"her sins have massed together clear up to heaven"

by proplog2 11 Replies latest jw friends

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Americans live in a dream world about the history of their country.

    They just can't see the USA as the treacherous "harlot" in Revelation. How can it be said of the USA that "in her was found the blood of prophets, and of holy ones and of all those who have been slaughtered on the earth"_Rev 18:24

    Certainly you can't say in a literal sense that the USA is responsible for "ALL those who have been slaughtered on the earth" any more than you could say that of ancient Babylon - "at Babylon the slain ones of all the earth have fallen". _Jeremiah 51:49

    The blood-guilt of both ancient Babylon and Babylon the Great is expressed as hyperbole - exageration for emphasis.

    But, isn't the USA the most peace loving nation on earth?

    Consider a few hard hitting truths from a speech by Nobel Laureate (litterature) Harold Pinter

    Art, Truth & Politics

    As every single person here knows, the justification for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein possessed a highly dangerous body of weapons of mass destruction, some of which could be fired in 45 minutes, bringing about appalling devastation. We were assured that was true. It was not true. We were told that Iraq had a relationship with Al Quaeda and shared responsibility for the atrocity in New York of September 11th 2001. We were assured that this was true. It was not true. We were told that Iraq threatened the security of the world. We were assured it was true. It was not true.

    The truth is something entirely different. The truth is to do with how the United States understands its role in the world and how it chooses to embody it.

    But before I come back to the present I would like to look at the recent past, by which I mean United States foreign policy since the end of the Second World War. I believe it is obligatory upon us to subject this period to at least some kind of even limited scrutiny, which is all that time will allow here.

    Everyone knows what happened in the Soviet Union and throughout Eastern Europe during the post-war period: the systematic brutality, the widespread atrocities, the ruthless suppression of independent thought. All this has been fully documented and verified.

    But my contention here is that the US crimes in the same period have only been superficially recorded, let alone documented, let alone acknowledged, let alone recognised as crimes at all. I believe this must be addressed and that the truth has considerable bearing on where the world stands now. Although constrained, to a certain extent, by the existence of the Soviet Union, the United States' actions throughout the world made it clear that it had concluded it had carte blanche to do what it liked.

    Direct invasion of a sovereign state has never in fact been America's favoured method. In the main, it has preferred what it has described as 'low intensity conflict'. Low intensity conflict means that thousands of people die but slower than if you dropped a bomb on them in one fell swoop. It means that you infect the heart of the country, that you establish a malignant growth and watch the gangrene bloom. When the populace has been subdued - or beaten to death - the same thing - and your own friends, the military and the great corporations, sit comfortably in power, you go before the camera and say that democracy has prevailed. This was a commonplace in US foreign policy in the years to which I refer.

    The tragedy of Nicaragua was a highly significant case. I choose to offer it here as a potent example of America's view of its role in the world, both then and now.

    I was present at a meeting at the US embassy in London in the late 1980s.

    The United States Congress was about to decide whether to give more money to the Contras in their campaign against the state of Nicaragua. I was a member of a delegation speaking on behalf of Nicaragua but the most important member of this delegation was a Father John Metcalf. The leader of the US body was Raymond Seitz (then number two to the ambassador, later ambassador himself). Father Metcalf said: 'Sir, I am in charge of a parish in the north of Nicaragua. My parishioners built a school, a health centre, a cultural centre. We have lived in peace. A few months ago a Contra force attacked the parish. They destroyed everything: the school, the health centre, the cultural centre. They raped nurses and teachers, slaughtered doctors, in the most brutal manner. They behaved like savages. Please demand that the US government withdraw its support from this shocking terrorist activity.'

    Raymond Seitz had a very good reputation as a rational, responsible and highly sophisticated man. He was greatly respected in diplomatic circles. He listened, paused and then spoke with some gravity. 'Father,' he said, 'let me tell you something. In war, innocent people always suffer.' There was a frozen silence. We stared at him. He did not flinch.

    Innocent people, indeed, always suffer.

    Finally somebody said: 'But in this case "innocent people" were the victims of a gruesome atrocity subsidised by your government, one among many. If Congress allows the Contras more money further atrocities of this kind will take place. Is this not the case? Is your government not therefore guilty of supporting acts of murder and destruction upon the citizens of a sovereign state?'

    Seitz was imperturbable. 'I don't agree that the facts as presented support your assertions,' he said.

    As we were leaving the Embassy a US aide told me that he enjoyed my plays. I did not reply.

    I should remind you that at the time President Reagan made the following statement: 'The Contras are the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers.'

    The United States supported the brutal Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua for over 40 years. The Nicaraguan people, led by the Sandinistas, overthrew this regime in 1979, a breathtaking popular revolution.

    The Sandinistas weren't perfect. They possessed their fair share of arrogance and their political philosophy contained a number of contradictory elements. But they were intelligent, rational and civilised. They set out to establish a stable, decent, pluralistic society. The death penalty was abolished. Hundreds of thousands of poverty-stricken peasants were brought back from the dead. Over 100,000 families were given title to land. Two thousand schools were built. A quite remarkable literacy campaign reduced illiteracy in the country to less than one seventh. Free education was established and a free health service. Infant mortality was reduced by a third. Polio was eradicated.

    The United States denounced these achievements as Marxist/Leninist subversion. In the view of the US government, a dangerous example was being set. If Nicaragua was allowed to establish basic norms of social and economic justice, if it was allowed to raise the standards of health care and education and achieve social unity and national self respect, neighbouring countries would ask the same questions and do the same things. There was of course at the time fierce resistance to the status quo in El Salvador.

    I spoke earlier about 'a tapestry of lies' which surrounds us. President Reagan commonly described Nicaragua as a 'totalitarian dungeon'. This was taken generally by the media, and certainly by the British government, as accurate and fair comment. But there was in fact no record of death squads under the Sandinista government. There was no record of torture. There was no record of systematic or official military brutality. No priests were ever murdered in Nicaragua. There were in fact three priests in the government, two Jesuits and a Maryknoll missionary. The totalitarian dungeons were actually next door, in El Salvador and Guatemala. The United States had brought down the democratically elected government of Guatemala in 1954 and it is estimated that over 200,000 people had been victims of successive military dictatorships.

    Six of the most distinguished Jesuits in the world were viciously murdered at the Central American University in San Salvador in 1989 by a battalion of the Alcatl regiment trained at Fort Benning, Georgia, USA. That extremely brave man Archbishop Romero was assassinated while saying mass. It is estimated that 75,000 people died. Why were they killed? They were killed because they believed a better life was possible and should be achieved. That belief immediately qualified them as communists. They died because they dared to question the status quo, the endless plateau of poverty, disease, degradation and oppression, which had been their birthright.

    The United States finally brought down the Sandinista government. It took some years and considerable resistance but relentless economic persecution and 30,000 dead finally undermined the spirit of the Nicaraguan people. They were exhausted and poverty stricken once again. The casinos moved back into the country. Free health and free education were over. Big business returned with a vengeance. 'Democracy' had prevailed.

    But this 'policy' was by no means restricted to Central America. It was conducted throughout the world. It was never-ending. And it is as if it never happened.

    The United States supported and in many cases engendered every right wing military dictatorship in the world after the end of the Second World War. I refer to Indonesia, Greece, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay, Haiti, Turkey, the Philippines, Guatemala, El Salvador, and, of course, Chile. The horror the United States inflicted upon Chile in 1973 can never be purged and can never be forgiven.

    Hundreds of thousands of deaths took place throughout these countries. Did they take place? And are they in all cases attributable to US foreign policy? The answer is yes they did take place and they are attributable to American foreign policy. But you wouldn't know it.

    It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.

    I put to you that the United States is without doubt the greatest show on the road. Brutal, indifferent, scornful and ruthless it may be but it is also very clever. As a salesman it is out on its own and its most saleable commodity is self love. It's a winner. Listen to all American presidents on television say the words, 'the American people', as in the sentence, 'I say to the American people it is time to pray and to defend the rights of the American people and I ask the American people to trust their president in the action he is about to take on behalf of the American people.' End Quote.

    Is it just coincidental that the USA fits the description of Babylon the Great. Babylon the Great is described as being so rich that "all those who having boats at sea became rich by reason of her costliness" Rev 18:19

    Is it just coincidental that the USA "has a kingdom over the kings of the earth"?

    Is it just coincidental that Russia is resisting this pressure for a unipolar world just like the beast in Revelation that gets tired of the Harlots domination and turns on her to "completely burn her with fire"? _ Rev 17:16

    Is it just coincidental that Russia, just like the Wild Beast in Rev 13, appeared to have been slaughtered to death but is in a state of healing?

    Is it just coincidental that Russia has the nuclear capability of destroying the USA? Especially if they initiate a first strike!

    Is it just coincidental that this pre-tribulation adversarial relationship is described in Daniel as the King of the North vs. the King of the South? In this struggle the King of the South pushes the King of the North into a devastating attack.

    I still don't believe in God. But somebody - somewhere knows something about this future we are living.

    The full text of Pinter's speech:

    http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lecture-e.html

  • greendawn
    greendawn

    Babylon the Great is not exactly identical with the original Babylon and not even with Rome as thought by some Protestants or with America. It is a universal power that runs right through time. America is no doubt part of it but is not all of it.

  • Alwayshere
    Alwayshere

    I believe Babylon the Great is the original Babylon and pictures nothing else.

  • TopHat
    TopHat

    OMG...Just shows to go ya! You can't trust ANYONE....except maybe Chavez or Jiadinedad

    Opps...forgot to add that trustworthy Castro to the list.

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Greendawn:

    It isn't "exactly" the same as Ancient Babylon so it therefore must be very similar...

    It isn't "exactly' Rome....

    America is part of it....

    It is a Universal power that has existed a long time....

    OK What is it? Tell us exactly what it is.

    Then I will be able to show you exactly why you are wrong.

  • yaddayadda
    yaddayadda

    Hows this:

    Babylon the Great is the powerful Freemasons/Illuminati with their long term goal of ushering in a secular 'one world government'. They have infiltrated all major political, religious and commercial institutions (including the Watchtower Society). They are quasi religious/spiritistic.

  • NewTruth
    NewTruth

    Yes, definately Babylon is America.

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Newtruth:

    I'm flattered that your 3rd post was on one of my topics.

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    It is clear to me that these threads are not very popular. The attitude is that prophecy is a waste of time because anyone can say anything they want to about such ambiguous predictions.

    Here are a few types that may post:

    1. Conspiracy theorists that have some kind of FreeMason slant to everything.

    2. Those who believe in Watchtower and other fundamentalist orientation that sees Babylon as some kind of religious entity.

    3. Those who believe that Israel has to have a significant role in the fullfilment.

    4. Those who take the popular critical approach that this is just apocalyptic musings to speak about enemies in hidden language.

    5. Those who simply ridicule.

    My approach is to simply keep informed. So here is some more info that Shows the King of the North (Russia) expressing their concerns with being pushed by The King of the South (USA)

    The Guardian
    April 11, 2007
    Moscow signals place in new world order
    Julian Borger, diplomatic editor

    The news that an arms race may be underway once
    more between Washington and Moscow has brought
    back some unpleasant memories, but it is also a
    pointer to a more complicated future.
    The Kremlin's threat to counter US missile
    defence installations in eastern Europe is a sign
    that Russia will no longer acquiesce in a Pax Americana.

    What seemed in the west like a post cold-war
    honeymoon in the nineties
    is remembered more as a
    rape by Moscow's new leaders. In their eyes
    Russia was taken advantage of at a moment of
    economic weakness by Washington, London and a
    band of unscrupulous Russian oligarchs. A new
    Russian foreign policy, published by the
    government in recent days makes it clear that
    Moscow believes the era of American hegemony is now over.

    "The myth about the unipolar world fell apart
    once and for all in Iraq," the review says. "A
    strong, more self-confident Russia has become an
    integral part of positive changes in the world."

    The policy document is an elaboration of an
    anti-American polemic delivered two months ago by
    Vladimir Putin to a roomful of shocked western
    diplomats in Munich. "The Munich speech may be an
    event ... we look back to and say: that's when
    everything changed, but we should have seen it
    coming," said Cliff Kupchan, a former US state
    department official now at the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy.

    Around the world, Putin's Russia has been serving
    notice for some time it is prepared to challenge
    US leadership of the international community.
    It
    is beginning to push back hard against missile
    defence and Nato's eastward expansion.
    It has
    resisted tough sanctions against Iran, and so far
    refused to go along with a UN-brokered plan to
    hand Kosovo autonomy. Moscow is also signalling
    it wants to be treated as a serious player in the
    Middle East, meeting Hamas officials at a time
    they are being ostracised by the US and western Europe.

    While there are cold war echoes in the Russian
    rhetoric over missile defence and in the
    intractability of some of the disputes in the UN
    security council, there are more differences than
    similarities between today's friction and the
    constant rivalry of the Soviet era.

    For one thing, disputes are no longer played out
    against a backdrop of mutually assured
    destruction. Most US and Russian intercontinental
    nuclear missiles are pointing at each other, but
    they are not on a hair-trigger. Nor are the two
    countries engaged in a global ideological
    struggle. Washington may be in the throes of
    intellectual ferment over the Bush doctrine, of
    defeating extremism by exporting democracy, but
    the Putin doctrine is by contrast, an exercise in
    pragmatism. It stresses the importance of
    national sovereignty and the primacy of the UN in
    resolving disputes. The common theme is Moscow's
    demand for its views to be taken into account.

    The roots are economic, and they reach back into
    the era of Boris Yeltsin, when an impoverished
    Russia offered itself as a eager junior partner
    to the west. That period is seen by the Kremlin
    occupants as a national humiliation. "What drives
    Putin's Russia is an obsession forged in the
    nineties," said one diplomat. "They detest its
    instability and the weakness it brought to Russia."

    Soaring oil and gas prices have transformed the
    environment. Russia is no longer a debtor nation.
    A new self-assuredness was on show when the
    Russians hosted the G8 meeting at St Petersburg
    in 2006. "Suddenly, they had all the right suits,
    watches and the right cars," said a western official who was there.

    Along with all the trappings of western affluence
    came a new determination that Russia would not be
    absorbed by the west. The Yeltsin government
    toyed with the idea of joining the European
    Union, but that idea is now dead. In an article
    to mark the EU's 50th anniversary, Mr Putin
    stated openly that Russia has "no intention of
    either joining the EU or establishing any form of
    institutional association with it".

    Moscow's relationship with Europe is now defined
    by its role as the continent's oil and gas
    supplier. Its tactics have been those of a giant
    corporation seeking to maximise its market power.
    Rather than deal with the EU as a whole, Russia
    has negotiated individual deals with different
    European countries - agreeing with Germany the
    construction of the Nord Stream pipeline under
    the Baltic, and the extension of another gas
    pipeline to Hungary. Moscow has thus undermined
    the EU's communal efforts to reduce its
    dependence on Russia by bringing Caspian gas through Turkey.

    After Moscow turned off the gas tap to Ukraine,
    Belarus and Lithuania, there are fears that it
    will ultimately try to translate its market power
    over Europe into a new political hegemony. But
    Dmitri Trenin, a former Russian military
    strategist, argues those fears misunderstand the
    Putin era. Russia, he says, is simply striving to
    extract maximum profits from its customers.

    Read Revelation 13. The USSR died. Russia is the revived head of the beast. After it is resurrected it appears as a lamb for a period of time. But then it shows its old nature by speaking like the dragon. This is the beast that turns on Babylon the Great (USA).

  • NewTruth
    NewTruth

    Pro: I think the head that gets revived, is the Bush administration.. With George H. Bush, he didn't finish his quest to destroy Iraq. But the Bush family was revived with George W. And the Bush administration hates Babylon...and is leaving her devasted and naked, financially, support wise, and other ways..

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit