llorente

All this exaggeration “exceeds 3 million,” condemned and “300,000 burned at the stake,” while ignoring that serious historians had already debunked such outlandish claims:

Llorente, the ex-Secretary of the Holy Office who wrote a bitterly antagonistic account of it at the beginning of the 19th century, based on manuscript material which is no longer extant, states that all told, from its foundation down to 1808, the total number of heretics burned in person in Spain alone totalled 31,912… These figures are so enormous as to seem highly suspicious. (8)

Reputable British historian Henry Kamen stated:

“[Llorente] came up with the incredible figures of 31,912 relaxations in person, 17,659 relaxations in effigy, and 291,450 penitents, a grand total of 341,021 victims. All the historical evidence has shown this greatly exaggerated figure to be without any foundation.” (9)

Inquisition historian A.S. Turberville:

Llorente put the total at nearly 32,000 [burned in person], but his method of calculation is fantastic and ridiculous. (10)

From a book of essays by leading Inquisition historians:

There can be little doubt, however, that in light of subsequent research, even by those more or less sharing Llorente’s animus towards the Holy Office, he can no longer be considered reliable…Clearly, Llorente also contributed substantially to the growing anti-clerical tradition in Spain in the 19th century. (11)

Also one can read Professor Gerard Dufour, historian Mariana, professor Dumont and many others. Even Henry Charles Lea, the first major American Inquisition historian and no fan of the Catholic Church, says of the calculations of victims:

There is no question that the number of these has been greatly exaggerated in popular belief, an exaggeration to which Llorente has largely contributed by his absurd method of computation…. (Lea, volume 4, page 517)

Lea calls Llorente’s guesswork “reckless” and “entirely fallacious.”
It even gets worse, our popular evangelical theologian and author, John MacArthur and in order to make this one verse in Revelation 17:6 fit, had the audacity to even inflate a number to an absolutely unsubstantiated “fifty million” martyred by the Popes, without providing any credible proof:

According to Protestant Historian John Dowling, the Roman Catholic Church has put to death more than fifty million “heretics” between A.D. 606 (the birth of the papacy) and the mid-1800s (12)

Comical illustration of Dowling writing

Depending on which author one reads, the numbers even extends to 68 million, 100 million, 120 million, and 150 million Bible believing Christians murdered by the Catholic Church, a history that no one in history verified; neither was the Papacy born in 606 A.D. as claimed by John MacArthur, the “reputable” theologian.
But drilling down to find where this came from, I obtained MacArthur’s quote in which he quoted John Dowling’s The History of Romanism, Book 8, Ch. 1, pp. 542, 543:

From the birth of Popery in 600, to the present time, it is estimated by careful and credible historians, that more than FIFTY MILLION of the human family have been slaughtered for the crime of heresy by popish persecutors, an average of more than forty thousand religious murders for every year of the existence of Popery.

And here is the crux of all this slander: in MacArthur’s quote, “According to Protestant Historian John Dowling,” as it turns out, John Dowling was a “pastor Dowling”, not “historian,” who held his pastorates in New York, Philadelphia.
It even gets worse, besides that Dowling has no credentials in history; Dowling, while he stated “fifty million,” he simply created such numbers out of thin air, his note explaining the number he admits:

No computation can reach the numbers who have been put to death, in different ways, on account of their maintaining the profession of the Gospel, and opposing the corruptions of the Church of Rome, A million Waldenses and Albigenses perished during a crusade proclaimed by Pope Innocent III in 1208; beginning from the establishment of the Jesuits in 1540 to 1580, nine hundred thousand were destroyed; one hundred and fifty thousand perished by the Inquisition in 30 years; within the space of thirty-eight years after the edict of Charles V against Protestants, fifty thousand persons were hanged, beheaded, or burned alive for heresy; eighteen thousand more perished during the administration of the Duke of Alva in five and a half years … but the total amount will never be known, till the earth shall disclose her blood (13)

Dowling even admits that “no computation” was done, that the only way to know is that “till the earth shall disclose her blood”. There was no tally, yet an enormous number was provided despite that when we examine the statement, there were no “million Waldenses and Albigenses perished”.
After noticing the outlandish quotes, I attempted to investigate even further as to what historian with his sane mind would declare that the Papacy murdered 100 million people. I finally found the source from a book, Who Are These Three Angels, by Jeff Wehr, P.p. 31-32:

For professing faith contrary to the teachings of the Church of Rome, history records the martyrdom of more than one hundred million people. A million Waldenses and Albigenses perished during a crusade proclaimed by Pope Innocent III in 1208; beginning from the establishment of the Jesuits in 1540 to 1580, nine hundred thousand were destroyed; one hundred and fifty thousand perished by the Inquisition in 30 years; within the space of thirty-eight years after the edict of Charles V against Protestants, fifty thousand persons were hanged, beheaded, or burned alive for heresy; eighteen thousand more perished during the administration of the Duke of Alva in five and a half years.—Brief Bible Readings for Busy People , No. 8.

The source used by Wehr, as it turned out, was from an insignificant booklet titled A Brief Bible Studies for Busy People (page 16), which was by Frances L. Carroll.
Carroll wasn’t even a historian but a housewife.
You heard it right.
It even gets worse, she was a Jehovah’s Witness serving with her husband as full-time volunteer traveling ministers of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (14)
Carroll, the housewife, simply plagiarized Dowling’s quote and simply inserted her own “one hundred million”.
But this is only taking a couple of quotes randomly that I was able to find a monumental fraud and outright slander.
Why do these resort to this?
It is because it is difficult to manipulate history without notice and is why such authors resort to theologians proclaiming them as historians.
I had even tracked countless publications to only find out the main sources for such false information were not credible:
Peter De Rosa (aka Neil Boyd) was not a historian (15) but an X-priest, novel writer and Professor of Metaphysics.
John Wesley was not a historian but a theologian.
Alexander Hislop was not a historian but a Pastor of East Free Church of Arbroath in Scotland.
Schmucker was not a historian but a Professor of Theology.
William Craig Brownlee was not a historian but a reverend and an American clergyman and professor of languages.
Joseph Martin McCabe was not a historian but an x-Catholic priest.
Charles Buck was not a historian but a reverend and author of Theological Dictionary.
Vergerius was not a historian but a religious ‘reformer’.
Thomas Armitage was not a historian but a Protestant theologian.
George Bourne was not a historian but a pastor.
Cushing B. Hassell was not a historian but a writer.
Dr. M. Geddes was not a historian but a Chaplain.
John B. Wilder was not a historian but a writer.
Taylor Bunch was not a historian but a Prophecy author.
Nathaniel Crouch (pseud. Robert Burton) was not a historian but a writer. (16)
Henry Southwell was not a historian but a reverend.
John Wylie was a not a historian but minister of the Free Church of Scotland.
J. M. Carroll was not a historian but a Southern Baptist minister.
Avro Manhattan was not a historian but a British writer.
Charles Chiniquy was not a historian, but a Canadian x-Catholic priest who was twice suspended from his priestly ministry (for moral turpitude).
R. W. Thompson, was not a historian but a politician.
John William Bowden was not a historian but theologian.
Walter j. Veith is not a historian or a “world acclaimed international lecturer” but a zoologist (17)
Frances L. Carroll, was not a historian but simply a housewife.
I could go on and on and on.
Such is the type of references used by evangelical authors when they need to exaggerate historic accounts. With no accountability by a higher order, evangelical authors can do as they wish under the first amendment but as long as man is man, true science and ripe scholarship, and sound reasoning, can be only the heritage of the few. (18)
Similarily, Tim LaHaye, in a description reminiscent to the blood libel against Jews, writes that under the Spanish Inquisition:
“no fewer than 900,000 Protestants were put to death, in the Pope’s war for the extermination of the Waldenses. Think of monks and priests directing, with heartless cruelty and inhuman brutality, the work of torturing and burning alive innocent men and women; and doing it in the Name of Christ, by the direct order of the “Vicar of Christ.” (LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled)
How could 900,000 Protestants be killed in the Pope’s war against the Waldenses when the Waldenses were hundreds of years before the Protestant Reformation?
But we are not willing to remove our books anytime soon and neither will we repent, instead, we choose to slander.
So who truly “drank the blood of the saints”?
Perhaps we can go to what is missing in the equation #1—THE ABSENCE OF CHRISTIAN-MUSLIM WARS; all these Islamic wars against the Catholic Church and Eastern Byzantium with the millions that no historian can even estimate; it was the heretic Unitarian Muslim who denied Father and Son were the ones who killed the Christians.
Isn’t it then time that we at least unite on this truth?
Part of confronting the truth is coming to realization that Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, are being slaughtered every day. Please, give what you can to save the lives of your fellow Christians
1 MacArthur, Preaching: How to Preach Biblically, ch. 3
2 LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled
3 Dave Hunt, James White, Debating Calvinism
4 Anne Bradford Townsend, The Cathars of Languedoc as Heretics, P.p 49
5 Will Durant, The Age of Faith
6 (cf. Lecky, “Democracy and Liberty”, I, 1896, pp. 424 sqq.)
7 Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, page 79, also 242
8 Cecil Roth [orig 1937], page 123
9 Henry Kamen [orig 1965], page 280-1
10 A.S. Turberville [orig 1932], page 112
11 Paul J. Hauben [1969], page 31, from chapter “Juan Antonio Llorente: A Spanish Anti-Clerical View”
12 The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, John 12-21, P.p. 181, Italics mine
13 John Dowling’s The History of Romanism, Book 8, Ch. 1, pp. 542
14 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=119716814
15 http://www.andrewnurnberg.com/authors/peter-de-rosa/
16 CROUCH’S “RELATION OF THE GREAT COUNCIL OF JEWS,” 1796, WITH AN “ACCOUNT OF THE WONDERFUL DELUSION OF THE JEWS BY A FALSE MESSIAH” Brett’s account of the “Great Council of the Jews in the Plains of Hungary in 1650 to Examine the Scriptures Concerning Christ” is today discredited as purely fictional— originally spawned by the Puritan Revolution in England in hopes of converting Jews to Christianity
17 http://walterveith.com/walter-veith-bio.html Professor Walter J. Veith, calims a “PhD Zoology and an ardent student of history and prophecy”, historian Jeff Crocombe, finds serious faults with some references Veith puts forward as ‘facts’
18 The American Catholic Quarterly Review, Volume II, P.p. 498

Muslims Rebuild The Tower of Babel (Shocking Research!)

By Shoebat Foundation on April 21, 2014 in Featured, General, Highlight

By Walid Shoebat (Shoebat Exclusive)
If one would ask a westerner “Where is Mount Babel?” They would probably think the question is regarding a biblical or an archeological site in Iraq. But if one asks an Arab today, “where is Mount Babel?” They would tell you that its in Mecca and it has 7 massive buildings on top of it called “The Towers Of The House” that overlooks the Ka’ba, Islam’s holiest place.
You read it right.
There is no place on earth today where stands the largest structure in the world, used for a religious purpose, all worshipping in one tongue regardless of their mother tongue, and is holy to more than 1.5 billion people on earth that is called Mount Babel, except the one in Mecca overlooking the Ka’ba.

Mecca, it is both a “city” and a “tower”:

“And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” (Genesis 11:4)

The photo above shows the massive structure the Arabs call “Al-Burj”, literally “the tower” and it sits on mount Babel overlooking the Ka’ba.

Al-Sharq Al-Awasat, the prominent Middle East Newspaper, even names it as such “Mount Babel,”: this to say about the massive project that was completed in Mecca:

“The project Towers Of The House is the first project in Mecca … which carry seven towers … “Towers Of The House” is on the area of Mount Babel in Ajyad. The site overlooks directly on the Haram al-Sharif (Holy House [Ka’ba]).”
“is also the largest tower in the world in terms of area. Contractor Bin Laden Group, Saudi Arabia … Classified as the largest building urban in terms of the total area on the face of the globe, where excess space land for the project 1.4 million square meters and consists of 7 towers”.

Just to illustrate how massive is this structure in comparison to the largest buildings in the world, see the pie-chart below:

The 1.4 million square meters 7 tower structure (7th from left to right) is 3 times larger than the tallest building in the world, the other “Burj” in Dubai.
Instead of waiting to see how the biblical verses regarding “Mystery Babylon” is fulfilled, many ill-informed westerners for centuries attributed the prophetic verses to the Vatican.
Our latest finding here is infinitesimal. We have gathered much to shed a new light to show the differences between Vatican and Mecca; the evidence is overwhelming, Mecca fits biblical Babylon and Vatican doesn’t. For example (out of hundreds), where in Vatican do we have “Mount Babel” which is also an observatory to monitor the movement of the moon and is called “Seven Towers of the House” reminiscent to the ancient name of Babel, which was called “The house of the seven lights of the earth”?
Where in the Vatican did they erect the largest tower on earth topped with a crescent and has observatories to monitor the planets and the moon? Where on Vatican hill, do they have an edifice decked with gold and silver, littered with statements that are biblically considered blasphemous, treated as if it was a woman, and has a massive gate made of pure gold that is literally called Bab-Illah (Babel) “The Gate to God”?
There is no place on earth that matches such requirements than Mecca.

Bab-Illah (The Gate of Allah) is the Gate to the Ka’ba (made of pure gold)

In what is probably the least examined sources in Islam by westerners, that discusses the Ka’ba as Babel “The Gate to God,” or Bab-Illah in Arabic, and is mentioned in the highest authority in Islam, the Hadith:

“… the Kaaba is the house of God and God’s sanctuary is Bab-Illah (the gate to God), so when they went there, they stood by the door in supplication …”

Babel, the English pronunciation, and Bab-Illah are identical in meaning. The difference is simply in the accent.
This Bab-Illah (Babel) is also depicted as a woman in Islam, exactly as John stated in Revelation 17:3. One Muslim writes a poem depicting as if the Ka’ba is a lover and is literally Bab-Illah (Babel) “the Gate to Allah”. He titles it “Look at my lover and your lover as she changes her dress”:

“I tremble in Thy beauty
Yearning to Thy black silk
Thy excellent belt a verse included
From the Quran a splendid writ
Granting Thee from Allah’s throne a high esteem
Which should suffice
He named Thee His Gate
He even loosened from Thy splendid robe pride
To dress Thee in splendor and majesty”
*http://www.startimes.com/?t=32625937 translated by Walid Shoebat*

Another Muslim describes a Turkish pilgrim’s experience in the Hajj:

“Ahmed says that he had an eerie feeling when he saw the Kaaba in Mecca at first glance: “This is the house of Allah!”, These words were on his mind as he looked to the Black Stone and beside it was the door of the house of Allah: “Is there any door besides Bab-Illah (Gate to God)”

The most famous of Muhammadan poetry by Al-Bosayri in the eleventh century and then the most prominent poet in Arab history, Ahmad Shawqi, who is considered the Prince of poetry, describes Muhammad as “owning the key to Bab-Illah (the gate of Allah)”.
Muslim scholar Muhammad Said Ramadan Al-Buti, prior to his assassination by the Free Syrian Army explained the Hajj Pilgrimage as following:

“You go around the house of Allah, and you are in His hospitality. You are standing at His door, floating around on the doorstep. You are not on the door of the king, nor a great man. You are at the door of the Lord of kings. You are standing before the door of the creation in humiliation and indignity. You stand at Bab-Illah (the door of Allah’s) pride and His dignity. Weep since weeping is joyful there, but you do not cry, beg to creature, nor weep in humiliation in front of a creature. It’s difficult for the man that cringes to a brother or to anyone else. But on Bab-Illa (the door of Allah) what is the most enjoyable is to seclude myself and drench my forehead on the cusp of Allah Almighty, because my soul in his hand, and my whole self is his and my breath is in his hand and I’m on His doorstep, I tour around his home saying: “There is no god but Allah alone …”

For years, I had to endure listening to lectures on why Rome is the Harlot since it sits on seven hills, when truth is that Vatican City—the city where the Catholic Church is headquartered—is not built on seven hills, but on a hill separate from the seven hills of Rome: Vatican Hill, which is not even one of the seven upon which ancient Rome was built. Those hills are on the east side of the Tiber river; Vatican Hill is on the west.
Other cities are known for having been built on seven hills as well. Istanbul is known as the City on the Seven Hills, which – consciously following the model of Rome – was built on seven hills too. There are about seventy cities that claim to be on seven hills, some of which are Jerusalem, Amman, Tehran, Brussels, Kiev, Moscow and Madrid.
Yet none of these (including Rome) were destined for destruction in the Bible, yet Arabia is (Isaiah 21).
The Bible is also precise and pinpoints a geographic location for this “Babylon” as was predicted in Jeremiah 49:21, literally, “the Red Sea” which confirms Arabia’s destruction. This is also confirmed in Revelation 18 regarding the harlot city:

“And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning” (Revelation 18:9). “And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, ‘What [city is] like unto this great city!” (Revelation 18:18).

And once one studies Isaiah 34, there should be no doubt. In nearly identical language concerning Mystery Babylon in Revelation 17, 18:

“Its streams shall be turned into pitch and its dust into brimstone; its land shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night or day; its smoke shall ascend forever” (Isaiah 34:8-10).

Incredibly, almost three millennia before the discovery of fuel oil, Isaiah predicted the burning of the very thing that was used in Babel to build a name for the rebellious ones – the pitch. Pitch is bitumen and tar, which technically is simply crude oil.
This judgment is not against Rome but “Edom” which extends from Teman to Dedan:

“Thus Says the Lord GOD; ‘Because that Edom hath dealt against the house of Judah by taking vengeance, and hath greatly offended, and revenged himself upon them. ‘Therefore thus Says the Lord GOD; ‘I will also stretch out mine hand upon Edom, and will cutt off man and beast from it; and I will make it desolate from Teman; and they of Dedan shall fall by the sword’” (Ezekiel 25:12-13).

The Lord vindicates Rome. He has made the geographical location of Mystery Babylon quite clear for anyone who would seek it out.
This destruction of Arabia is complete and fits the description made by several prophets whose prophecies correlate with Isaiah 34:

“Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her: death, mourning, and famine. She will be consumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her. When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry: ‘Woe! Woe, O great city, O Babylon, city of power! In one hour your doom has come! … Every sea captain, and all who travel by ship, the sailors, and all who earn their living from the sea, will stand far off. When they see the smoke of her burning, they will exclaim, ‘Was there ever a city like this great city?’” (Revelation 18:8-10, 17-18).

Apart from Sodom and Gomarrah, this type of utter destruction has never been seen in any other city, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “After her destruction, Babylon will merely be a home for demons, evil spirits, and scavenging desert creatures” (Revelation 18:1-2).
This is in line with the ancient Eastern perception that desolate desert wastelands were the dwelling place of demons and unclean spirits. The point being emphasized is that after Babylon is destroyed, there will be absolutely no human life ever found there again. Jeremiah agrees; he describes this:

So desert creatures and hyenas will live there, and there the owl will dwell. It will never again be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation” (Jeremiah 50:39). Isaiah confirms a similar fate: “It shall be a habitation of jackals” (Isaiah 34:14).

And again later, the destruction of Babylon is described as being absolute. Isaiah speaks of this event:

“For I will rise up against them, says the Lord of hosts, and cut off from Babylon its name and remnant, and offspring and prosperity, says the Lord … I will sweep it with the broom of destruction” (Isaiah 12:15).

The broom of destruction! Anyone who has seen footage of a nuclear explosion has seen the fury and the power of the ominous cloud that sweeps up everything in its path. To read more on how Mecca is destroyed, please read:
[here]
[here]
[here]
[here]
REFERENCES
Shu’ab Al-Iman by Al-Bayhaqi, No. 4084, 3/684
http://www.annabaa.org/nbanews/39/070.htm
http://islamport.com/w/mtn/Web/3004/4321.htm http://islamport.com/d/1/mtn/1/67/2399.html?zoom_highlightsub=%DB%C8%D1)
naseemalsham.com/ar/Pages/download.php?
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=192169&page=7
http://depaj.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/الأثر-في-نبوءة-نسف-الكعبة-وهجران-مكة-2/
http://alqumaa.net/vb/showthread.php?t=46583

Greta: Obama Tried to Stop Fox News From Reporting Benghazi

Greta: Obama Tried to Stop Fox News From Reporting Benghazi

As more and more truth is discovered about the Benghazi terror attack on 9/11/2012, the more that the Benghazi coverup spun by the White House is collapsing.  Even liberal bastions like MSNBC and the New York Times have reluctantly admitted there is a coverup.
The vast majority of Americans want the truth about Benghazi, and are demanding a special investigation to uncover it.
The American people are beyond tired of the stalling and uncooperative attitude displayed by the White House towards Congress and certain members of the media.
It now appears that Obama’s administration went beyond just stalling or being uncooperative, and were actively trying to silence the coverage of the attack by Fox News.  Greta Van Susteren wrote about it on her blog.
(H/T: Newsbusters)

“After Benghazi on 9/11/2012, the Obama administration tried very hard to discourage Fox News Channel from reporting on it. The effort was obstruction – pure and simple.”
“They tried to prevent the truth from coming out and the Administration tried just about everything to discourage Fox from investigating and reporting,” she continued. “All the American people wanted, and all I ever wanted, was just the facts – why did 4 Americans die? What happened?”
“The Obama Administration put out that phony video story — but who could not have been suspicious of the Administration after hearing that?” Van Susteren asked. “Frankly, if they had been candid on day 1, the Benghazi story would have been over in short order. It would not be to the point we are now: with a Senate Bi Partisan Intelligence Committee report with the very painful conclusion that the murders at Benghazi could have been prevented.”

Greta shares some specific proof that validates her claims of White House obstruction.

In the early days after Benghazi, the State Department omitted only Fox News Channel from its conference call to all the media when it claimed to be answering questions about Benghazi for the media. Our friends in other media outlets were scandalized that Fox was not included and told us all about it. They were suspicious of State Department forgetting us/Fox and courageous to tip us off. The State Department claimed it was accident and not intentional.
And then shortly thereafter, there was the CIA briefing about Benghazi at the CIA for all the networks – except one: Fox News Channel. The CIA would not let Fox News Channel attend. [...]
And there were many times in the months and years since September 2012 when Obama Administration officials would make comments to suggest that Fox was just doing the Benghazi reporting for political reasons. The Administration was doing what it could to deter and demean the Fox News Channel investigation. They did not want to give us the facts — so their strategy was to attempt to belittle and demean our reporting.

Even more specifically, Greta says that she was warned by a friend in the administration about Fox reporter Jennifer Griffin, and was told to rein her in, as she was asking too many questions and digging too deep.

[M]y friend told me that my colleague Jennifer Griffin, who was aggressively reporting on Benghazi, was wrong and that, as a favor to me, my friend in the Administration was telling me so that I could tell Jennifer so that she did not ruin her career. My friend was telling me to tell Jennifer to stop her reporting. Ruin her career?
In 20 plus years, I have never received a call to try and shut down a colleague – not that I even could – this was a first.

Told by her friend that Griffin was wrong in her assessments of Benghazi, Van Susteren demanded proof that her colleague Griffin was wrong.

I got no proof. Zero. I smelled a rat. Favor to me? Hardly. My friend was trying to use me. I feel bad that a friend did that to me, tried to use me for a dirty reason. I knew then — and it is now confirmed by BIPARTISAN Senate Intelligence Committee — Jennifer was getting her facts right. I think it is really low for the Administration to stoop this low.

This news doesn’t really come as a shock to anybody.  A vast majority of Americans believe that Obama is covering up the truth of Benghazi.  It is not a stretch to think his administration would warn and shun certain reporters and news organizations that posed a danger to their cover story.
Th Obama administration has gone to great lengths to disguise the true events of Benghazi, from changing the original talking points for the media, to changing the names of survivors to prevent their stories from reaching the public.  It is time for a special select committee to fully investigate Benghazi and hold whoever is responsible to full account for their actions.
Please share on Facebook and Twitter if you are unsurprised that Obama’s White House tried to prevent Fox News from covering the Benghazi terror attack.

Read more at http://www.capitalisminstitute.org/obama-stopping-fox-news/#bA1gICiarazqUogp.99

MVI 1781 Vladimir Putin, I Believe Knows The Truth!

The End of the New World Order

• Tweet152
• Share84
• Share6
• 3
• 1

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphDENVER – Russia’s annexation of Crimea and ongoing intimidation of Ukraine appears to mean the end of a 25-year period whose hallmark was an effort to bring Russia into greater alignment with Euro-Atlantic goals and traditions. Now the question is: What comes next?

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphAs the weeks pass, it is increasingly clear that the challenge is not so much Ukraine – which will continue to lurch from one crisis to the next, as it has since independence 23 years ago – as it is Russia and its regression, recidivism, and revanchism.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphExactly 25 years ago, in the spring of 1989, Poland and other countries of what was then known as the “Eastern Bloc” took the first steps to break free from their forced alliance with the Soviet Union. Indeed, these countries’ relationship with the Soviet Union was no true alliance at all; rather, they were accurately described as “satellites” – states with limited sovereignty, whose main role was to serve Soviet interests.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphAs subjugating and ahistorical as those relationships were, much of the world accepted the binding of “Eastern Europe” to the Soviet Union as a logical state of affairs, one in keeping with the world order that emerged at the close of WWII. But what seemed like a permanent division of the world into competing spheres of interest suddenly ended in 1989, when the Eastern Bloc left the Soviet orbit, soon followed by the republics of the Soviet Union itself.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphRussia emerged not as a renamed Soviet Union, but rather as a state with its own history and symbols, a member of the international state system that had been absent for some time, but had suddenly returned. And the reborn Russia seemed to be dedicated, in its own way, to the same goals as its post-Soviet neighbors: membership in Western institutions, a market economy, and a multi-party parliamentary democracy, albeit with a Russian face.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphThis new world order held for almost 25 years. Except for Russia’s brief war with Georgia in August 2008 (a conflict generally seen as instigated by reckless Georgian leadership), Russia’s acquiescence and commitment to the “new world order,” however problematic, was one of the great accomplishments of the post-Cold War era. Even Russia’s reluctance to support concerted Western action, such as in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990’s, was based on arguments that could be heard in other European countries. Russian democracy certainly had its share of flaws, but that hardly made it unique among post-communist countries.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphRussia’s historical relationship with Ukraine is far more complex and nuanced than many Western pundits suggest. It is difficult to talk about Russian civilization without talking about Ukraine. But, whatever the complexities, Russia’s recent behavior toward its smaller neighbor is not rooted in the legacy of their shared history.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphIt is rooted in a different legacy – that of a Russian Empire whose habits did not die during the Soviet period. Ukraine did not – and perhaps could not – develop its sovereignty in the way that Poland and others have succeeded in doing since 1989; nonetheless, it is entitled to chart its own future. Russia’s challenge to Ukraine’s status as an independent state is thus a challenge to the entire world, which is why the crisis has risen to the top of the global agenda.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphIn the United States, the media often point out that most Americans would be hard pressed to find Ukraine on a map. They don’t need to. But Americans do need to understand the challenge they are facing from a Russia that no longer seems interested in what the West has been offering for the last 25 years: special status with NATO, a privileged relationship with the European Union, and partnership in international diplomatic endeavors. All of these seem to be off the table for now.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphSo what should the West do? An approach based on sanctions that target the Russian economy (and therefore its people) is the preferred alternative of those with the least at stake (US politicians). But sanctions are unlikely to bring about the internal changes that Russia needs, because those changes need to be accomplished by the Russian people.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphFor the West, the real issue should be shoring up security structures and being prepared for the long haul. NATO has taken an important step in reassuring its eastern members. This is not to say that Russia, having annexed Crimea and intimidated Ukraine, will seek to make similar trouble among former Soviet “allies.” But historical memories die hard.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphPoles are well aware that, 75 years ago this year, France and Britain were parties to security agreements that compelled them to declare war on Germany if it invaded Poland. In September 1939, when Germany invaded, both countries dutifully declared war, but neither fired a shot or helped Poland in any tangible way. Poland disappeared from the map of Europe for five years.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphThe Ukraine crisis is really a Russian crisis. Ukraine – whatever is eventually left of it – will increasingly become a Western country. Russia is showing no sign that it will follow suit.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphInstead, Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to be settling in for a long diplomatic winter. The US needs to prepare for it, especially in shoring up partners and allies, and ensuring as best it can that Ukraine is Russia’s last victim, not its first.

CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphRead more from "Cold War II?"

Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/christopher-r--hill-calls-on-the-west-to-prepare-for-a-long-struggle-with-a-revanchist-russia#QVSu3mGpXuTO1GIl.99

Top U.S. Diplomat: Russia Has Betrayed the “New World Order”

Moscow’s refusal to acquiesce to NATO over Ukraine signals new cold war
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
April 25, 2014

Image: Vladimir Putin (Wiki Commons).

Top diplomat Christopher R. Hill says that Russia’s response to the Ukraine crisis means that Moscow has betrayed the “new world order” it has been a part of for the last 25 years.

In a piece for the influential Project Syndicate publication, Hill, a former US ambassador to Iraq and Korea, writes that Russia’s annexation of Crimea and “intimidation” campaign against Kiev has brought an end to a 25-year historical period, accusing Moscow of engaging in “regression, recidivism, and revanchism”.

Hill’s definition of the “new world order” is Russia’s post-Glasnost involvement in “Western institutions, a market economy, and a multi-party parliamentary democracy.”

“This new world order held for almost 25 years. Except for Russia’s brief war with Georgia in August 2008 (a conflict generally seen as instigated by reckless Georgian leadership), Russia’s acquiescence and commitment to the “new world order,” however problematic, was one of the great accomplishments of the post-Cold War era,” writes Hill.

Hill, who is an advisor with the Albright Stonebridge Group, a “global strategy company” with tentacles deep within the White House and the State Department, goes on to accuse Moscow of reviving the days of the Soviet empire, adding that, “Russia….no longer seems interested in what the West has been offering for the last 25 years: special status with NATO, a privileged relationship with the European Union, and partnership in international diplomatic endeavors.”

Arguing that western sanctions are unlikely to have any impact, Hill asserts that NATO should prepare itself for the long haul, warning that Russia “will seek to make similar trouble among former Soviet “allies,” invoking the German invasion of Poland in 1939 to suggest that Moscow may launch aggression against other eastern European nations.

Hill’s assertion that Russia has turned its back on the “new world order” illustrates how Moscow is seeking to lead an alternate BRICS-aligned faction that will pose a major threat to the unipolar future envisaged by the United States and NATO.

In other words, whether Russia wants one or not, the western elite is digging in for a new Cold War and the world may be entering the most dangerous period of history since the Cuban missile crisis.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article was posted: Friday, April 25, 2014 at 2:31 pm

Tags: foreign affairs