Muslim Refugees in Europe:An Existential Threat?

RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical issues and contemporary developments. The views of the authors are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced electronically or in print with prior permission from RSIS and due recognition to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email: RSISPublications@ntu.edu.sg for feedback to the Editor RSIS Commentary, Yang Razali Kassim. 

---

No. 203/2015 dated 28 September 2015

Muslim Refugees in Europe:
An Existential Threat?

By Aida Arosoaie

Synopsis

The recent influx of refugees into Europe has been mislabeled as “immigration” and portrayed by local right-wing politicians as an existential threat. This European nationalist rhetoric could legitimise and provoke violence by Salafi-jihadis.
Commentary

REFUGEES FLEEING the wars in Syria, Eritrea and Afghanistan are facing a great injustice: in the past few months, right-wing European politicians have been referring to them as ‘migrants’ and even depict them as an existential threat to Christian Europe. The justifications of European nationalist politicians for such actions are seeded in the conflation between Islam - the refugees’ religion – with Salafi-jihadi militancy.

By framing it as an existential threat, the right-wing politicians are constructing their political discourse in the same way Salafi-jihadi organisations construct theirs while at the same time, acting inconsistently with the fundamental values of the European Union. If this rhetoric persists it might result in legitimising the Salafi-jihadi discourse and make recruits of current refugees, which in turn, would increase the likelihood of attacks in Europe orchestrated by Salafi-jihadis.
Europe’s “immigration” problem

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany referred to the Syrian, Eritrean and Afghan nationals coming into Europe as the “biggest challenge” she has experienced. The Italian Foreign Minister Paolo Gentiloni argued that the current immigration crisis poses a threat to the “soul of Europe”. Viktor Orban, Hungary’s Prime Minister was more vehement as evidenced by these words he uttered:  

“Those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims. This is an important question, because Europe and European identity is rooted in Christianity.”

Additionally, the current European nationalist lexicon does not include the word ‘refugee’. Instead, it uses the less evocative term ‘migrant’. However, there is a substantive difference between the state of a refugee and that of a migrant. UNHCR defines refugees as persons fleeing armed conflict or persecution and migrants as persons who choose to move, not because of a direct threat of persecution or death, but mainly to improve their living standards.

Protected under international law, the status of a refugee signals the threat to human dignity, liberty, equality and respect for human rights which represent the very fundamental values of the Constitution of the European Union. The choice of ‘migrant’ over ‘refugee’ signals an attempt to evade moral responsibility in addressing the plea of these people.
Threat of Salafi-jihadi militancy

The framing of the current “immigration” threat is in effect a securitising process that renders Islam and Muslims as existential threats to Europeans. This is problematic in two ways. Firstly, this securitisation process is based on the same Manichean divide that defines Salafi-jihadis’ thinking. Secondly, this discourse is incongruous with the fundamental values of the European Union.

Nationalist European leaders and parties, such as Orban, the UK Independence Party or France’s National Front, believe that Muslim refugees are an existential threat to the Christian soul of Europe because they associate Islam with Salafi-jihadi militancy. This conflation implies that the refugees, motivated by their religion, promote global “terrorism”. Significantly, Orban is constructing an existential threat in the same fashion as the Salafi-jihadi groups. Take the speech by Abu Mohammad al-Adnani, the spokesperson of ISIS, who denounced the West for covertly waging a war against Islam:

“O Crusaders, indeed you are weak cowards, all of you (…) because you don’t dare make public the reality of your war and the fact that it is a crusade, that it is against Islam, and that it is against Sunnis”.

Thus Adnani is also conflating Western politics with Christianity. Both parties construct an existential threat by conflating the Other’s religion with politics: in the case of Salafi-jihadis is the conflation of Christianity with democracy and liberalism, while in the case of right-wing European leaders it is Islam with Salafi-jihadi “terrorism”. Both parties project the world in binaries, each binary with its own religion and specific ideological orientations.

Legitimising the Salafi-jihadis

By constructing an existential threat based on such conflations, Orban also disregards the commitment he has to the values of the European Union. The EU was not founded on a particular religious creed, but on neutral values meant to serve humanity. In this context, Orban’s behaviour is morally inconsistent, as he is acting against the very values he is supposed to represent as a leader of a European Union member state.

This could also draw the attention, and indeed ire of Salafi-jihadis who in the past, have specifically posited such moral inconsistencies as an essential trigger for their violence. In a statement on 1 November 2004, Osama bin Laden implied that Al-Qaeda would not strike Sweden, for example, because the Swedish government never acted in inconsistent terms. It bears noting that Sweden is the country that has been taking in more asylum seekers per capita in comparison to any other European country without questioning their religion.

By portraying the current refugee crisis in existential terms and by disregarding the fundamental values of the European Union, right-wing European leaders might end up legitimising the Salafi-jihadis amongst the refugees. Potential consequences could be the emergence of a recruitment pool for Salafi-jihadi groups and a surge of Salafi-jihadi-orchestrated attacks across Europe.

Instead, if right-wing European leaders and parties moderate their rhetoric and re-spond to the refugee crisis in ways that are morally consistent and in conformity with the European values, they might end up legitimising their own political values amongst the refugees. If so they would assist a potential post-war reconstruction of Syria where the West could be looked at more favourably as opposed to the contemporary neo-colonial and neo-imperialist lenses.

Aida Arosoaie is a Research Analyst with the International Centre for Political Vio-lence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR), a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Click HERE to read this commentary online.

Australia’s Turnbull Government:Big Changes Coming?

RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical issues and contemporary developments. The views of the authors are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced electronically or in print with prior permission from RSIS and due recognition to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email: RSISPublications@ntu.edu.sg for feedback to the Editor RSIS Commentary, Yang Razali Kassim. 

---

No. 204/2015 dated 28 September 2015

Australia’s Turnbull Government:
Big Changes Coming?

By Sam Bateman

Synopsis

Australia’s new government led by Malcom Turnbull will be very different from its predecessor, though of the same Liberal-National coalition. However residual conservative forces within its ranks mean that major changes in direction are unlikely in the short-term.
Commentary

AUSTRALIA’S NEW prime minister Malcolm Turnbull will lead a government that is very different from its predecessor though of the same Liberal-National coalition. Turnbull has described his government as one that will seize the opportunities of the future rather than one seeing only challenges ahead and seeking to preserve the order of the past. The government of his predecessor, Tony Abbott, had become derided for its reactionary mindset, including its failure to accept challenges of the 21st Century, such as climate change and the need for a constructive renewable energy policy.

In forming what he calls a ‘21st Century government’ Turnbull has shown a clear focus on business skills and potentially dynamic, leading members of his government. He has markedly increased the number of women in senior political roles, including appointing Senator Marise Payne as Australia’s first female defence minister.
Who is Malcolm Turnbull?

The problem for Malcolm Turnbull is that he will be unable to push for change too quickly. Although some key members of the ‘old guard’ of ultra-conservative supporters of previous prime minister Tony Abbott have been ousted from Cabinet, a hard core of people of similar political persuasion remains in Parliament, including some within Turnbull’s own Cabinet. Too much change too fast conflicts with the conservative political thinking of these members, and they are unlikely to support any major shifts in policy at least in the short-term.

Turnbull brings to leadership a much wider depth of experience, particularly within the private sector, than his predecessor. He has been successively over the years a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, journalist, barrister, banker, businessman, shopping centre developer, and politician. He has been remarkably successful in all these pursuits.

In 1986, as a 31-year old barrister, he acted for the former MI5 officer Peter Wright and won the famous ‘Spycatcher’ case against the British Government led by Margaret Thatcher. He is popular with the electorate and already there has been a remarkable lift in the public opinion polls in support of the Liberal – National Party coalition government.

After the mining magnate, Clive Palmer, Malcolm Turnbull is the second wealthiest Australian parliamentarian. Perhaps most importantly for what could become a major change of direction for Australia in the future, although not in the short-term, Turnbull is a republican, having once been leader of the Australian Republican Movement. His predecessor, Tony Abbott, on the other hand, was an enthusiastic royalist who earlier this year reintroduced knighthoods into the Australian system of honours, awarding an Australian knighthood to Prince Philip.
Foreign policy

Julie Bishop remains Australia’s foreign minister, but some subtle changes are likely in foreign policy. The focus on business and opportunities in the Turnbull Government may lead to more emphasis in Australia’s international relations on economics and trade rather than security. There will be greater recognition that the old order of US-led regional stability has gone; China is the new powerful player on the regional scene, and that changes in Australia’s strategic posture are required. As a consequence, there may be less echoing of Washington by Canberra when it comes to strictures of China.

The Abbott Government presided over a significant ‘mission creep’ with Australia’s military involvement in the Middle East. Some of Turnbull’s key supporters were rather less than enthusiastic about Australia’s recent commitment to the aerial bombing campaign in Syria. That decision will not be reversed but Turnbull, along with his new Defence Minister, is unlikely to share Abbott’s great liking for military commitments overseas.

Defence policy

Senator Marise Payne, the new defence minister, is a self-described feminist and small ‘l’ liberal. She has periodically annoyed more conservative members of the Liberal Party with her less traditional views. She has been a Senator since 2007 and was Minister for Human Services in the Abbott Government. Having been Chair of the powerful Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Senator Payne has considerable experience with the defence portfolio. Her appointment has been well received by the defence establishment.

Senator Payne is on record as a strong supporter of Australia’s relations with Asia. After being appointed minister, she said relations with Indonesia were a top priority. She plans to visit Jakarta soon to cement relations with her Indonesian counterpart and help remedy the thorny problems that had arisen in the bilateral relationship during the Abbott Government’s term. While Australia’s alliance with the US will remain a corner-stone of Australia’s defence and foreign policies, a more pragmatic and less doctrinaire view is likely to emerge as to just what that alliance means in terms of Australia’s relations in the region.

The advent of the Turnbull Government has markedly reduced the prospects of Australia building its new submarines in conjunction with Japan. After then Prime Minister Abbott had reportedly reached a ‘hand-shake’ deal with Prime Minister Abe, Japan had appeared to be the favourite for the submarine project, but will now fall back behind the European contenders who are offering firmer prospects for building the submarines in Australia.

Looking ahead

Despite Malcolm Turnbull’s personal predilection for issues such as climate change, a meaningful renewable energy policy, same sex marriage, and an Australian republic, he is unlikely to push for changes in policy on these issues in the short-term. The residual conservative forces in his Government are simply too strong. In the medium- and longer-term, however, significant changes are possible not just in controversial domestic issues, but also in Australia’s foreign policy.

Sam Bateman is a Senior Fellow in the Maritime Security Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. He is a former Australian naval commodore who had several postings in the Strategic Policy area of the Department of Defence in Canberra.

Click HERE to read this commentary online.

The Next Big Bubble to Burst

Having trouble viewing this email? View it online.

Monday, September 28, 2015

YOUR BEST SOURCE FOR THE UNBIASED MARKET COMMENTARY YOU WON'T GET FROM WALL STREET

The Next Big Bubble to Burst

by Martin Weiss

Dear Subscriber, Next Thursday, October 8, marks the seven-year anniversary of a date that will forever be remembered in monetary infamy. That was the memorable day in 2008 when the Fed began to dramatically slash its already-low Fed Funds target rate in the wake of the Lehman Brothers failure — first to 1.5% ... then to 1% two weeks later ... and finally to near-zero on December 16 of that year. Plus, it was also the memorable time when the Fed launched forward with the most audacious money-printing binge since the birth of the U.S. dollar exactly 229 years and 20 days ago. In last week's article, under the title "The Real Reasons Yellen Didn't Raise Rates," I showed you the enormous size of that adventure. It was 44 times larger than the Fed's emergency response to fears of a Y2K disaster back in 1999 ... It was 81 times larger than the Fed's emergency response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and ... It was far larger than anything mankind had ever witnessed on this planet before. Now, the big question before us is: What happens when the Fed begins to reverse this audacious escapade, even if meekly and gingerly? The first and best answer: We don't know. We don't know for the simple reason that there's no historic precedent — no previous 7-year period of zero interest rates and nonstop monetary binging. We do have, however, some other historical facts that can help us better understand what the future may bring: Historical fact #1. The Fed's 7-year money frenzy forced the hand of other major central banks around the world — the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan — to also open their money floodgates in tandem. Ditto for many emerging market countries and even frontier economies. Historical fact #2. The near constant gusher of liquidity into the global economy — considered by investors to be almost as reliable as America's famous "Old Faithful" geyser — gave rise to a series of speculative bubbles: Commodities went through the roof, led by oil, up to $130 per barrel.   Stocks in major emerging markets like Brazil, Russia and China exploded higher.   Junk bond issuance in the U.S. surged to $1.81 trillion, nearly double their high-water mark just prior to the 2008 debt crisis.   Investors plowed into the riskier small-cap stocks, valued at $2.2 trillion, also far exceeding pre-2008 peak levels.   And globally, corporate debt grew to levels beyond the danger zone reached just prior to the 2008 debt crisis. Multiply Your Money! I'm so concerned about the massive new threats to your income, savings, investments and retirement detailed in this report ... And I'm so confident that simply by taking the right steps now, you can USE these fast-breaking events to multiply your money ... I am ready, willing and able to give you everything you need to help protect and multiply your wealth in 2015 — absolutely FREE: Click here to view now! -Larry Internal Sponsorship Historical fact #3. The first two of these bubbles have already burst: From peak to recent trough, crude oil has plunged 74.3%. Silver has plummeted 72.1%. Copper has crashed 52.5%. And gold has been hammered to the tune of 42.8%.   Stocks in emerging markets have taken an equally big beating: China down 53.5% from peak to trough; Brazil, down 42.2%, and Russia, down 27.4%. Historical fact #4. The three other speculative bubbles — small cap stocks, junk bonds, and other corporate debts — have not yet burst; they're still largely intact. But past cycles tell us that these three sectors are very sensitive (and vulnerable) to any kind of money tightening. When the Fed raises rates, which will be the next to burst? It's hard to say with certainty. But my best guess is ... The Junk Bond Bubble Any corporate bond can be risky. If the company misses a payment — or it's simply downgraded by one of the major rating agencies — the market price for its bonds can crater almost as swiftly as the price of a stock. And I'm talking about investment grade bonds (rated triple-B or higher). When it comes to speculative grade bonds (double-B or lower), the risk is even greater. That's why, in the common parlance of Wall Street, they're called "junk." And it's also why, in normal times, most average investors have considered them forbidden fruit. But whatever you call them, the fact is that, in the zero-interest rate Eden of the past seven years, junk bonds have been virtually the only fruit that yielded any juice. So investors flocked to them in droves, creating the greatest junk bond bubble of all time: Click image for larger view Just take one look at this chart, take a walk through history, and you'll see exactly what I mean: 1999: Most of Wall Street is going gaga over tech stocks. So junk bonds, even with their higher yields, are considered dull and boring. By 2000, they've attracted only about $650 billion of investor funds. 2007: This time, the big bingeing has been in real estate and mortgages. Yes, the junk bond market had grown since the beginning of the decade — to $960 billion. But it's still not the primary focus of speculation. 2015: Now, junk bonds are back – in a big way. While the real estate markets have been less leveraged and more subdued, junk bonds have suddenly emerged as the poison of choice for yield-thirsty investors. Try to remind them that junk really does mean junk, and their likely response is to roll their eyes or shrug their shoulders. "Where else can I get a halfway decent yield?" they ask. "And who gives a damn about risk?" Sound crazy? Perhaps. But these are actually rational responses to a Garden-of-Eden world where the Fed pegs official rates at zero with one hand ... and guarantees a virtually risk-free environment with the other. Nevertheless, junk bonds are a giant house of cards, waiting for the day when the Fed decides to throws up both hands and eject investors into the real world. When will that begin? There are some early signs it already has begun: Junk bonds issued by energy companies, coal miners and metals producers (about one-third of the junk bond market) have already been falling all year — along with the plunge in commodity prices. But the idea that investors could escape the carnage simply by avoiding commodity-related junk isn't working anymore.   For example, Moody's recently downgraded much of Sprint's junk bonds to Caa1, precipitating a chaotic and fierce market response. Sprint's $2.5 billion of bonds maturing in 2028 plunged as low as 80.8 from 88.4 the day before, while $4.2 billion of its notes maturing in 2023 fell to as low as 90.1 from 98.6. For bonds, which rarely move by more than a point on any given day, that was the equivalent of a big crash.   Junk bond mutual funds and ETFs have also been a big part of the junk bond bubble with over 200 funds in all. But in recent months, more than $8 billion of investor money rushed for the exits, a prelude to the stock market exodus we saw in August. Next big questions: What happens when the party ends — either because the Fed is shutting off the lights or because investors see the handwriting on the wall? How will a junk bond bust impact other markets — investment grade bonds, small cap stocks, and other recent targets of high-risk capital? It's too soon for any definitive, quantitative answers. But if you're heavily invested in any of these areas, I would not wait for the final word before taking protective action. If you own junk or "high yield" mutual funds and ETFs, seriously consider taking advantage of any intermediate market strength to get out. Good luck and God bless! Martin The investment strategy and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of any other editor at Weiss Research or the company as a whole.

Astronaut Says NASA Could Be Announcing Alien Life on Mars This Week

News · Sci & Tech

September 28, 2015 by John Vibes

Powered by Translate

According to a press release issued by NASA last week, the agency is planning to announce a major breakthrough in their research of the planet Mars. Few details have been mentioned about their discovery thus far, but they have hyped this discovery as a solution to an age-old mystery.
The press release read in full:
NASA will detail a major science finding from the agency’s ongoing exploration of Mars during a news briefing at 11:30 a.m. EDT on Monday, Sept. 28 at the James Webb Auditorium at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The event will be broadcast live on NASA Television and the agency’s website.
News conference participants will be:

· Jim Green, director of planetary science at NASA Headquarters
· Michael Meyer, lead scientist for the Mars Exploration Program at NASA Headquarters
· Lujendra Ojha of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta
· Mary Beth Wilhelm of NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California and the Georgia Institute of Technology
· Alfred McEwen, principal investigator for the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) at the University of Arizona in Tucson
A brief question-and-answer session will take place during the event with reporters on site and by phone. Members of the public also can ask questions during the briefing using #AskNASA.
To participate in the briefing by phone, reporters must email their name, media affiliation and telephone number to Steve Cole at stephen.e.cole@nasa.gov by 9 a.m. EDT on Monday.

The announcements have many researchers excited, and some are even predicting that evidence of alien life could be revealed.
Former astronaut Mike Massimino told ABC news that he is expecting paradigm changing news.
“I suspect it’s going to be something that will increase our interest in going to Mars,” he said.
“That there is some sort of life form that might be discovered, and it’s also the possibility that you could support human life there,” he added.
As of right now it is too soon to speculate about what the announcement actually is, but we are hoping that it lives up to the hype.
For NASA TV downlink information, schedules and to view the news briefing, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/nasatv

---

John Vibes writes for True Activist and is an author, researcher and investigative journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture and the drug war.
This article ( Astronaut Says NASA Could Be Announcing Alien Life on Mars This Week ) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and TrueActivist.com.

Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/astronaut-says-nasa-could-be-announcing-alien-life-on-mars-this-week/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TrueActivist+%28True+Activist%29

Pope Francis Embraces Chrislam And Lays A Foundation For A One World Religion

Pope Francis Embraces Chrislam And Lays A Foundation For A One World Religion

September 29, 2015  

End Of The American Dream Blog / Michael Snyder

Share this article

---

Remarks made by Pope Francis at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Manhattan have sparked a firestorm of criticism from those that do not believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

Many have taken the Pope’s remarks as a major step in the direction of a one world religion, and the truth is that the Pope has made other such statements in the past.

In recent years, the theory that Christianity and Islam are just two distinct paths to God among many others has rapidly gained traction all over the planet. Some religious leaders have even gone so far as to try to merge Islamic and Christian practices, and the term “Chrislam” is now often used to describe this ecumenical movement.

If all this sounds incredibly strange to you, just keep reading, because this is just the tip of the iceberg.

What Pope Francis had to say at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Manhattan has received very little coverage by the mainstream media, but it was exceedingly significant. The following is how he began his address…

I would like to express two sentiments for my Muslim brothers and sisters: Firstly, my greetings as they celebrate the feast of sacrifice. I would have wished my greeting to be warmer. My sentiments of closeness, my sentiments of closeness in the face of tragedy. The tragedy that they suffered in Mecca.

In this moment, I give assurances of my prayers. I unite myself with you all. A prayer to almighty god, all merciful.

He did not choose those words by accident. In Islam, Allah is known as “the all-merciful one”.

And this is not the first time Pope Francis has used such language. For instance, the following comes from remarks that he made during his very first ecumenical meeting as Pope…

I then greet and cordially thank you all, dear friends belonging to other religious traditions; first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you. I really appreciate your presence: in it I see a tangible sign of the will to grow in mutual esteem and cooperation for the common good of humanity.

The Catholic Church is aware of the importance of promoting friendship and respect between men and women of different religious traditions – I wish to repeat this: promoting friendship and respect between men and women of different religious traditions – it also attests the valuable work that the Pontifical Council for interreligious dialogue performs.

Pope Francis clearly believes that Christians and Muslims worship the exact same God. And so that helps to explain why he authorized “Islamic prayers and readings from the Quran” at the Vatican for the first time ever back in 2014.

Catholicism and Islam are the two largest religions on the entire planet, and so any one world religion would need to incorporate both of those belief systems. Sadly, this Pope seems to be quite eager to lay the groundwork for such a one world religion.

Pope Francis made another statement at St. Patrick’s Cathedral that has shocked believers all over the planet. Apparently this Pope seems to think that the cross was a “failure”…

The cross shows us a different way of measuring success. Ours is to plant the seeds. God sees to the fruits of our labors. And if at times our efforts and works seem to fail and not produce fruit, we need to remember that we are followers of Jesus Christ and his life, humanly speaking, ended in failure, the failure of the cross.

After he made that statement, he didn’t continue to go on and explain that the cross was ultimately a great victory. He just ended his thought and moved on to other topics.

Needless to say, many are extremely upset by this. The following comes from Leo Zagami of Infowars.com…

These words have of course outraged most true Christians around the world who cannot imagine Christianity without the value of the cross, which symbolizes the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus for mankind. It’s impossible for a Christian of any denomination to imagine the very essence of their faith being discussed in this way, let alone by the Pope. The fact that blood was shed on the cross by Jesus for the ultimate self-sacrifice that could help rid mankind of all sins is one of those essentials of the Faith that should never be questioned.

The mainstream media persists with their undying affection for Pope Francis, never commenting on this outrageous statement.

But even though the Pope is saying things like this, his legend just seems to grow by the day. Even in the United States, throngs of faithful devotees are treating him like he is some sort of supernatural being…

Everywhere he goes, Pope Francis attracts worshipful crowds of people, straining and reaching to touch any part of him as if something spiritual and holy could be imparted to them by doing so. People weep, they cry, they hold up their sick children and beg him to touch them in the hopes they will be healed.

And this is even true of members of Congress. Just check out the behavior that some of them have displayed…

Representative Bob Brady, a devout Catholic and Democrat from Pennsylvania immediately made his way to the podium after Pope Francis finished speaking and grabbed the glass that was still filled with water. He then drank the water, gave some of the water to his wife Debra, and saved the rest for his grandchildren. Representative Brady took photos as well, and had his staff send them out to the press. He also shared some of the water with members of his staff and assistant, also a devout Catholic. As for the saved water, he plans to sprinkle it on his grandchildren and one great-grandchild.

I don’t know about you, but major alarm bells start going off for me when I read stuff like this.

We are witnessing the initial stages of the rise of a one world religion, and much of the planet is ultimately going to embrace it.

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2015/September29/293.html#xDOCfbBgiR0CSUfj.99

Doorway To A New World Order? UN Security Council Reform Could Change Global Power Structure

Doorway To A New World Order? UN Security Council Reform Could Change Global Power Structure

September 29, 2015  

By Kade Hawkins

Share this article

---

“The world is bigger than five,” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan famously warned the UN General Assembly in his speech before the global body in 2014.

Pressure has been building for years to change the status quo regarding the US, Britain, France, China, and Russia's ability to have veto power over UN Security Council decisions.

The Security Council is made up of 15 members, 5 of them permanent. The other 10 members are elected for two year terms, but it is the permanent members who wield all the power.

Any of the permanent members can veto a resolution, which has frustrated members of the global body for deadlocking it's ability to respond to crisis situations.

Proponents for reforming the Security Council received a boost from Germany's Angela Merkel this week after she met with leaders from Brazil, India and Japan and stated, "We need a new method of work to solve problems. That makes reform of the Security Council necessary, reform which reflects the real power in the world better than the situation today."

Brazil, India and South Africa have all indicated a desire to represent their regions on a permanent basis. Germany and Japan have also indicated their desire to sit on the council as two of the most powerful financial global powers.

Previous attempts to reform the Security have all failed including a speech last year by French President François Hollande when called on the five powers to agree on a set of scenarios in which the veto should not be used.

Some Bible prophecy experts have speculated that efforts to reform the security council may lead to a scenario in which the UN body is represented by 10 permanent members who in turn give their power to one single leader to oversee the entire global body.

"The 10 horns that you observed are 10 rulers... who are to receive power and authority for a single hour, along with the beast. These have one common policy (purpose), and they deliver their power to the beast... God has put it into their hearts to carry out His own purpose by acting in harmony in surrendering their royal power and authority to the beast until the prophetic words of God shall be fulfilled." [Revelation 17:12-13, 17]

While it is unlikely that the "Big 5" are willing to share their power and become the "Big 10" anytime soon, unforeseen world events and rising pressure from developing nations may force their hand.

Keep your eye on the UN and we will keep you updated as new developments take place.

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2015/September29/291.html#vJtlL6kUDTAu3vQm.99

So Obama Wants Talks with Putin on Syria?

So Obama Wants Talks with Putin on Syria?

By Finian Cunningham

September 26, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "SCF"-  After more than a year of demonising Russia as a threat to world peace, all of a sudden the United States changes tack and wants to hold talks with Moscow over Syria. US President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin are set to hold talks in New York on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting. The leaders will meet on Monday, 28 September, authorities from both the countries have confirmed. What a change from Obama’s churlish tantrums towards the Russian president!

US Secretary of State John Kerry speaking in London last weekend seemed to be overcome with «shared goals» and objectives, seeking «common ground» with Russia to defeat the jihadist terror group, Islamic State (IS), in Syria.

But only the week before that, President Obama was condemning Russia for stepping up military support for its long-time ally, Syria. Obama had said the Russian military aid was «doomed to failure».

Suddenly, it seems, however, there is an American turnaround. The New York Times reported on how the Obama administration has now «reached out to Moscow» to coordinate actions in Syria «to avoid an accidental escalation».

Obama reportedly «instructed» his Defence Secretary Ashton Carter to open dialogue with Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu about «deconfliction» in Syria. It was the first time in more than a year that such high-level military talks between the US and Russia had taken place. Contact was previously broken off by Washington after the latter accused Russia of «annexing Crimea»in March 2014.

Three years ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a prescient comment about foreign policy, which is all too relevant to the more recent developments in Syria. Back then Putin said: «Everything we do will be based on our own interests and goals, not on decisions other countries impose on us. Russia is only treated with respect when it is strong and stands firm on its own two feet».

Indeed. For over four years, since March 2011, Russia has seen the US and its clients tear Syria apart with a covert war for regime change against President Bashar al-Assad. The Western narrative of supporting a «pro-democracy uprising» is an insult to common intelligence. Leaked secret cables from the US embassy in Damascus reveal that Washington was seeking regime change against the Russian and Iranian ally as far back as 2006.

Washington’s deliberate sponsoring of jihadist extremist groups like the head-choppers of Islamic State was instrumental in this criminal enterprise of toppling the Syrian government. That some 240,000 people have been killed and millions more displaced by the US-fuelled covert war in Syria is another abominable violation of international law committed by Washington in a litany of imperialist crimes across the Middle East.

Russia’s renewed support earlier this month for the Assad government in Syria certainly stunned Washington and its Western subordinates. It was a huge reality check. The US and its clients have spun themselves into ever-constricting contradictions over Syria – supposedly fighting terrorism, while using terrorism for regime change. When Russia asserted its own narrative – of aiding an ally in the actual fight against terrorism – then suddenly the West tripped over its own contradictions. This is affirmation of Putin’s earlier strategic precept: «Russia is only treated with respect when it is strong and stands firm on its own two feet».

Washington’s knee-jerk reaction was to protest the Russian move, but then it couldn’t level a credible objection because it’s supposed to be fighting terrorism too. And, besides, everything Russia is doing as a bilateral partner of the sovereign state of Syria is legal under international law.

When John Kerry talks about the US and Russia having «shared goals» in defeating terrorism in Syria the American diplomat’s unctuous words are utter, cynical nonsense.

What the US does want, however, is to inveigle Russia into a seeming partnership against terrorism, whose abiding goal is regime change in Syria. This is where the American and British practice of the dark arts of deception come into play.

Here’s how the BBC reported on Kerry’s agenda. «Speaking after talks in London [with British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond], he [Kerry] said what he described as Russia's new focus on fighting Islamic State militants could be an opportunity to push towards a political settlement».

By «political settlement» what is meant is a framework insinuated by Washington and its trusty British sidekick by which the objective of Bashar al-Assad’s removal from power is put on the negotiating table. But why should this outcome be even broached on the negotiating table? By what authority does the US and Britain insist on Assad being deposed – apart from their own conceited presumption of authority?

Kerry went on to say with seeming sincerity: «We’re prepared to negotiate. Is Assad prepared to negotiate, really negotiate? Is Russia prepared to bring him to the table?»

The arrogance of Kerry and his British counterpart Philip Hammond is astounding. «Is Russia prepared to bring Assad to the table?» – as if Russia can be treated like some kind of henchman to be deployed by the Western masters to deliver the Syrian president’s head on a platter.

Kerry and Hammond asserted that Assad must be removed, even though the Syrian people re-elected him as president in 2014 with a huge majority. The Anglo-American double act appeared to offer a magnanimous fig leaf for their regime-change scheme by saying that Assad’s removal «doesn't have to be on day one or month one… There is a process by which all the parties have to come together to reach an understanding of how this can best be achieved».

What process? Who says so? Who are the Americans and British to determine «a process by which all parties have to come together to reach an understanding»? Who needs a process when the objective is to defeat terrorism and, as Moscow has clearly stated, the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad is the primary force against such terrorism?

The bottom line is that the Americans and the British want regime change in Syria by hook or by crook. They haven’t succeeded so far with their covert criminal war, and now Washington and London see an «opportunity» of roping Russia into a «political process» under the guise of defeating terrorists – terrorists that the West and its regional clients unleashed on Syria in the first place.

A Pentagon spokesman told the Guardian that Ashton Carter emphasised to Sergei Shoigu in their talks that the putative fight against terrorism in Syria was to be conditioned with a wider political objective. «He [Carter] noted that defeating [terrorists] and ensuring a political transition are objectives that need to be pursued at the same time».

«Still,» adds the Guardian, «the White House cautioned Moscow against ‘doubling down on Assad’».

The New York Times helpfully, albeit inadvertently, draws out further the real purpose of Washington’s sudden desire to engage with Moscow over Syria.

«But while Mr Carter’s initial military-to-military talks were limited in scope, officials indicated that the larger goal was to draw the Russians into a political process that would ultimately replace Syria’s government of President Bashar al-Assad, a longtime ally of the Kremlin,» reported the Times.

Does Washington and London really think that Moscow is that stupid?

Ukraine and Syria are both part of a continuum of Western covert war to undermine, isolate and destabilise Russia. The West has destroyed Ukraine and Syria to get at Russia. And now, as Putin asserts Russian interests in Syria, the West suddenly discovers «diplomacy». But still the opportunistic West wants to engage with Russia in order to better achieve its agenda of undermining Russia in Syria by expediting regime change against Bashar al-Assad. Can you believe the monstrous arrogance of it?

Russia does not need approval, consultation or «partnership» with Washington and its Western minions. As Putin said, Russia must assert its own strategic interests with confidence and without the toxic mediation of Washington.

Let Washington engage if it wants. But it should be on Moscow’s terms.

© Strategic Culture Foundation

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

What's your response? -  Scroll down to add / read comments 

Sign up for our FREE Daily Email Newsle

China Joining Russia In Syria While Germany Prepares to Leave NATO In Advance of World War III

By Dave Hodges
David Ochmanek, who, as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, stated on Monday that “Russia’s future looked to be increasingly integrated with the West.” That statement is no longer true. In fact, not only is Russia a growing threat to United States security, a series of Pentagon war games has revealed that the United States cannot defeat a Putin led Russia, given the present set of circumstances.
Pentagon War Games Spells Bad News for the U.S. Military
The Pentagon, along with other Defense Department planners, have come to a frightening realization. The U.S. military routinely comes up on the losing end of any conflict with Russian troops, Foreign Policy (FP) reported Monday. Russian superiority is not limited to any one theater of action. America’s ineptitude spans the entire globe.
The present analysis is simultaneously following along  two track. One set of scenarios has focused in on what the U.S. could do as part of NATO, if Russia were to launch an offensive against an alliance member(s).  The other scenario examined what actions the U.S. could hypothetically take outside the NATO sphere of influence. Both plans scenarios focuses on Russian incursions into the Baltic States, as this is the most likely scenario.
In addition, planners are not focusing solely on traditional warfare but on so-called “hybrid” tactics Moscow used to infiltrate and take Crimea in the Russian take over of the are.  Accompanying this scenario include the use unaffiliated operatives and forces, manufactured protests and, of course, elements of cyberwarfare, where the U.S. is woefully weak.
David Ochmanek, who, as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, ran that office at the time. “Russia’s future looked to be increasingly integrated with the West.” After eight hours of playing war game, which followed a variety of  scenarios, “The conclusion was that we are unable to defend the Baltics.” Game over, this is the end of NATO.
Let us not forget that Obama continues to gut the U.S. military with sequestration-related force cuts that will cut Army troops by 40,000, as well as reductions across the board at the Pentagon. In the aforementioned war games, the logistics become even more frightening. Since we have fewer and fewer troops to deploy as a preventative action, deploying US troops to the Baltic would take 30-60 days and Russia would have taken a lot of territory by that time. The end result conclusion of these war games is that the US cannot prevail against Russia.
Meanwhile Back In the Real World
The United States has already been checkmated in Syria. Russia has already gained a firm military foothold in the Middle East and as the reader will soon discover, China is sending some of its military in support of Russia’s effort in Syria as part of a newly forming BRICS coalition being put together to ostensibly destroy ISIS. The real purpose of these moves is designed to have China and Russia take over the Middle East. These events should not come as any surprise as China and Russia have openly announced their hostility toward the United States for the past three years.
How serious are the Chinese and Russians at standing up to the imperialistic United States? Considering that both Chinese President Hu and Major General Zhang Zhaozhong have threatened the United States with nuclear war if they invade Iran, the prudent opinion says that this is the newest version of the “Axis of Evil’s” line in the sand, and it has been clearly drawn. While many eyes are on Ukraine, the real prize and the key to the solvency of the BRICS is Iran and its willingness to accept gold for oil payments. Protecting Syria is the first line of defense, because all roads to invading Iran and ending the threat to the Petrodollar run through Syria. And America’s worst nightmare, a joint Middle Eastern military partnership between Russia and China, is about to become a reality.
Arab Media Outlet Reporting Chinese Troops On the Way to Syria

China-CV-16-Liaoning-aircraft-carrier

In a potentially stunning development, the Al-Masdar Al-‘Arabi, (AKA) The Arab Source, is reporting that a Chinese warship recently passed through the Suez Canal three days ago,  and is headed to Syria to assist the Russians military fight against ISIS. The news source refers to ISIS as “US proxies trying to overthrow the al-Assad government”.
This news comes on the heels of the recent arrival of Russian military personnel which arrived at the Syrian port-city of Tartous. This is a potentially catastrophic development given the fact that the US admits to having Special Operations Forces on the ground in Syria as well and soon-to-be presence of the Chinese military to Syria provides more insight into their contingency. The foundational structure, which will comprise the elements of World War III are nearly in place. Syria will be the flash point for World War III, followed by a Russian invasion of the Baltic states. Some has suggested that the Russians are borrowing from a page in the US military strategy and they are beginning to build a coalition of forces in Syria. In other words, Russia will not be confronting ISIS alone. This is similar to the US plan of forming a “coalition” of forces.
Germany, France and Italy’s Motivation to Leave NATO
Germany just threw its support of Putin putting boots on the ground in Syria to fight the CIA created ISIS. Germany is on the edge of leaving NATO. The United States has responded with shipping its most modern nuclear weapons to Germany last week. If NATO is on the rocks, and that almost certainly appears to be the case, the U.S. has a very narrow window from which to launch an attack upon Russia to counter its moves in Syria, its growing threat to the Baltic states and its newly forming partnership with Germany which serves to undermine NATO. This is clearly what the shipment of nuclear missiles to Germany, this week, and this increases the possibility that the war will be a case of happening sooner, not later.
The eventual defection of Germany, France and Italy is easy to foretell. This is a case of a picture, or in this case, an energy map, is worth a thousand words.
















All Russia has to do is to turn off the natural gas shipments this winter and Europe will freeze and NATO will disappear.
To anyone possessing an IQ above room temperature, this map is the road map to the destruction of NATO. Key NATO allies are being held hostage by Putin through energy blackmail. If NATO was to survive, the time to have attacked Russia was last Spring, but I believe that this ship has sailed with Russia’s military buildup in Syria along with China’s support.
Conclusion
Can you imagine, you just opened your contacts list on your phone and all of friends and business associates are gone. This is what is happening to the United States.
The following scenario now seems likely. Russia and Chinese forces eventually confront American Special Operation forces in Syria. Russia and China gain a strong military foothold in the Middle East. The US scrambles to respond. However, Russia attacks Eastern Europe and focuses its might on the Baltic states. China takes advantage of the crisis and attacks Taiwan and simultaneously, North Korea sends a million men across the DMZ and occupies Seoul within 72 hours. Does the US respond with nuclear weapons. The Pentagon has undoubtedly run this war game and they are not about to tell us how bad the United States is going to lose.
Related articles

• China joins Russian buildup in Syria
• Will World War III Begin In Syria?

Yet another Chinese Chemical Plant Explodes Mysteriously as China Dumps A Record $94 Billion In US Treasurys In One Month

Editor’s Note…
Fourth strike ! Looks like all the “coincidence theories” can be put to rest now, as China Dumps A Record $94 Billion In US Treasurys In One Month. All those mysterious explosions must be related.
***
Zero Hedge
If you’re planning on travelling to China, we have two pieces of advice:

1. Do not look like a short seller
2. Do not go near any chemical factories

Failing to heed the first tip there could get you thrown in jail (or, as Man Group’s China chief Li Yifei calls it, sent on a “short vacation”).
The consequences of failing to follow the second piece of advice above could be, how should we put this… explosive.
With Beijing still scrambling to contain the fallout (both figuratively and literally) from the devastating blast at Tianjin which killed some 160 people and injured more than 700 last month, the country is on edge. Two additional chemical blasts (both in Shandong) did little to calm China’s frayed nerves and now, a fourth blast, this time in Zhejiang, has been reported. Here’s Reuters:

An explosion shook a chemical plant in the Chinese province of Zhejiang, state media said on Monday, though there were no immediate reports of casualties in a country on edge after blasts killed more than 160 people last month.
The blast caused a fire and thick smoke to bellow from the plant in Lishui city shortly before midnight, state radio said on its official Weibo microblog.

With Tianjin it was sodium cyanide and with Shandong adiponitrile – looking at the visuals below, we can’t help but wonder what’s now being disbursed into the air over Zhejiang.

This Is What A Big Mac Does To Your Body Within One Hour Of Eating It

Health · Health Food · News · Sci & Tech

September 24, 2015 by Amanda Froelich

Powered by Translate

One Big Mac can't hurt, right? Wrong. The iconic burger dehydrates you, raises your blood sugar, and makes you feel hungry just 40 minutes after eating it.

You’ve heard a million times that fast food is horrible for your health… But how bad can a burger such as the Big Mac be?
According to an infographic created by Fast Food Menu Price, pretty darn bad.
Among other things, the iconic burger dehydrates you, raises your blood sugar, and makes you feel hungry just 40 minutes after eating it. Just take a look at the infographic below:

 

Here’s what you can expect:

In the first 10 minutes: The Big Mac (and its 540 calories) raises your blood sugar to abnormal levels. Junk food like the Big Mac triggers your brain’s reward system by releasing “feel-good” chemicals, such as the neurotransmitter dopamine. The process works in a similar way to the reaction you’d get after taking a drug like cocaine and raises the likelihood of compulsive eating.
After 20 minutes: The Big Mac’s bun has high levels of high-fructose corn syrup and sodium — both of which are addictive and make your body crave more.
After 30 minutes: The burger’s 970 milligrams of sodium can cause dehydration. The symptoms of dehydration are similar to those of hunger, tricking you into thinking you want more food. Your kidneys have trouble eliminating the salt, and your heart has to work faster to pump blood through your veins. This can cause high blood pressure and can ultimately lead to heart disease and stroke.
After 40 minutes: You start to feel hungry again. When you eat a high-calorie meal, your body’s insulin response can bring down your glucose levels, causing you to want to eat more. The bun’s high-fructose corn syrup is quickly absorbed by your GI tract, creating insulin spikes and even bigger hunger pangs.
After 60 minutes: Your body typically takes 24 to 72 hours to digest food, but burgers can take more time because they are greasier. The Big Mac can take more than three days to fully digest.
Some controversy does exist on the facts presented, but it is agreed that overall, a Big Mac should never be considered to be a ‘health food.’ And really, just take a look at the ingredients in a Big Mac. 
Certified dietitian nutritionist Lisa Moskovitz, CEO of NewYork Nutrition Group, told Yahoo Health: 

“Everyone’s body has a different blood sugar and insulin response. Because there is also a significant amount of fat in a Big Mac, it may slow down the conversion of the carbs into glucose that travel through the blood stream.”

Source IFLScience agrees (though does think some facts are exaggerated) and notes that the amount of sodium, poor quality carbohydrates (white bread, high-fructose corn syrup), and high amount of fat are anything but healthy.
Simply put, a Big Mac is not a nutritious food, and should never be mistaken as such. If you or someone you know indulges in the calorie-dense frankenfood often, perhaps it’s time to re-think that habit. Plenty of healthy alternatives exist, and plant-based restaurants are popping up everywhere, offering delicious, more nutritious fare at similar prices.
What are your thoughts? Comment below and share this article! 

---

This article (This Is What A Big Mac Does To Your Body Within One Hour Of Eating It ) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and TrueActivist.com

Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/this-is-what-a-big-mac-does-to-your-body-within-one-hour-of-eating-it/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TrueActivist+%28True+Activist%29

Vatican Insider Reveals Pope is A Communist

Orthodox Jews see blood moon as big deal

 

Orthodox Jews see blood moon as big deal

 

September 20, 2015

-NO AUTHOR-
Posted with permission from WND

Republish Reprint

It's not just evangelical Christians, messianic Jews and Hebrew roots believers touting something big, something significant in the tetrad of blood moons set for a grand finale "supermoon" show Sept. 28 in a week.
Increasingly, Orthodox Jewish leaders and teachers are saying the event is significant historically and for the future of Israel and the Jewish people.
Bob O'Dell and Gidon Ariel, founders of Root Source, an educational program in which Orthodox Israelis teach Christians about the Bible and Judaism, say the closing blood moon on the first day of Sukkot, or the Feast of Tabernacles, should not be ignored or dismissed.
For the fourth time in two years, a blood moon will occur on either Passover or Sukkot. Previous blood moon tetrads, four lunar eclipses in succession over an 18-month period, occurred in other historically significant times for the Jewish people – 1428-1429, 1493-1494, 1949-1950, 1967-1968 and now 2015-2015.
The blood moons patterns were discovered by Mark Biltz, a Tacoma pastor who emphasizes the Hebrew roots of the Christian faith. He is the author of the bestselling "Blood Moons" and is featured as the presenter in a documentary movie about the phenomenon.
What is God telling us? Read the details of the blood moons, in "Blood Moons: Decoding the Imminent Heavenly Signs."
Making the latest tetrad more significant for some is the fact that it takes place at the end of a Shemitah cycle – the seven-year period leading to God's commandment for resting the land and release of debts in Israel. O'Dell and Ariel also believe this one occurs in a Jubilee year – kind of a super-Shemitah that comes every 50 years.
The Shemitah cycle has become big news all over the world as a result of the work of Jonathan Cahn, a messianic rabbi from New Jersey who wrote the No. bestselling books, "The Harbinger" and "The Mystery of the Shemitah," and collaborated with WND Films on "The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment," the bestselling faith movie of 2012 and 2013.
"We are not at all predicting the end of the world or the arrival of the Messiah in September," O'Dell told Breaking Israel News. "If you look at all the blood moons that have occurred in history, you see that every time they arrive, they mark turning points in history – major new trends involving the Jewish people."
Watch the trailer for "Blood Moons":
The tetrad in 1428-1429 marked the end of a wave of forced conversions for the Jews in Spain, and the tetrad in 1493-1494 signaled the end of the Spanish inquisition, which concluded with the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492.
"We can now look back and see that the nation of Spain was peaking in power, while God was preparing a new home for the Jews with the founding of America through Christopher Columbus," O'Dell said. "The blood moons occurring on those Jewish feast days were a witness that God had not forgotten His promise to return the Jews to their homeland."
More modern Blood Moons tetrads have come at significant times for the reborn state of Israel.
"With the blood moons of 1949-1950, 1967-1968 and 2014-2015, when we take them all together they are marking the three phases of the rebirth of the nation of Israel," explained O'Dell.
According to O'Dell, the dates mark the creation of Israel as a nation in 1948, the unification of Jerusalem in 1967, "and as for 2015," he said, "we will need to wait and see. But our guess is that it has to do with Israel being now able to stand upon its own without help from the United States. We also see the coming together of Christians and Jews in love and support of each other as a new spiritual trend as well."
Gidon Ariel, the Israeli co-founder of Root Source, provided a historical perspective on the lunar occurrences.
"I think that Jews paid more attention to the skies in previous eras. In Ethics of the Fathers 3:18, Rabbi Eliezer ben Hisma states that tekufot, seasons, referring to all astronomical sciences, are parparaot lachochma, side dishes of wisdom. Maimonides also went to great lengths to document lunar tables and the like," he said.
What is God telling us? Read the details of the blood moons, in "Blood Moons: Decoding the Imminent Heavenly Signs."
Ariel pointed out that this trend has been largely neglected by modern Jews.
"Today, some astronomy buffs might pick up on [the blood moons], but it is still pretty esoteric for the mainstream," he told Breaking Israel News, adding, "That being said, I would mention there are more and more individuals and organizations dedicated to charting lunar data, some of them in preparation for renewing the Jewish lunar calendar based on r'eeyah, sighting, as part of the return to Temple service."
O'Dell and Ariel have co-authored a book entitled "Israel FIRST!" in which they highlight the importance of blood moons and other fascinating biblical phenomena. They hope to give the topic more appeal for both modern Jews and Christians to raise awareness and interest in the subject.
"For those who follow end-times prophecies, the blood moons are fascinating," said O'Dell, explaining, "Heavenly signs are mentioned in some of the end-times Bible passages and moons specifically."
O'Dell pointed out that the current blood moon is different from previous ones in that it will be visible in both Israel as well as in North America.
"The four eclipses in 1949-1950 were all visible from Israel," he said. "The four in 1967-1968 and the four in 2014-2015 are all visible from the USA – an extremely rare occurrence. But this very last blood moon in September is visible from both Israel and the USA simultaneously. It is something to ponder."