Ezekiel, chapter 31.

Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

Yea also, because he transgresseth by wine, HE IS A PROUD MAN, NEITHER KEEPETH AT HOME. who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death, and cannot be satisfied, but gathereth unto him all nations; and heapeth unto him all people...(Habakkuk 2:1-14).


He shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many...(Daniel 8:21-25).


I will be as the dew unto Israel. He shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as (a Cedar in) LEBANON...(Hosea 14:5).


"The 'trees of Lebanon' denotes the Trees which the Holy One uprooted and planted in another place, as it is written: 'The cedars of Lebanon which he planted.' (1 Kings 5:9), (Psalm 104:16), (Ezekiel 17:3,4). Zohar III.127b; Amos 2:9.


Behold, the Assyrian was a Cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs..

The Cedars in the Garden of God could not hide him: the fir trees were not like his boughs, and the chestnut trees were not like his branches; nor any tree in the Garden of God was like unto him in his beauty...(Ezekiel,chapter 31).


Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns (the cares of the world), or figs of thistles (the deceitfulness of riches)?...(Matthew 7: 15-20).


"Lebanon denotes the ringleader." Commentary on Isaiah, The Dead Sea Scriptures, by Theodor H. Gaster, p.307.


O Assyrian, rod of mine anger...(Isaiah 10). (Micah, chapters 4 to 5:6).


I will break the Assyrian (the World leader) in my land...(Isaiah 14:25).


Now the axe is (fully) laid to the Root of the Tree...(Matthew 3:10, 11).


"When the Lord hath brought to completion that which He means to do on Mt. Zion and Jerusalem, I will then call to account the king of Assyria for the fruit of his arrogant heart and the pride of his haughty looks. For see what he has been saying: my own brain and brawn (for Oh how clever I am) I have accomplished it all--He has shifted the bounds of the people and rifled their stores.

The reference is to the annihilation of Babylon. The bounds of the people are the statutory laws of (God's) people, which (the man of lies) summarily sets aside: while the rifling of the stores refers to the deception which he practices on the masses." Commentary on chapter 10 of Isaiah, The Dead Sea Scriptures.


Exalt not thyself, lest thou fall, and bring dishonour upon thy soul, and so God discover thy secrets, and cast thee down in the midst of the congregation, because thou camest not in truth to the fear of the Lord, but thy heart is full of deceit... (Ecclesiasticus 2:30).


But we have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God...

For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake...

But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair;

Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed.

Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body,

For we which live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh...(2 Corinthians 4:2-11).

The day will declare it or not (see Deuteronomy 18:22), but to suggest that Jimmy Carter is an antichrist is to those dwelling on the vast spiritual surface of things, an absurdity. And how much more absurd and far-fetched is it to state that he is the Antichrist himself, the one to whom the fated number 600, 60, and 6 belongs. One is on slippery ground and open to every intellectual, not to fail to mention political and religious attack just to say so. How could this world-renowned individual answer to all the horrid descriptions that have been imagined of the Antichrist all of these centuries? And even if the number Six hundred Sixty and Six somehow associates itself with the office of the American presidency in the 20th century (these might reason), (and hasn't everyone always twisted these numbers to fit the names and personages of a myriad of other historical figures throughout the centuries? they will say), what could it have to do with Carter now? Is he not, as Douglas Brinkley writes in The Unfinished Presidency, the only one of them in recent times "who is NOT criminally insane?" Since leaving that office Carter has, on the great and renowned surface of things, exemplified himself in ways that no other President has, in ways it seems every Christian should--given the nature of these times, and the character of those others who are presently in charge of the world. He has even openly defined himself and his agenda in the language of the Scriptures. (Of course this should have been a direct sign to more than just a few). He has not shied away from proclaiming what appears to be--at least in its ethical and social applications--the gospel of Christ (as it has emerged out of his own Southern Baptist and American-capitalist worldview that is). He has kept his moral bearings in a political world swirling with other opportunities...

Carter has lent his name, his organizational skills, and from time to time even his own physical labors, to such causes as Habitat For Humanity. Why wouldn't every thoughtful person want to trust and emulate him, and be involved themselves in some such ways?...Yet for some reason many are not compelled to it. And it has something intrinsically to do with what many can also see are but mere spasms of humanitarianism emanating from those in the liberal establishment and on the religious Left, that hardly, in the end, lead to the real changes that are required in the structure of a society to make such efforts meaningful; or that are required in the structure of each soul's real personal and economic relationship to every other soul, in order to make such efforts not just truly meaningful but revolutionary. Such humanitarian efforts certainly make us feel good about ourselves (not to fail to mention how they can enhance a reputation). They may even allow some to think that they are taking part in the process of real spiritual transformation in the world. And in some sense they are, but in the main these changes are more in keeping with the pulse of traditional American liberalism than with the pulse of the Spirit who is rising up everywhere in the world to shine a light on such half-meaningful and, for many, such self-serving exercises.

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto UNFEIGNED LOVE of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently...(1 Peter 1:22).

We sacrifice, as it is, our own personal comforts, and even our habit of being paid for our labors, for a week or so, or a weekend or two, and nothing on the surface seems to be wrong with it. On the contrary, everything seems to be right about it--save for the half-empty feeling so many are left with afterwards. And this because we intuitively know that something vital is missing. God's purposes, in some essential way, while they seemed to be served were not entirely served. Despite the good intentions, and the real religious motivations of many--and a good time was had by all (and reputations, as we mentioned, were enhanced)--real spiritual Community was not attained. The brief relationship between the wealthy donors and volunteers and impoverished recipients were not really forged, or hammered together in a new alliance of heart and mind, because the social and economic "hegemony" of the one group over the other was not changed. The Gospel was not served because the world remained the same, and this is the point of the matter. The motives of the sons of Darkness (into whose grasps the children of Light often fall), are not aimed at changing the world, but of only making this present world better--for themselves, and for those who participate in their world view. The difference is critical. The children of Light--those who increasingly, as Paul said, find themselves troubled on every side--seek not only for a complete renewal of the human heart but for a complete overhaul of the world's institutions as well--for the kingdom of God to arrive on earth, not for the kingdom of man to supplant it. The very best of the children of Darkness strive to merely reform this present world, while remaining content to leave its institutions, in which they have a great personal stake, and its old ways of doing business intact.

From May 18th to the 20th (2001), there was a Conference on Prophecy being held at the Cathedral of Saint John the Divine in New York City. The speakers inside the conference were among many of the leading scientific and religious thinkers of our day. At the same time there was another gathering of churchmen and women letting out, a casual parade of be-collared and be-ornamented obviously mainline Protestant ministers, all liberal in demeanor, in conversation and in appearance. As the group passed by, without so much as an inquisitive glance at the conversation that was happening on the street outside (after all, what could they possibly learn from outside their own enlightened conference, and from the "unordained" no less)? one was left with a parade of impressions running through their mind (generalizations of course, but nevertheless): proud, elitist, uniquisitive and unimaginative, rational (to a fault), well-heeled, financially secure, self-certain, intellectually arrogant, content in their own company, in a word, Carteresque.

One woman from the prophecy conference asked why this conversation was being held out here on the street, and not inside. We agreed that it was one thing to talk about God, and about the oppressed and those who are out of the way, and to spend some of one's own life devising programs to benefit the poor and the disenfranchised, but it was quite another thing to share the same living space as the poor and the working class, the same real-life conditions and experiences, the same sense of exclusion. When I mentioned to her that it was in the dynamic of the streets, and not in the hallowed halls of academia, or in the chambers of those lovely traditional and mainline churches that fill the American landscape, that the real conversations of Life, and of God, and of prophecy, were taking place, she said "thank you."


Every day in countries all over the world, people live under difficult, life-threatening circumstances caused by war, disease, famine, and poverty. The non-profit Carter Center strives to relieve this suffering by advancing peace and health in neighborhoods and nations around the globe.

The Center, in partnership with Emory University, is guided by a fundamental commitment to human rights, wages peace by bringing warring parties to the negotiating table, monitoring elections, safeguarding human rights, and building strong democracies through economic development.

It sows the seeds of peace in other ways--by fighting disease, increasing crop production, and promoting preventive health care in the United States and abroad.The goal is to help create a world where very man, woman, and child has the opportunity to enjoy good health and live in peace. Office of Public Information, The Carter Center.

It is true (and our own natural and liberal impulse is to say God bless his soul for it, and we do), Carter has intervened and used his political influence in the world to alleviate the agony of perhaps millions afflicted with the dreaded guinea-worm disease. This is a painful and life-threatening condition contracted when the larvae of this worm enters the body through, what was for so many, the almost unavoidable use of unsanitary and infected water sources. The Carter Center was able to marshall the energies and the political will of those nations afflicted with such conditions; and, using the material and simple technological resources of the West, was able to almost eradicate the disease in those areas. And along with others, he has concerned himself with the AIDS crisis in Africa. So what is to criticize? On the surface, absolutely nothing--aside from the words: ...But the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. (Proverbs 12:10). And aside, that is, from the remaining scope of Carter's global agenda, his otherwise, not so spiritually benign association with the powers of this world. Thus the fact that he will also find himself in a position to assist in arousing and marshaling the reactive energies of the Western economic (thus the political and military) order as well in a time of global crisis. (And we are referring to those global crises that God Himself is presently visiting upon the earth as it is written: I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it...until he come whose right it is; and I will give it to him...Ezekiel 21:27). Jimmy Carter thinks in three dimensions, not four; he is a man of this age, and of this present world. And because he is not a son of the age that is a-borning, or of the world to come, he finds room in his imagination for the thinking of such other fellow luminaries as Zbigniew Brzezinski:



Zbigniew Brzezinski's Latest Blueprint For American Foreign Policy

By Bernard Gwertzman

(Of course the Bush administration has its own strategy--Full Force--and is presently [and unwittingly] moving its pieces in its own way across the board. His pawns and knights [and his bishops at home], having already checkmated one king in the Middle East, are now preparing for the next match. The Great King, however--the grandest Chessmaster of them all--is still hiding behind His own forces, and has yet to loose them out of the North and the East. He is drawing the American pieces out across the Great Chessboard, extending them, entangling them, and will move before the game is over to check and checkmate).

Since the end of the cold war and the collapse of Communism, the United States has accepted the "victory" and, for better or worse, has had collective amnesia about global issues. After some 50 years during which foreign affairs commanded the highest priority in Washington and on television and the front page, the subject has virtually disappeared for most Americans. (And this was true in a sense, until September 11th, 2001. Nevertheless the neo-cons of the Reagan-Bush administrations were not asleep at their posts during the Clinton years, and were cleverly devising and inciting the very global strategy that is unfolding before our eyes at this present time).

This is true from top to bottom. President Clinton clearly pays as little attention to foreign affairs as he can get away with...For many in the foreign policy establishment, this means the public cares less and less about what they have to say. But they keep saying it anyway. And some are saying with increasing alarm: Wake up, America, before its too late.

One of those most troubled by the sudden turn in American attitudes is Zbigniew Brzezinski, who from 1977 to 1981 was President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, and who has for years been one of the more provocative thinkers about foreign affairs, particularly those dealing with the former Soviet bloc. What has bothered Brzezinski is that as a result of the Soviet collapse, the United States is the unquestionable world leader, unchallenged for the moment by any other power. But American democracy does not lend itself well to the running of empires. This has frustrated Brzezinski, who has now provided another scholarly blueprint for what he believes the United States should do in the coming years to further American interests, maintain the hegemony it commands and prevent global anarchy. For Brzezinski this is a strategic game, not unlike chess, TO OUTWIT POTENTIAL RIVALS, and hence the title of the book: The Grand Chessboard....

He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure (Recall that Brzezinski's grand strategy was laid down well before September 11th...Deuteronomy 32:16-22; Isaiah 30:25. KJV)...(Psalm 2:4,5).

...This is not the first time Brzezinski has touched on this theme. Eleven years ago he published "The Game Plan: A Geostrategic Framework for the Conduct of the U.S.-Soviet Contest." And just four years ago, in the aftermath of the Soviet disintegration, he wrote: "Out of Control: Global Turmoil on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century," which many saw as a counter to the optimistic view of the future in The End of History and the Last Man, by Francis Fukuyama...

Brzezinski, who writes convincingly if a bit inelegantly, describes a very forbidding situation in the years ahead if the United States does not make more permanent the dominance it now has over a vast area of the world. "This huge oddly-shaped Eurasian chessboard--extending from Lisbon to Vladivostok--provides the setting for the game," Brzezinski says. "IF THE MIDDLE SPACE CAN BE DRAWN INCREASINGLY INTO THE EXPANDING ORBIT OF THE WEST (where America preponderates), if the southern region is not subjected to domination by a single player, and if the East is not unified in a manner that leads to the expulsion of America from its offshore bases, AMERICA CAN THEN BE SAID TO PREVAIL...

He concludes bluntly that "the time has come for the United States to formulate and prosecute an integrated, comprehensive and long-term geostrategy FOR ALL OF EURASIA...

How the United States manages this chessboard , he says, "will be critical to the longevity and stability of America's global primacy."..."In brief," he writes, "the U.S. policy goal must be unapologetically twofold: to perpetuate America's own dominant position...and to create a geopolitical framework that can absorb the inevitable shocks and strains of social-political change while evolving into the geopolitical core of shared responsibility for peaceful global management." New York Times Book Review.

They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world (this present world that is about to pass away), and the world heareth them...(1 John 4:5).


One media organization finally has the guts to blow the lid off the hype about the liberals' patron saint, Jimmy Carter. That organization is NewsMax, and in the February issue of NewsMax Magazine you'll find out that Jimmy Carter is far from the humanitarian or "peacemaker" figure offered by the major media.

In fact, Carter has left a trail of bloodshed, war and revolution during his long career in global politics. In the February edition of NewsMax Magazine you'll get the inside story you'll find nowhere else.

(Of course in its Right Wing assessment of Jimmy Carter, NewsMax Magazine, a literary front for the American Neo-conservative agenda, stumbles headlong into its own devices and brings the entire American political order into the Light of day).

Carter will not only be in a position to assist in marshaling these forces against any perceived threats to the Western order of things (as the coming of the true Messiahs will be), but in his own unenlightened way against all the children of Light themselves--as they stand up in these crises to participate in the things that God is bringing to pass in the earth. Leaving these and a few other such things aside there is nothing to criticize and everything to praise:

"An old aphorism holds that we grow more conservative with age--but the opposite has happened with Jimmy Carter. As the Democratic party edged to the right throughout the 1980s and 90s, Carter shifted decidedly left, in part as a consequence of his experiences trying to complete his unfinished presidential agenda. By the early 1990s his liberal convictions put him philosophically closer to the former senator George McGovern than to President Bill Clinton. Again and again Carter lashed out at his own government's insensitivity to the poor at home and abroad. Carter has taken the most liberal and successful policies of his presidency--human rights, peacemaking, and concern for the poor--and made them the vortex of his own political resurrection. 'He's a pure Calvinist' (hold that thought), former UN ambassador Andrew Young maintained, 'the kind of man who's got to wake up every morning with a full schedule...He makes me feel guilty for serving on corporate boards because he's shunned all that.' On the domestic front he lobbied for better education, public health, homeless shelters, AIDS research, and environmental policies; he turned against developers and tobacco conglomerates, the 'haves' so heedless of the health and welfare of the 'have-nots.'

Until he intervened in North Korea, Haiti, and Bosnia, the American public had little idea of the magnitude of Jimmy Carter's postpresidential activities. Some of his humanitarian efforts--such as the annual Habitat for Humanity house buildings for the poor, which were aimed at whipping up publicity to goad others into volunteering--got a great deal of press. But scant fanfare attended most of the Carter Center's achievements, no matter how remarkable: who knew that as of 1998 the center had monitored elections in seventeen countries, distributed medications for preventing river blindness to over 11 million people in Africa and Latin America, and nearly eradicated some diseases from the planet? Or that Carter's personal appeals to world leaders had freed thousands of political prisoners, or that the Carter Center's Global 2000 program was feeding the hungry in Ethiopia, Sudan, Ghana, and Zimbabwe?" The Unfinished Presidency, by Douglas Brinkley, pp. 474,75.

The key to our contention lies in the Word of God which also says: In the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly. (Jeremiah 23:20). It lies in the words which say: Then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not, (Malachi 3:18), and: He shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many. (Daniel 8:25). It lies in the words of Messiah which say:

But I fear, lest by any means, as the Serpent (the great "SELF") beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ...

For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit (one which speaks of peace, but in the end will consent to war) which ye have not received, or another gospel (the gospel of American capitalism), which ye have not (before hand) accepted, ye might bear with him...

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works...(2 Corinth. 11:3-16).

The issues at hand have to do with the Nature and the Presence of God in the universe, thus the nature and the meaning of war in the earth; and with the character of the world that God is bringing into existence, and which is in fact in the very process of being born. Shall it be the Augustinian world-view triumphant: thus more and more of the same turmoils in the earth until some indeterminate time in the far distant future when the Western-Christian-now-capitalist-now-global order finally overcomes (by force, whenever and wherever it seems necessary), and subdues all of the otherwise wayward impulses of men? Or is history rising to a great climax of events? And therefore shall it be the Dialectic-Apocalyptic world view of the prophets that carries the day, in which the Glory of God is suddenly revealed? Jimmy Carter does not espouse the world-view of the Prophets, nor is he interested in the Glory of God.

Malachi, chapter 4. (Measure in Jubilees, not Gregorian years). Matthew, chapter 24 (KJV).

JIMMY CARTER, ON THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES: "Many people will be reading these pages during 1999 and 2000, as we welcome the new millennium. There will undoubtedly be numerous media stories, both secular and religious, about the significance of this turning point...There will be end-of-the-world predictions, and other religious prophecies based on selectively extracted verses from the Holy Bible, especially the Book of Revelation. (The phrase "thousand years" occurs six times just during the first seven verses of Revelation 20) This period of a millennium is not taken lightly by many sincere evangelical Christians, and there are sharp divisions generated by different interpretations of the meaning....

I DON'T CLAIM TO UNDERSTAND THE NUANCES OF THESE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE BIBLE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT JESUS CAUTIONS US NOT TO MAKE PREDICTIONS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF SCRIPTURAL EVENTS. (And therefore Jimmy Carter does not even concern himself with the subject at all). When his disciples asked him about his second coming and the end of the world, he cautioned them, 'But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only' (Matthew 24:36). Later Peter writes, 'One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day' (2 Peter 3:8).

On a number of occasions, Jesus commands us to live as though our ending was imminent. In this book, I have attempted to describe in layman's terms, as simply as possible, how my life has been affected by the words and acts of Jesus Christ, about the mistakes I've made and the lessons I've learned. PERHAPS THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST CENTURY WILL BE AN DDITIONAL INCENTIVE FOR EACH OF US TO LOOK BACK AT OUR FAMILY ROOTS." The Personal Beliefs of Jimmy Carter, by Jimmy Carter, pp. x, xi.

...Thus shall it be the continuing and beguiling ethics of the liberal and religious elite that carries the day, or shall it be a day in which man's spiritual mind, and man's highest collective human potential shall be suddenly perfected? a day in which an entirely new world order is born--one that has been forming in the womb of this world all this time--in the Darkness of this present age? If it is a birth process that is underway then Nature itself teaches us how it will unfold--in a moment. Jimmy Carter, and those he represents in the earth, and those whose views he shares, does not want this moment to happen, or this world to be born. They have another world in mind--the world of their own political and religious imaginations:

Again, the devil (his own lower nature), taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

And said unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan, for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve...(Matthew 4:8-11; Deut.6:13).

..."Most of the time it is a pleasure for me to study a suggested Scripture, consider at least overnight how best to present the lesson, read some commentaries, prepare an outline, and then meet with my class on Sunday mornings. I treat theological arguments gingerly but am bolder when it comes to connecting my religious beliefs with life and current events in the world, even when the issues are controversial...

As a new millennium approaches, WE AMERICANS face many issues within which religion, politics, and private matters tend to mix explosively. They create sharp divisions among us, in our private and public lives and even in individual religious denominations. IT SEEMS INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE ISSUES, AND EVEN THE PURELY RELIGIOUS ISSUES HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED BY POLITICIANS.

I have confronted the separation of church and state from both directions. I think often of the strong reaction of our visiting revival preacher WHEN I DECIDED TO RUN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE BACK IN 1962. He asked me, 'How can you, as a Christian, a deacon, and a Sunday school teacher, become involved in politics?' I gave him a smart-aleck response: 'I will have 75,000 people in my senate district. How would you like to have a congregation that big?'

The Teacher (Understand it in the Qumran--Dead Sea--Scrolls).

More recently, since our White House years, my move has been away politics and toward religion, BUT FOR ME THE TWO ARE STILL RELATED. There is no doubt that my having been a national leader is what attracts most visitors to my Sunday school class, and it is clear to me that these worshippers are increasingly eager TO HELP SHAPE OUR NATION'S POLITICAL AGENDA." The Personal Beliefs of Jimmy Carter, pp.7-9.

Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world (this world, and its present economic, political, and military institutions) is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God...(James 4:4).

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for had they been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not of us...(1 John 2:18,19).


He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby we know that we are in him.

He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also to walk, even as he walked (outside of the political order)...

(Therefore) Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world (this present world-system), the love of the Father is not in him.

For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the Pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world...(1 John 2: 4-6; 15,16)

One wishes here that every reader had access to the following works, and had already immersed themselves in them, in order to see and understand for themselves how the Law and the Prophets, and the Gospel of Christ that attends them, devolved in these last centuries into the doctrines, the precepts, the laws, and into the national myths and beliefs of the American nation. (Of course the process began in the time of Christ, with the words at 2 Thessalonians 2:7, KJV; or rather, it began in the garden of Eden when Eve conceived and said: I have gotten a man from the Lord...Genesis 4:1; Job 3:1-6). They are: How Christians Made Peace With War by John Driver; Paradise Lost and The Rise of the American Republic, by Lydia Dittler Schulman; The American Religion, The Emergence of the Post-Christian Nation, by Harold Bloom; The Church That Produced a President, by James and Marti Hefley; The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White; The History of the American People, by Paul Johnson; Naming the Antichrist, The History of an American Obsession, by Robert C. Fuller, and there are many others like them, including the fully entangling: The Soul of Politics, by Jim Wallis; and A Government as Good as It's People; Why Not the Best?; Turning Point, A Candidate, A State, And a Nation Come of Age; and The Personal Beliefs of Jimmy Carter, Winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize; all by Jimmy Carter. And not least among Jimmy Carter's books is, Talking Peace, with which we must fully concern ourselves shortly.

In his work, Sources of Strength, Meditations on Scripture For a Living Faith, in a chapter entitled "What it takes to Be a Christian," Carter speaks of his faith in Jesus Christ. He speaks of Christ's Plan of Salvation; of the presence of the Holy Spirit in people's lives; and "The simple but profound fact that our lives can be changed--beginning now--by professing our faith in Jesus Christ." Well what can these things mean in the context of Carter's American ethos? outside of his belief that if we give our lives over to Christ we will transformed into ideal Americans ourselves. In the chapter entitled "A Humble Servant" he quotes the verse: But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. (Matthew 23:11). He also quotes from the chapter in Isaiah which begins...

Who hath believed our report? AND TO WHOM IS THE ARM OF THE LORD REVEALED...(Isaiah 53).

...saying: "What are the consequences of our violating God's moral code?...There is a clear and disturbing answer," he goes on to say, "For the wages of sin is death. (Romans 3:23)". And then he says: "Isn't it remarkable, to see God coming to earth in this form? Not as a triumphant ruler, riding a white horse and wearing a crown, leading an army to expel the hated Romans and fulfilling human desires and ambitions (please understand Revelation 19:11-16, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9 and Isaiah 66:15,16 in light of the unfolding spiritual realities of our time), but rather as one who epitomizes unlimited forgiveness, compassion, service, peace, and love. A man, yet God, who was there when the universe was created, knowing everything, totally powerful." James Earl Carter, neglecting the entire apocalyptic dimensions of God's revelation, choosing only those texts that suit his own personal ambitions (thus betraying his inability to perceive the presence of God in all of these unfolding realities), believes in essence that he is this humble servant. He sees himself in the same global and political light in which Thomas Woodrow Wilson saw himself at the time of the First World War (Please see the chapter entitled Thomas the Contender):

"Wilson at the time of his "conversion" began to believe that he was in direct communication with God, to feel that God had chosen him for a great work and would preserve him until that work was done." Thomas Woodrow Wilson, A Psychological Study, by Sigmund Freud and William C. Bullitt, p.72.


"On March 18, Carter announced his publishing deal in New Jersey, at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs...Carter's primary motive for visiting the Garden State was to consult with scholars of the presidency, particularly distinguished American historian Arthur Link, editor of the multivolume Woodrow Wilson papers and author of several seminal works on Wilson. Buoyed by Link's encouragement, Carter left Princeton ready to write and so stimulated by his interaction with students that he gave serious consideration to becoming a university professor..." The Unfinished Presidency, p.49.

"To Clinton's wary new State Department team, Jimmy Carter apparently came across as a warmed-over Woodrow Wilson without the authority of office...

But whatever Washington thought, Jimmy Carter was a global reality. His track-two diplomacy methods were already operating in a half-dozen countries. He had already become perhaps the most admired living American worldwide and possessed stature and authority that allowed him influence unrelated to transient office." (pp,372,73).

"It was a telling moment. ALTHOUGH MOST CONSIDERED CARTER A KIND, AMIABLE MAN, HE COULD TURN NASTY IN AN INSTANT. AT TIMES HE WAS DOWNRIGHT VICIOUS; in fact. his trademark steely, laser-sharp stare usually preceded a hurtful put-down. This brusqeness--a lot like his old boss in the U.S. Navy and father of the nuclear submarine, Admiral Hyman Rickover--kept Carter's subordinates on their toes and made others take him seriously. But it did not tend to inspire deep friendships. EVEN IN THE MOST INFORMAL OF SETTINGS, CARTER HAD TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW HE WAS IN CHARGE." (see 1 Corinthians 13:3-10).(p.28).

"After securing corporate and foundation support, Carter hosted a well-publicized and creative fundraising event (for the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia) that took place at Sotheby Parke Bernet's haute auction house in New York...The auction dinner was fully underwritten by Saudi Arabian businessman AND ARMS DEALER Adnan Kashoggi, then among the world's richest men. 'I intend to spend the rest of my life working in this place,' Carter told the Sothby's crowd. 'But its not a monument to me. I consider it my contribution to MY STATE AND THE NATION for allowing me to serve as president of the United States...

While Carter still had to kowtow to the corporate and foundational worlds, for consolation he had carte blanche TO BE RUDE to the press...One TV reporter anxious to start filming said, 'Mr. President, you're too close. Could you step back a couple of feet?' Carter, his face red, shot back, 'Hell, no. You step back two feet!' The incident led, as Carter recalled, to 'a delightful realization that I didn't need to let reporters push me around anymore.'" (p.78).


"Premillenial books and newsletters have relentlessly stalked the Antichrist over the past few decades. Most sightings have taken the form of foreign leaders. The principle targets have continued to be Soviet politicians, Arab statesmen, or European aristocrats deemed likely to become leaders in the European Economic Community. All such efforts to ferret out the Beast share Dave Hunt's assumption that:

'Somewhere, at this very moment, on planet Earth, the Antichrist is almost certainly alive--biding his time, awaiting his cue... Already a mature man, he is probably active in politics, perhaps even an admired world leader whose name is almost daily on everyone's lips. Or he could be the head of a multinational corporation, or a little-known international banker.'

They also share Hunt's intuitive feel for the key quality or identifying trait that will reveal the Beast's sinister nature. HIS PUBLIC PROFESSION OF TOLERANCE, PLURALISM, ONE-WORLDISM, GLOBAL PEACE, AND ECOLOGICAL PURITY. ALL OF THEE, HUNT INSISTS IN HIS Global Peace and the Rise of Antichrist ARE ALL HALLMARKS OF THE ANTICHRIST. All belie an antipathy for the theological absolutes and rigid social boundaries that have demarcated American fundamentalism since its emergence nearly a century ago.

Hunt's identification of globalism, peace, and tolerance as 'the horrifying image of the Antichrist' tells us as much about what motivates the continuous naming of world leaders to the status of the Beast. Each Antichrist candidate has in some way been connected with the kinds of late-twentieth-century political, economic, and cultural trends that premillennialists find objectionable. Hunt, for example, concedes that there are sound economic and political reasons for promoting a more global outlook. He also concedes THAT THERE ARE REASONS TO THINK THAT A NEW SENSE OF WORLD UNITY IS NECESSARY TO RESCUE THE ENTIRE PLANET FROM ECOLOGICAL COLLAPSE. (And this is absolutely true). BUT, HUNT WARNS, THESE ARE THE REASONINGSS OF ANTICHRIST: 'UNLESS ONE IS A CHRISTIAN AND REALLY BELIEVES THAT EITHER CHRIST OR ANTICHRIST MUST RULE THE WORLD, NOTHING MAKES BETTER SENSE THAN A ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT IN SOME BENIGN FORM.'" Naming The Antichrist, by Robert Fuller, pp.182,83.

The great difference that exists between the nationalistic doctrines of American fundamentalists (the fearful-looking and largely isolationist doctrines of the Conservative Right), and the Christianity of Jimmy Carter is that Carter's vision is closer to that of Christ's than their's. It is exactly this nearness (and particularly in the mind of Carter himself) that makes him the one. (As for the Right-wing of the American church, everyone but the Christian Right itself can see how this modern phenomena has grown here in the West, not only in the ways of national, but also in the ways of personal self-interest, greed, cock-suredness, outright condemnation of others, and that it has become the fast friend of vested conservative American economic and military interests--in a word: entangled in all of the complexities of evil). Like that of the true Anointed Ones, Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter's world-view does indeed transcend national boundaries, and it certainly transcends the narrow literalism of the Conservative Right--but in the opposite, and just as twisted, mainstream intellectual way of the religious Left. However, unlike the rest of the Intellectual Left (understanding the mind of Jimmy Carter is like solving for X), Jimmy Carter truly believes that the spirit of Christ should rule the world. It is just that he does not believe in the literal coming of Christ as do others (and has no time, nor inclinations for such speculations), and therefore does not believe in the notion of Antichrist either, outside of the general and collective state of unbelief and social unrepentence that exists everywhere in the world around him. Jimmy and Rosalynn could be the true Messiahs (they have the relationship, the impulse, and the resolve), if they were not American nationalists, capitalists and militarists (which Jimmy Carter pretends not to be), and if Jimmy Carter's personal worldview was rooted in the Torah instead of in the myths and the history of the American nation (Deuteronomy 4:7-10):

Lest there be among you a man...whose heart turneth away from the Lord our God to go and serve the gods (the ideas and philosophies) of these nations; lest there be among you a root that beareth gall and wormwood (see Hebrews 6:1-8; Heb.12:13-15).

And it come to pass, when he heareth the words of this curse, that he bless himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace, though I walk in the imagination of mine heart to add drunkenness to thirst...(Deut.28:18-29).

Likewise, Jimmy Carter's theology of America is not the same as Ronald Reagan's (please read Reagan's America, by Gary Wills, and especially the chapter on "Original Sinlessness"). Carter believes in sin, personal as well as collective. Like Reagan, however, who could not recall any sin America could possibly be guilty of, Carter, could not possibly imagine how the sins of the American Nation could be rooted in its own National existence to begin with, and in its own dark persona as the American body-politic, as he says:

"The United States of America must be the world's champion of human rights. OUR HISTORY AND CHARACTER AS A NATION UNIQUELY QUALIFY US FOR THIS ROLE, and our enormous influence makes it possible for us to lead effectively. SINCE THE PRESIDENT IS, IN EFFECT, THE VOICE OF OUR COUNTRY, oppressed peoples around the world fear silence from our White House. That same type of silence is what oppressors want most..." Jimmy Carter, Speaking Peace, p.106.

Something fiercely debilitating happened between the time of Roger Williams and to the doctrines of Roger Williams, who--though perhaps the first European on American soil to champion the right of absolute free expression of thought, and of the right to follow one's own spiritual conscience in the face of both church and state--most assuredly would not have participated in the violent affairs of the American revolution (continued)...

"It was inevitable that Baptist ideas would be carried to the American colonies, where Puritans had been given their own colony in Massachusetts. The seeds were sown while Roger Williams grew up in England. Williams lived near Newgate Prison and saw ghastly executions of Baptists and other "heretics" for no crimes other than dissent. He also knew that the bloody conflict (the Thirty Years War) then raging on the Continent was between church-state regimes, battling to gain control of subject's minds...

A letter came from the Puritan congregation in Boston inquiring whether Williams would be interested in becoming their pastor. He knew that the Puritans had gone to Massachusetts to worship God according to their conscience. He hoped he would be permitted to preach what he could not in England.

Williams was not long in Boston before he realized that the Puritans wanted religious freedom only for themselves. They were more intolerant of dissenters than their Anglican cousins. He refused their pastoral call, explaining, 'I durst not officiate to an unseparated people.'

Williams took the pulpit of the liberal Salem church, which was then in rebellion against the powers in Boston. The Salem Puritans agreed with him that civil powers shouldn't be used to control conscience. (The Puritan fathers of the holy commonwealth saw it differently. They had been sent by God to build the New Israel in America. They were the agents of the theocracy, the enforcers of God's law, judge, jury, and executioner).

Williams said all the things the English Baptists had been saying and more. He attacked the Puritan laws against violation of the first table of the Ten Commandments. Whether a man worshipped a god or no god, Williams said, swore or never took an oath, went to church on the Sabbath or went fishing was none of the state's business...

And if this wasn't insult enough to the holy commonwealth, Williams preached to the aborigines that God loved them as much as He did proper Englishmen. When he found what the Indians had been paid for their lands, he gave the back of his hand to the Puritans for cheating.

The wigged heads in Boston could tolerate his meddling with the Indians; they needed his help in persuading the Indians not to attack. But calls for "absolute permission of conscience...in what is spiritual" were intolerable. They passed a law requiring all citizens of the commonwealth to take an oath of loyalty to the general court. Refusal was punishable by banishment. Williams thundered that the law was illegal and unjust. He was promptly arrested and put on trial.

Convicted, he was offered a chance to recant. He replied defiantly, 'I shall be ready...not only to be bound and banished, but to die also in New England for my convictions and for the truth as I see it.'

(What Williams in essence said, was that the church had no authority whatsoever over the private or civil lives of individuals, especially if such individuals considered themselves outside of the church itself. But also, and more critically, that the duly elected civil powers had absolutely no right in turn to govern over, or to counterdict an individual's sense of his or her's own responsibility to God. Williams set the individual conscience above both church and state).

(Later) At Providence, Williams was free to set up his own church...Thus was born in 1639 the first Baptist church in America, and it is still in existence." The Church That Produced a President, pp.27-28.

...and the doctrines of those Baptist preachers who we find more than a century later still hammering away for this right of free expression. For by this time they had clearly diminished and confounded the high intent and spirit of William's resistance to the established order by entangling themselves, and their congregations, in the now purely political, secular, and mercantile causes of a new "established order," One newly risen up. If their own cause was still a spiritual one in their own eyes the sanctity of it was entirely lost now, no less than when the early Christians joined forces with the secular powers of the world in the time of Constantine. The line was cast out again and these latter Baptists unvigilantly and unwittingly took the hook:

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to open shame.

For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:

But that which beareth thorns and briars is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned...(Hebrews 6:4-8; 1 Corinthians 3:13-15).


For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from those who live in error.

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought into bondage...(2 Peter 2:18,19).


"The fight for independence was now on, and Baptists were rallying to the cause. The eloquent John Ryland, the leading Baptist light in the mother country, said, 'If I were Washington, I would summon all the American officers, they should form a circle around me, and I would address them, and we would offer a libation in our own blood, and I would order one of them to bring me a lancet and a punch bowl and we would bare our arms and be bled; and when the bowl was full, when we had all been bled, I would call on every man to consecrate himself to the work by dipping his sword into the bowl and entering into a solemn covenant engagement by oath, one to another, and we would swear by Him that sits on the throne and liveth for ever and ever, that we would never sheath our swords while there was an English soldier in arms remaining in America.'" (This was now mainline Christian doctrine)...

Open the Book of Isaiah at the time of the American Revolution, 2 Peter, chapter 2; the Book of Jude, etc.).

..."For the Baptists the fight was not over when Cornwallis surrendered in 1781. Oppressive established churches remained in nine colonies...Baptists in the other four--Rhode Island, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey--feared a loss of the freedoms they had gained. Rhode Island, which was estimated to be two-thirds Baptist, did not even send delegates to the convention that met in Philadelphia to draw up a federal constitution (Because it lacked a bill of rights)...

In Virginia a Baptist parson named John Leland was a key figure in the fight for ratification. A native of Massachusetts, Leland had become the most influential Baptist in the Old Dominion. He was a close friend of 'Counsellor' Carter (the grandson of 'King" Carter and in a line of Carters that led to Jimmy Carter). They served on a committee to "forward the business respecting a seminary of learning.'

Leland's burning concern was to win religious liberty. He was good friends with Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, James Madison, and George Mason. Jefferson occasionally came to hear him preach and sought his counsel on legislation for church and state... " The Church That Produced a President, pp.41-43...

...all of which led to the eventual enactment of a Bill of Rights to the American Constitution, a cessation to the persecution of Baptists in the American colonies, but also to the words:

"'Baptists in Georgia started out as an outcast minority,' reflects Jack U. Harwell, editor of the Georgia Baptists Convention's weekly newspaper 'The Christian Index.' 'Now with over a million of us in the state, one of every three whites, we are the establishment. Almost every governor, sheriff, judge, ordinary (county clerk), and state legislator is a Baptist. It is the same in the other old Confederate states.'" The Church That Produced a President, p.72.

This chain of religious events leading from Roger Williams, and the founding principles of the Baptist church in America, through the American Revolution and the establishment of the American Bill of Rights, to the rise of Jimmy Carter in the American South, when understood in the historical and epic context of the Law and the Prophets, and seen in the Light of the precepts and commandments of Christ, lead us to see that no matter how vehemently Carter claims descent from the Baptists of the time of Christ (for this is what present-day Baptists claim of themselves) or even from Roger Williams (who others say was the last true Baptist in America), his spirit and his doctrines are clearly derived from those later Baptists who passed through the fires of the American Rebellion, and who came out the other side of this great Falling Away as true red-blooded American Patriots...(From Braveheart to Benjamin Martin if we may coin a modern movie phrase...BUT DEFINETLY NOT TO THE PASSION OF CHRIST). In the process they had forsaken their Center and the foundation of their own faith. This in our times is the worship of Ba'al, and it is the very same spirit that Elijah had to combat in the Book of Kings, and John the Baptist had to contend with in the time of Christ.

To The Deists.

"He can never be a friend of the Human Race who is a Preacher of Natural Morality or Natural Religion; he is a flatterer who means to betray, to perpetuate Tyrant Pride & the laws of that Babylon which he sees shall shortly be destroyed, with the Spiritual and not the Natural Sword. He is in the state of Rahab, which state he must put off before he can be a friend of man.

O ye deists, profess yourselves to be the enemies of Christianity, and you are so: you are also the enemies of the Human Race & of Universal Nature. Man is born a spectre of Satan & is altogether an evil, & requires a New Self continually, & must be continually changed into his direct counterpart. But your Greek Philosophy--which is a remnant of Druidism (in its fallen state)--teaches that man is righteous in his Vegetated Spectre; an opinion of fatal and accursed consequences to man, as the ancients saw plainly by Revelation, to the entire abrogation of Experimental Theory; and many believed what they saw, and prophecied of Jesus.

Man must & will have some Religion: if he has not the Religion of Jesus, he will have the Religion of Satan & will erect the Synagogue of Satan, calling the Prince of This World, God, and destroying all who do not worship Satan under the name of God. Where are they? Listen! Every Religion that teaches Vengeance for Sin is the Religion of the Enemy & Avenger and not the Forgiver of Sin, and their God is Satan, named by the Divine Name. Your Religion, O Deists, Deism, is the Worship of the God of This World by the means of what you call Natural Religion and Natural Philosophy, and of the Natural Morality of Self Righteousness, the Self Virtues of the Natural Heart. This was the Religion of the Pharisees who murdered Jesus. Deism is the same and ends in the same…

Those who Martyr others or who cause War are Deists, but can never be the Forgiver of Sins. The glory of Christianity is to Conquer by Forgiveness. All the Destruction, thereof, in Christian Europe has arisen from Deism, which is Natural Religion. William Blake.

And though Carter has since renounced his affiliation with the all-too-socially-conservative Southern Baptist Convention (opening the doors of his own global world-view), he is still an American (first) and a a Baptist at heart (which one cannot be at the same time and still walk in the universal precepts of Christ):


My mother's father, Jim Jack Gordy, was named after James Jackson, a Revolutionary War hero who accepted the British surrender of Savannah. Jackson was one of Georgia's first three U.S. congressmen and later served as governor and U.S. senator. Grandpa was active in local politics and was considered the most politically knowledgeable man in Webster and Stuart counties...

My father, Earl Carter, often said that he too had been a strong supporter of Franklin Roosevelt in 1932, but Daddy fiercely opposed Roosevelt's subsequent imposition of controls on cotton acreage and his limitation of the number of hogs being prepared for market. When Daddy was forced to plow up knee-high cotton and slaughter some of his growing pigs, he was deeply embittered and never again voted for a Democratic president. But in local and state elections, like all good Georgians, he continued to vote the straight Democratic ticket until his death...

Fourteen years later, far from the navy and back home in Plains, I had decided to be a candidate myself..." Turning Point, by Jimmy Carter, A Candidate, A State, And a Nation Come of Age, by Jimmy Carter, pp.3-5, 55.


Which of you by taking thought (for all these things) can add one cubit unto his stature (Jimmy Carter did)...(Matthew 6:27).


Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns (the cares of the world), and figs of thistles (the deceitfulness of riches)?

Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruiit.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them...(Matthew 7:15-20).

In a USA Weekend article entitled "How Will Jimmy Save the World?" it says:

"Jimmy Carter is dreaming big again." "In his fantasies the former president sees himself as the world's premier peacemaker, a Superman of statescraft..."

"'It is the way I plan to spend the rest of my life,' a steely voiced Carter says in his Atlanta office. 'It's a dream I don't intend to have frustrated.'"

"The missionary in Jimmy Carter still wants to perform good works. The frustrated politician is pushing for one more chance at world leadership."


"The Carter Center, he says, would not undercut the United Nations, or the State Department, but would play a unique role..."

"Is Carter's goal of global peacemaking just a pipedream? 'There is in it a kind of grandiose idea--which created problems for him as president--that one can act outside of political parameters,' observes Betty Glad, a Carter watcher and the author of a Psychological Carter Biography. 'I think its unrealistic. I don't think one can accomplish anything without having the people who have power agreeing...'"

"Even if Carter does win the title of world referee, it won't necessarily vindicate his presidency. He has made a modest comeback in scholarly circles for his emphasis on human rights and his ethical conduct in office. And defense programs he championed, such as the conventional warhead cruise missile and stealth fighter, are being praised for paying off in the Gulf War." USA Weekend, March 17, 1991.


"The presidency of Jimmy Carter, covering the years 1977 to 1980, seemed an attempt by one part of the Establishment...to recapture a disillusioned citizenry. But Carter, despite a few gestures toward Black people and the poor, despite talk of 'human rights' abroad, remained within the historic political boundaries of the American system, PROTECTING CORPORATE WEALTH AND POWER, MAINTAINING A HUGE MILITARY MACHINE THAT DRAINED THE NATIONAL WEALTH, ALLYING THE UNITED STATES WITH RIGHT-WING TYRANNIES ABROAD.

Carter seemed to be the choice of that international group of powerful influence-wielders--the Trilateral Commission. Two founding members of the commission, according to the "Far Eastern Economic Review'--David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski--thought Carter was the right person for the presidential election of 1976 given that 'the Watergate-plagued Republican Party was a sure loser...

His appeal was 'populist'--that is, he appealed to various elements of American society who saw themselves beleaguered by the powerful and wealthy. Although he himself was a millionaire peanut grower, he presented himself as an ordinary American farmer. ALTHOUGH HE HAD BEEN A SUPPORTER OF THE VIETNAM WAR UNTIL ITS END, HE PRESENTED HIMSELF AS A SYMPATHIZER WITH THOSE WHO HAD BEEN AGAINST THE WAR, and he appealed to many of the young rebels of the sixties by his promise to cut the military budget...

His most crucial appointments, however, were in keeping with the Trilateral Commission report of Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington, which said that, whatever groups voted for a president, once elected 'what counts then is his ability to mobilize support from the leaders of key institutions.' Brzezinski, a traditional cold war intellectual, became Carter's National Security Advisor. His Secretary of Defense, Harold Brown, had, during the Vietnam War, according to the 'Pentagon Papers,' 'envisioned the elimination of virtually all constraints under which the bombing then operated.'...

Under Carter, the United States continued to support, all over the world, regimes that engaged in imprisonment of dissenters, torture, and mass murder: in the Philippines, in Iran, in Nicaragua, and in Indonesia, where the inhabitants of East Timor were being annihilated in a campaign bordering on genocide...

The Carter administration (motivated not so much by a love for humanity, but by political expedience and practicality) clearly was trying to end the disillusionment of the American people after the Vietnam war by following policies more palatable (where possible), less obviously aggressive. Hence the emphasis on 'human rights.' the pressure put on South Africa and Chile to liberalize their policies. BUT ON CLOSE EXAMINATION, THESE MORE LIBERAL POLICIES WERE DESIGNED TO LEAVE INTACT THE POWER AND INFLUENCE OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY AND AMERICAN BUSINESS IN THE WORLD

Another fundamental of foreign policy, whether Democrats or Republicans were in the White House, WAS THE TRAINING OF FOREIGN MILITARY MILITARY OFFICERS. THE ARMY HAD A 'SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS' in the Canal Zone (and at Fort Benning, Georgia), FROM WHICH THOUSANDS OF MILITARY LEADERS (Death Squads) IN LATIN AMERICA HAD GRADUATED. Six of the graduates, for instance, were in the Chilean military junta that overthrew the democratically elected Allende government in 1973. The American commandant of the school told a reporter, 'We keep in touch with our graduates, and they keep in touch with us.'

Carter asked Congress in the spring of 1980 for $5.7 million in credits for the military junta fighting off a peasant rebellion in El Salvador. In the Phillipines, after the 1978 National Assembly elections, President Marcos imprisoned ten of twenty-one losing opposition candidates; many prisoners were tortured, many civilians were killed. Still, Carter urged Congress to give Marcos $300 million in military aid for the next five years..." A People's History of the United States, pp.553-560.


SALT LAKE CITY, Feb.21, 2003__Former President Jimmy Carter blamed U.S. policy in the Middle East for creating animosity abroad, BUT HE STOPPED SHORT OF TAKING A STAND ON WAR WITH IRAQ. HE SAID PUBLISHED REPORTS THAT HE HAD SIGNED A PETITION OPPOSING WAR WERE WRONG...

The former president, who won the Nobbel Peace Prize last year, has refused requests for comment since Secretary of State Colin Powell brought the U.S. case against Saddam Hussein to the U.N. Security Council. He didn't comment Thursday on Powell's address, but said Powell was "caught in difficult circumstances."


From David Podvin

Dear President Carter,

Over the weekend, you were quoted in the Columbus Ledger-Inquirer as saying, "I have the greatest personal respect for President George Bush, and also understand the difficulties and challenges of a new president." You made this comment several days after you were quoted in the same newspaper criticizing Bush for his position on missile defense, Alaskan oil drilling, and global warming.

It had been gratifying, however briefly, to hear you speak the truth about this corrupt prostitute for Big Business. That makes it even more infuriating to see you now gutlessly back down. When you say that you have "the greatest personal respect" for Bush, is this deadpan satire? Or do you literally mean that your respect for him is unsurpassed by your respect for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.? Dr. King risked his life to guarantee that African Americans would have the right to vote and to have their votes count. The man for whom you have :the greatest personal respect" deliberately prevented many black Floridians from exercising the rights that Dr. King worked so bravely to win for them....

Do you respect him because he lied about his tax cut for the rich, and because republicans now plan to raid Social Security and Medicare in order to have the elderly subsidize that immoral giveaway? Do you respect him because he lied about the "energy crisis," and helped Kenneth Lay and the Texas Natural Gas Mafia steal billions of dollars from defenseless consumers?...Do you respect him in spite of these things, or because of them?

Bush has appointed devotees of the Confederacy to his cabinet. Did this increase your respect for him? He has made an all-out assault on the environment. He lied about curbing carbon emissions. He decided in favor of more arsenic in the drinking water. He has okayed dumping of more industrial toxins into America's potable water supply. All the while he has deceitfully called himself an "avid environmentalist."

He pledged to "leave no child behind," then ruthlessly slashed funding for pediatric hospitals, day care facilities, reading programs, and child abuse prevention centers. President Carter, what does someone have to do in order to lose your "greatest personal respect?"...


By Jay Nordlinger, National Review

All right, I’ve got Carter on my mind, so look out. Why Carter? Didn’t he leave office in 1981 (the same day the mullahs decided to spring the hostages, lest RR send a few up you-know-where)? Yes, but he’s back in the news, yapping absurdly about the Middle East and getting ready to visit Castro down in Cuba (May 12 to May 17).

For several days, I rooted around in all things Carter, preparing for a piece that appears in the new NR (“There He Goes Again: Jimmy Carter, Our ‘Model Ex-President’”)...I, personally, have always been sort of fascinated by the man (and his family, and his home environs). I suppose I’ve read just about everything significant ever written about him. (Does anyone know what the phrase “Lordy, Lordy, Jim Jack Gordy” could possibly mean? If so, you are a fellow Carterologist.) I have followed Jimmy C. since the Democratic primaries of 1976. The other day, in conversation with someone, I described his chronicler Douglas Brinkley as “a great admirer of Carter who’s not blind to his faults.” I suppose I’d describe myself as a great critic of Carter’s who’s not blind to his virtues. Anyway, let’s Carter away.

For years, Carter has been a thorn in the side of presidents, acting as a kind of “anti-president,” as Lance Morrow once put it in an essay for Time. You recall how Carter irked Clinton on Haiti and North Korea. His low moment, however, came during the run-up to the Gulf War, when he wrote members of the U.N. Security Council — including Mitterrand’s France and Communist China — urging them to thwart the Bush administration’s effort. Our government found out about it when the Canadian prime minister, Brian Mulroney, called the defense secretary, Dick Cheney, and said, “What the . . .?” Some people actually allowed themselves to utter the word “treason.”

Sometimes, Carter says he would never act at odds with the government; at other times, he talks about a higher law, a duty to conscience, etc. EITHER WOULD BE FINE: BUT THE EX-PRESIDENT DOESN'T STICK TO ONE OR THE OTHER.

CARTER HAS LONG ENJOYED A REPUTATION AS A MIDDLE EAST SAGE, owing, of course, to his role in the original Camp David accords. That reputation, however, rests on shaky grounds. Truth is, Sadat and Begin had their deal worked out before ever approaching Washington. And the facilitators they used were far from saintly Southern Baptists: They used the dreadful King of Morocco and the even more dreadful Ceausescu of Romania! When they had their plan essentially worked out, however, they called the White House (WHOSE OCCUPANT JUST HAPPENED TO BE J.C.) (initials not accidental, he and his most fervent admirers have seemed to think for years). Why did they contact the White House? Prof. Bernard Lewis put it succinctly to Charlie Rose recently: “Well, obviously, they needed someone to pay the bill, and who but the United States could fulfill that function?”

Still, CARTER IS PROUD-AS-ALL-GET-OUT of his rendezvous with Middle East history. He trades on it incessantly. I remember Mario Cuomo, giving his famous...keynote address at the Democratic convention in 1984. He went down a list of Democratic presidents, lauding them: and when he got to Carter, all he could think of, apparently, was Camp David — the “nearly miraculous” accords, he called them. CARTER, in the stands, BEAMED AND BEAMED, and teared up badly.

I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER KNOWN, OR KNOWN OF, SOMEONE WHO SO NAKEDLY LOVED PRAISE. I saw him on C-SPAN once, appearing on a radio show (if you know what I mean). This was a call-in show somewhere, and the cameras were on Carter. One elderly caller began her question with a long paean to the ex-president and his special human greatness. CARTER ENJOYED IT IN A TRULY UNSEEMLY FASHION, grinning and grinning, seeming to draw his very life from it. IT WAS PERFECTLY HUMAN— PERFECTLY NATURAL— but obscene in a way. I felt almost as though I had to look away: like I was seeing something too private, something I wasn’t meant to see...

The ex-president has always considered himself screwed out of the Nobel prize, and he and his Carter Center have campaigned rather embarrassingly openly for it. He has won prizes, however, about which he crows: There was one named after his fellow liberal southerner, Fulbright; there was one from the U.N. (natch); and there was my favorite: the Zayed International Prize for the Environment, named for His Highness Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan of the United Arab Emirates! Arabs are heavy-duty funders of the Carter Center, and they get a lot for their money.

No one quite realizes just how passionately anti-Israel Carter is. William Safire has reported that Cyrus Vance acknowledged that, if he had had a second term, Carter would have sold Israel down the river. In the 1990s, Carter became quite close to Yasser Arafat. After the Gulf War, Saudi Arabia was mad at Arafat, because the PLO chief had sided with Saddam Hussein. So Arafat asked Carter to fly to Riyadh to smooth things over with the princes and restore Saudi funding to him — which Carter did...

In The Unfinished Presidency, Brinkley writes, “There was no world leader Jimmy Carter was more eager to know than Yasir Arafat.” The former president “felt certain affinities with the Palestinian: a tendency toward hyperactivity and a workaholic disposition with unremitting sixteen-hour days, seven days a week, decade after decade.” Neat, huh? At their first meeting — in 1990 — Carter boasted of his toughness toward Israel, assuring Arafat at one point, “. . . you should not be concerned that I am biased. I am much more harsh with the Israelis.” Arafat, for his part, railed against the Reagan administration and its alleged “betrayals.” Rosalynn Carter, taking notes for her husband, interjected, “You don’t have to convince us!” Brinkley records that this “elicited gales of laughter all round.” Carter himself, according to Brinkley, “agreed that the Reagan administration was not renowned as promise keepers”...

After Carter had that first meeting with Arafat, he went home and promptly served the PLO head as PR adviser and speechwriter. What do I mean? Listen to Brinkley: “On May 24 Carter drafted on his home computer the strategy and wording for a generic speech Arafat was to deliver soon for Western ears . . .” Said Carter, “THE AUDIENCE IS NOT THE SECURITY COUNCIL, BUT THE WORLD COMMUNITY. The objective of the speech should be to secure maximum sympathy and support of other world leaders . . . The Likud leaders are now on the defensive, and must not be given any excuse for continuing their present abusive policies.”

Things are a little clearer now. Carter’s op-ed piece for the New York Times last month — April 21 — was a nasty piece of work, an apologia for Arafat (despite a pro forma and unconvincing attempt at “balance”) and a mendacious attack on Sharon and Israel. His hatred for Sharon is deep, obvious, and personal. At times he seems to use the man as a proxy for Israel: in other words, it’s okay openly to despise Sharon, if it’s slightly less okay openly to despise Israel. He refers to Sharon’s “invasion” of Egypt and his “invasion” of Lebanon. Of course, Meir was prime minister in the one instance, and Begin was prime minister in the other. Sharon was a general or defense minister. Carter also forgets the annoying little detail that Israel is a democracy, and that the people of that country democratically elected Sharon their prime minister. This is in sharp contrast to the Arab states, plus the P.A., that Carter admires and excuses....

At the end of his piece, Carter calls — no surprise — for an American crackdown on our ally, Israel: Silence its weapons, threaten its aid. Carter then writes, “I understand the extreme political sensitivity in America of using persuasion on the Israelis” — which, to me, sounds an awful lot like, “Sure, that blasted Jewish lobby controls U.S. policy, as it always has — except maybe for the shining years of 1977 to 1981.” Really disgusting, this effort, and utterly revealing of Carter...

In a 1997 op-ed piece entitled “It’s Wrong to Demonize China” (also for the New York Times), Carter wrote — and forgive the awkward prose — “American criticism of China’s human rights abuses are justified, but their basis is not well understood. Westerners emphasize personal freedoms, while a stable government and a unified nation are paramount to the Chinese. This means that policies are shaped by fear of chaos from unrestrained dissidents or fear of China’s fragmentation by an independent Taiwan or Tibet. The result is excessive punishment [excessive punishment!] of outspoken dissidents and unwarranted domination of Tibetans.”...

In the same piece, Carter came very close to claiming that freedom of religion had come to China — causing activists in the field, who know the wretched truth, to groan in pain. In a 1999 op-ed piece (USA Today) called “Let’s Keep Chinese Spying in Perspective,” Carter said that “some . . . American leaders, who have habitually demonstrated animosity toward the People’s Republic of China [note the mimicking of the Communists’ own false description of themselves], have attempted to drive a deeper wedge between our two countries at what is already a troubled time.” Anyone who doesn’t demonstrate “animosity” toward that horrible state, Realpolitik or no, is no friend to mankind...

He did even better in North Korea, singing praises to Kim Il Sung, one of the most complete and destructive dictators in history. Kim’s North Korea, as Kirkpatrick says, was, and is, truly a “psychotic state.” Said Carter of the “Great Leader,” “I find him to be vigorous, intelligent, surprisingly well informed about the technical issues, and in charge of the decisions about this country” (well, he was absolute ruler). He said, “I don’t see that they [the North Koreans] are an outlaw nation.” Pyongyang, he observed, was a “bustling city,” where shoppers “pack the department stores,” reminding him of the “Wal-Mart in Americus, Georgia.”...

But Carter is not completely blinkered when it comes to brutal dictators. Here’s what he said to his interviewer and admirer James Zogby (one of America’s foremost PLO advocates) in 2001: “I think the sanctions are hurting the people of Iraq, and not Saddam Hussein, whom I consider to be a dictator, and I think an insensitive dictator [!], and he is able now to blame all of his maybe self-induced problems [“maybe self-induced”!], economically and socially, on the United States because of our sanctions and because of our fairly infrequent aerial attacks.” Friends and foes can agree on one thing: THERE'S NO ONE LIKE CARTER. NO ONE.

In a work entitled, Cycles of War, The Next Six Years, the author, R. E. McMaster Jr.--in addition to describing the details of Presidential Executive Order 11921, which continued (up until the present Homeland Security measures being put in place) to ensure the President dictatorial authority to suspend all constitutional guarantees and to enact marshall law in the event of national crises--quotes from Murray N. Rothbard's article in Reason magazine, "The Conspiracy Theory of History Revisited":

"Any time a hard-nosed analysis is put forth of who our rulers are, of how their political and economic interests interlock, it is invariably denounced by Establishment liberals and conservatives as a 'conspiracy theory of history,' 'paranoid,' 'economic determinist,' and even 'Marxist.' These smear labels are applied across the board...

Dr. Rothbard goes on to comment that the conspiracy analyst is a realist in the sense that they believe folks tend to act in their own self-interest, and that the use of government can be a very helpful means of achieving one's ends. It is naive to believe that a series of events in government, "are random and unplanned, and that therefore people do not engage in purposive choice and planning:"

..."Dr. Rothbard notes, for a case in point, that even the major newsweeklies have commented on the fact that almost all of the top leadership in Carter's administration are members of the elite Trilateral Commission, which was founded by David Rockefeller in 1973. The purpose of the Trilateral Commission is to formulate policies in the unified best interest of the United States, Japan, and Western Europe...and/or members of the Board of the Rockefeller Foundation. Mr. Carter, Mondale, and important members of the Coca-Cola company, Georgia's largest corporation, are all members of the Trilateral Commission...

Professor Rothbard concludes...'Was Jimmy Carter named a member of the Trilateral Commission as soon as it was founded because Rockefeller and others wanted to hear the wisdom of an obscure Georgia governor? Or was he plucked out of obscurity and made President by their support? Was J. Paul Austin, head of Coca-Cola, an early supporter of Jimmy Carter merely out of concern for the common good? Were all the Trilateralists...chosen by Carter simply because he felt they were the ablest people for the job? If so, it's a coincidence that boggles the mind. OR ARE THERE MORE SINISTER POLITICAL-ECONOMIC INTERESTS INVOLVED? I SUBMIT THAT THOSE WHO STUBBORNLY REFUSE TO EXAMINE THE INTERPLAY OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN GOVERNMENT ARE TOSSING AWAY THE ESSENTIAL TOOL FOR ANALYZING THE WORLD IN WHICH WE LIVE.'"

"(These men) all represent a '...deeply internationalist tradition that is part of the Eastern American Establishment'...'Liberal Internationalism is our creed,' said Fred Bergstan, Asst. Secretary of Treasury, 'AND JIMMY CARTER IS ITS PROPHET,'...

If there is one book in Carter's gospel, it is Zbigniew Brzezinski's 'Between Two Ages,'...in which Brzezinski formed the concept of a community of developed nations, that would direct the world to new levels of freedom (read, spiritual captivity), human rights, and economic progress (read unparalleled environmental destruction)..."

There are in reality no clandestine human organizations, or cartels of wealthy and powerful men, plotting in the darkened boardrooms of the Western world to overthrow the plan of God. These men are oblivious to it all, and do not even know that God has a plan. There is ultimately only one Conspirator in the Universe, God. And God's plotting throughout the course of human history has been aimed at the very heart and mind of Darkness itself. God would have us see at last that this spirit of Darkness is absolutely incapable of considering and comprehending the Presence and the Nature of Higher Reality. They pay no heed to the hidden meaning of what is actually taking place... says the document named The Coming Doom, in the Dead Sea Scriptures. Thus what appears at ground level to be an unfolding (and quite marvelously timed) conspiracy to concentrate economic and political, and military power in the hands of Western globalists and internationalists, so that they--moving ever so stealthily with the current of changing events--might assure that the coming age is established upon the foundation of their own continuing self-interest (be they economic or religious), is really not that at all. What we are actually witnessing is the full historical effect of the words in Matthew 13:24-43, where the tares are being bound in bundles. That is, where all the Sons of Darkness are being bound together--along with all those who yield to them, who participate in their world-view, and who agree in the end to go to war for them--into common states of mind, to be consumed in the judgments that are now already being visited upon the earth.

God (who is as Terrible as Nature itself, who dwells in the Sum of all natural and human events), is calling all the forces of Darkness (Gog and Magog--America and her allies) to their Feet, and summoning them to come up and meet Him in the great age-ending battle. The whole Western Order, the Realm of Antichrist, has come to its perfection now. It stands completely in opposition to the emerging spiritual Order, one that is engaged in its own birth-process at this very moment in time. (Isaiah 66; 1 Thessalonians 5). The office of the American presidency (without which this birth process could not have come to its perfect conclusion), and those who have occupied it, stand in direct opposition to the spirit of Christ in the Earth. (See Ephesians 4:13,14). McMaster's words, though written during the Carter years in the White House, still ring ominous and true:

"Probabilities indicate that the U.S. Ship of State will sail into a hurricane within six years, the captain of the ship is 'tailor made' to assume the dictatorial powers already in place...

Mr. Carter's political base is the awesome cartel of corporation and banking interests, supported by the Eastern Educational Establishment and upper echelon of Labor which brought him to power. He meets the qualifications demanded by the public that Dr. McClelland listed as necessary for a crisis and warfare leader. He is at the right place at the right time...Mr. Carter's skilled use of communications in this electronic age is unsurpassed. His absence of political debt...enables him to move independently. His stubbornness, his natural preference to work alone with attention to detail, concentrates the power in the White House, (or wherever Mr. Carter happens to be). MR. CARTER'S ENTREPRENEURIAL ABILITY, HIS COLD, CALCULATING AND POTENTIALLY RUTHLESS MODUS OPERANDI ARE BEFITTING A DICTATOR. His strict upbringing, his strong discipline, reinforced by his scientific training and military education...qualify him for military crisis management. The evolution to a concentration of power in the White House is a U.S. parallel of the development of Caesarism in Rome. History, therefore, is on his side. Last, but not least, MR. CARTER'S SOUTHERN BAPTIST 'GOD IS ON MY SIDE' MENTAL ATTITUDE FREES HIM FROM DOUBTING AND QUESTIONING HIS DECISIONS. Professor E.E. Jennings of Michigan State University, an expert on executive behavior and a longtime 'President-Watcher,' stated of Mr. Carter, '...A man on a white horse...He is a man in search of a mission...Mr. Carter has a sense of personal history...CARTER IS THE "MAXIMUM LEADER" TYPE...all he needs is a crisis.'"...

"Mr. Carter, (however), is in absolute conflict with those who brought him to power. Mr. Carter believes (so he says) in a Supreme God. The basic belief of the Trilateral Commission, the National Council of Churches, and the nation's political and economic leaders is not in a Supreme God, but in man, and in man's ability to solve his problems on his own...

Will this contentious situation endure...One may wonder if there will be a power confrontation between Mr. Carter and those who brought him to power, or if Mr. Carter remains in the Trilateral camp...

There is a chance that Mr. Carter may not be consciously aware of his conflict. He was technically trained and educated. His tendency is to function mechanically. He is not a philosopher, by training or inclination, as are not most military or business men who 'work with cold hard facts.' Carter is susceptible. With no well thought out philosophical base, such a man is easily influenced by any whim or idea that comes along...Therefore, regardless of how Mr. Carter is viewed--a man knowingly or unknowingly in conflict with those who brought him to power, a man who compromised himself and what he believes in, a man who really does not know what he believes--he is captain of a Ship of State apparently about to enter a storm. One finds great difficulty in exuding confidence that the journey will be completed safely." Cycles of War, pp.127-131.


"There is no doubt, however, that Jimmy Carter both in and out of office was more committed to arms control than was Reagan and less inclined toward military intervention. When the streets of Manhattan swelled with 80,000 demonstrators rallying against nuclear proliferation on June 12, 1982, Carter added his voice to Coretta Scott King's clarion call on the generals of war to turn their swords into ploughshares. It was a call he could justifiably make, since Carter while president had used U.S. armed forces only twice...while Reagan deployed military forces eighteen times and often much more aggressively. In his 1993 book for young adults, 'Talking Peace: A Vision for the Next Generation,' Carter lists all the Reagan military initiatives in a chapter about the insanity of making war. If Armageddon was really imminent, as Reagan warned on a number of occasions, CARTER WAS PREPARED TO BE THE LAST CHRISTIAN SOLDIER BATTLING THE PROPHECIES OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION. 'Under Reagan, military madness had taken hold,' he exaggerated later." The Unfinished Presidency, p.127.


WASHINGTON__Former President Jimmy Carter yesterday said he is opposed to bombing Iraq, fearing a military strike would be counterproductive and slaughter innocent civilians.

The White House shrugged off Carter's comments. "We respect the guy," a top Clinton aide said, "but he's always opposed to force, and sometimes there's no other option.

In an interview on CBS' "Up To The Minute" news program, Carter said airstrikes against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein "might very well cause the death of 100,000 or more totally innocent Iraqi people who are already suffering under the dictator's oppression."

Calling the use of force "counterproductive," Carter added: "I think the bombing of Iraq would be the wrong step any time in the near future. I think the best thing to do is to be firm, be patient, work with our allies and friends, put constant pressure on Iraq to force Saddam Hussein to permit UN inspections, but I think the basic and very difficult work is patience."

Carrie Harmon, a Carter spokeswoman, said the former President had taken the same position in a private meeting with Clinton in Washington last month, WHEN HE ALSO MADE CLEAR THAT HE'D SUPPORT THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF IN THE CRUNCH.

"IF WE DO GO TO WAR," Harmon said, "he would certainly be supportive of President Clinton and our troops. He is certainly aware that we only have one President at a time."

President Carter does not talk at his young audience. He takes them too serious for that...It is riveting stuff. Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Read this book and you will encounter the powerful vision of one of the greatest peace-makers in this turbulent world. Elie Wiesel.

Please discern in the following excerpts from Talking Peace whether Jimmy Carter is preparing to lead his flock by still waters in the event of a coming judgment war, or if he is rationalizing their involvement in such a war should it occur. Is he telling them to resist war, as he should be if he is a true Christian man, or actually setting them up to be destroyed in such an event with his smooth sounding words, and with his cunning and subtle talk of purpose, and resolve to propagate--not actually peace in the world, but the only hope of it in his eyes: Pax Americana, the American message throughout the earth. This is the talk, and these are the doctrines of the Antichrist:

"As a submarine officer in the U.S. Navy and later as President of the United States, I have learned firsthand about the terrible nature of war. This knowledge strengthens my personal commitment to work for the blessings of peace.

Bringing death and injuries, massive destruction of property, and the interruption of normal law and order, war is the greatest violation of basic human rights that one people can inflict upon another. Starvation, exposure, and disease caused by war often produce more casualties than the fighting itself. War touches not only soldiers in battle and leaders in government but ordinary citizens--men, women, and children--as well...

When I left the White House in 1981, my wife, Rosalynn, and I wanted to continue working for peace in the world. We founded the Carter Center, in Atlanta, Georgia, a private, nonpolitical organization that tries to help countries resolve their internal conflicts in a peaceful manner. The center does this by encouraging individuals and governments to undertake peace talks instead of resorting to civil violence or military force, and, if possible, to hold free and fair democratic elections...

But because of these numerous bloody struggles (such as in the Balkans, or in the Middle East), millions of people have lost their homes, livelihoods, and opportunities for medical care and education. Children in particular suffer--many do not know when to expect their next meal...Thousands of children and teenagers have been placed in internment camps, and many others have been forced to serve as soldiers. Even though today OUR OWN NATION is at peace, our global neighbors are feeling the ravages of war. AS AMERICANS and as fellow human beings, WE MUST TAKE ACTION to help them find an end to the conflicts destroying their lives...


A Personal Commitment

"It is one thing to say that we have the right not to be killed. It is another to say that we each have the right to live comfortably, with adequate food, health care, shelter, education, and opportunities for employment. It is even more powerful to say that we have THE RIGHT TO WORSHIP AS WE CHOOSE (as absolute pacifists? in a time of conscription?) AND TO BE GOVERNED BY LEADERS WE CHOOSE (such as the true Messiahs when they are revealed, instead of those who just pretend to the office?)...

When I was preparing for the presidency, I thought very hard about what human rights meant to me. I studied what previous presidents had believed, and learned that OUR NATION has always been strong when we have lived up to our founding ideals (now what on earth can these be?)--advocating life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not just for ourselves but for others. (?) Our commitment to BASIC human principles strengthens our ties with allies and OUR INFLUENCE in the world. In MY inaugural address, I SAID, 'Because we are free, we can never be indifferent to the fate of freedom elsewhere.'

In the area of human rights, THE UNITED STATES IN THE NATURAL LEADER among the world's more than one hundred ninety countries. WE WERE THE FIRST NATION TO BE FOUNDED UPON THESE IDEALS. We have never been perfect in our observance of human rights, but throughout our history we have consistently expanded our understanding of what human rights mean. BY SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS to prosecute human rights violators and by OUR FOREIGN POLICY, the United States can encourage a focus on human rights around the world...


And so goes the text of Jimmy Carter's Talking Peace. It speaks profusely of America, and of Jimmy Carter's own fervent belief in the sacred ideals of the American nation--a nation that was founded in bloodshed and rebellion, in manstealing and landstealing, in genocide, and in oppression and injustice, thus in gross violations of all the teachings of Christ. In the name of Jesus, however, this Teacher (see it in the Dead Sea Scrolls) does not even once suggest to the young people he is addressing in this book, that they have a 2,000 year-old commandment--not only to come out from among the nations of the world, And be ye separate, but to stand bold in the day of judgment and refuse to serve in the armed forces of any of these nations (which is nowhere near the point that Jimmy Carter is ultimately and subtly making in his discourse), or to be under the command of any world leader other than Christ. Nor does he mention the provisions of the Federal Emergency Management Act that he strengthened or helped enact into law with his approval of Executive Order 11921, which gives the president and the federal government the uncontested power, as we just mentioned, to suspend all the guarantees of free expression and assembly that he speaks of here, in the event of some national crisis (such as an all-out state of war, or perhaps the manifestation of the Messiah)?

And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. (See 2 Peter, chapter 2. KJV).

Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier...(2 Timothy 2:2-4).


PLAINS, Georgia (CNN)--Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said Thursday that NATO's bombardments of Yugoslavia have failed to achieve the alliance's stated goals, and have unleashed "horrible destruction" on Serb civilians.

"I just hate to see us continue to destroy the lives of totally innocent civilians in Serbia in a fruitless effort," he said on CNN's "Larry King Live." He called the air campaign "well-intentioned but counterproductive."


In other words, killing innocent civilians is not okay (which it most certainly is not, but in saying so it makes Carter appear to the undiscerning mind as a compassionate humanitarian and a man of peace), but killing our sons and daughters, and our brothers and sisters, in a ground operation is okay. Carter speaks from both sides of his mouth. He is a warrior at heart.

And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceedingly mighty; and the land was filled with them.

Now their rose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. (This king is the Office of the President of the United States of America in the 20th century)

And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we:

Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, AND IT COME TO PASS, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land...(Exodus 1:7-10; Ezekiel 31:18).

This day in history has come, as it is written:

According to the days of thy coming out of the land of Egypt will I shew unto him marvellous things...(Micah 7:15)


And I saw as it were a sea of glass (tranquility of heart) mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image (Daniel, chapter 2), and over his mark (Genesis 4:8-16), and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God (Psalm 137).

And they sing the Song of Moses the servant of God (Exodus 15:1-19), and the Song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints...(Revelation 15:1-3).


"In sharp contrast to the general public's perception, human rights champion Jimmy Carter was no pacifist. It should not be forgotten that the only 20th century American president who had a longer military career than Carter's...was Dwight D. Eisenhower. Carter abhorred only the unnecessary use of military force (He is a proponent of Augustine's pernicious "Just War" doctrine), and as president he worked to modernize the armed forces not to weaken them. 'I'M A MILITARY MAN BY TRAINING AND BACKGROUND, AND THE STATISTICS ARE THERE,',' he pointed out years later to rebut Reagan's claim...

Thus as Reagan prepared to take office, it was far easier for him--thanks to Carter--to rally a consensus behind his strident policies for winning the cold war, Carter tried peaceful coexistence with the Kremlin and had been betrayed. The stupidity of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan turned Carter into a hawk. As Journalist Martin Walker later wrote, 'AMERICANS SHOULD RECALL THE STEEL BENEATH THE GENTLENESS; the real historical legacy of Jimmy Carter is as one of the men who won the Cold War. Yet it was the compassion of the human rights program that had freed political prisoners across Latin America and the Soviet Union that Carter wanted to be his lasting legacy--and that is what he set his mind to upon leaving the White House." The Unfinished Presidency, pp.21-23.

"What the Carterites underestimated was the advantage Reagan gained by operating from a strict ideological framework. His positions were always clear: if it was a tax, he was against it; if it was a new weapons system, he was for it. Carter, on the other hand, was always mired in specifics, TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY HE WAS AGAINST THE B-1 BOMBER BUT FOR STEALTH FIGHTERS, and it confused people." (p.9).

A Double minded man is unstable in all his ways...(James 1:8).

"Carters inability or unwillingness to put an end to the squabbling within his administration, particularly between Vance and Brzezinski, continued to dog him after the 1980 election. While still head of the NSC, Brzezinski sparked a furor among liberal Democrats...when he appeared to embrace Reagan's choice for secretary of state--General Alexander Haig, the hawkish former NATO commander, Nixon chief of staff, and NSC deputy to Kissinger--by seconding Haig's view that it was necessary to deal toughly with the Soviets...Yet Brzezinski still remained fiercely loyal to, and even downright defensive of Carter, whom he considered A HAWK. The two men had, after all, shared a vision of infusing American foreign policy with a new realpolitik concern for human rights that would confound the Soviets, even if it was only partially successful." The Unfinished Presidency, p.93.


An interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, January 15-21, 1998

Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ("From the Shadows"), that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security advisor to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

BRZEZINSKI: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite the risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

BRZEZINSKI: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

BRZEZINSKI: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to forget it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost ten years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [insurgence], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

BRZEZINSKI: What is more important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.

BRZEZINSKI: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion in the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morroco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries. Translated by Bill Blum, author of Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II.


From whence come wars and fighting among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?

Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.

Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.

Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that friendship with the world (that is presently passing away) is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Do you think the Scriptures saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the Proud, and giveth grace unto the humble.

Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the Devil (see Math.4:1-11), and he will flee from you...(James 4: 1-7).


But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice (their sons and daughters), they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than He?...(1 Corinthians 10:20-22).


The words of his mouth was smoother than butter, but war was in his heart. His words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords...(Psalm 55:21).


"There are special admonitions concerning those who hold high public office, and I was reminded of them throughout my terms of governor and president. I remember Paul's urging Timothy to pray for 'kings, and for all that are in authority (Paul said to pray for them, not with them), that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty' (1 Timothy 2:2). I realized that any moral responsibilities I had as a Christian were greatly magnified WHEN MILLIONS OF PEOPLE COULD BE AFFECTED BY MY ACTIONS AND MY EXAMPLE.

I enjoyed being president, but during that time I felt a special burden. The questions that had to be answered in the Oval Office were the most diffiicult ones OUR NATION faced, those that could not be resolved in the offices of mayors or governors or in corporate boardrooms. KNOWING HOW MANY LIVES COULD BE AFFECTED BY MY DECISIONS, I FELT A SPECIAL NEED FOR WISDOM AND A SENSE OF GOD'S PRESENCE. Although I had a lot of advice from all sides, it was a lonely job during times of crisis or when the issues were especially controversial...

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; SO THAT HE AS GOD SITTETH IN THE TEMPLE OF GOD (in the midst of the people), SHEWING HIMSELF THAT HE IS GOD...(2 Thessalonians 2:4).


Nowadays, one of the most hotly debated historical questions is whether President Truman made the right decision in ordering the atomic bomb to be dropped on Hiroshima...The horrors of a nuclear attack are being compared with what might have happened during weeks of massive bombing with conventional forc, followed by the mainland invasion. In 1984, I was the first senior American statesman to visit Hiroshima, and I was deeply moved by the remaining evidence of destruction, and the estimates of 66,000 deaths from the attack. Clearly this was a devastating military blow with horrific human consequences. STILL, I BELIEVE THAT TRUMAN'S DECISION TO USE THE BOMB WAS CORRECT. REMEMBER, WE WERE IN A DECLARED WAR, DEFENDING DEMOCRACY, OUR NATION, AND OUR CITIZENS...

Although most Japanes strongly disagree, it seems to me, that THIS DIFFICULT DECISION HAD TWO OVERRIDING BENEFITS. Much greater invasion casualties were avoided, and the terrible evidence of atomic power has proved to be a major deterrent to its subsequent use. THUS, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE VAST, ALMOST UNIMAGINABLE EVIL OF A WORLD WAR, THE LESSER EVIL OF USING THE FIRST ATOMIC WEAPON MAY HAVE BENEFITED HUMANITY IN THE LONG RUN--THOUGH AT AN AWFUL PRICE.


...Had my Christianity been of the type that the Quakers and some others espouse, I would have been a conscientious objector rather than serve in the military. I might also never have accepted political office, (EXACTLY!) since this could have required me, as president, to send soldiers to their death. BUT PACIFISM WAS NOT MY CHOICE.


Even before my inauguration as president, I was thoroughly briefed about our military forces, and I consulted then and throughout my term with wise and knowledgeable people who shared my cautious approach to the use of our military power. MY PRIMARY COMMITMENT WAS TO PROTECT AMERICA'S INTERESTS while living peacefully with the Soviet Union. IF PEACEKEEPING EFFORTS FAILED, AS HAPPENED BEFORE WORLD WARS I AND II, I WAS PREPARED TO USE FORCE IF NECESSARY. In addition, the mutual know-ledge of our of our mighty response capability was the greatest possible deterrence to an enemy attack and the destructiveness of the alternative--A THIRD WORLD WAR. THUS, ALTHOUGH THE LIFE-AND-DEATH POWER I HELD AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF WAS SOBERING, I WAS, AND AM CONVINCED OF THE MORAL RIGHTNESS OF MAINTAINING AMERICA'S MILITARY STRENGTH." The Personal Beliefs of Jimmy Carter, pp.97-101.

My soul is among lions...even the sons of men whose teeth are as spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword...(Psalm 57:4).

Their Feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood; their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity, wasting and destruction are in their paths.

THEY WAYS OF PEACE THEY KNOW NOT, and there is no judgment in their goings; they have made them crooked paths; whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace...(Isaiah 59:7,8).


"They pay no heed to the real hidden meaning of things, but divert themselves instead with all kinds if iniquitous (thinking). They do not know the hidden meaning of what is actually taking place, not have they ever understood the lessons of the past. Consequently, they have no knowledge of what is coming upon them and have done nothing to save their souls (or the souls of others) from the deeper implications of present events.

This, however, will symbolize things for you. What is going to happen is, as it were, that all iniquity is going to be shut up in the womb and prevented from coming to birth. Wrong is going to depart before Right, as darkness departs before light. As smoke disappears and is no more, so will Wrong disappear for ever. But Right will be revealed like the Sun. The world will rest on a sure Foundation. All who cling (to error) will cease to exist. The world will be filled with knowledge, and ignorance exist no more.

The thing is certain to come. The prophecy is true, and by this you may know that it will not be revoked:

Do not all peoples hate wrongdoing? Yet, is it not rampant among them all? Are not the praises of truth sung by all nations? Yet is there a single race or tribe that really adheres to it? What nation likes to be oppressed by a stronger power? Or who wants his property plundered unjustly? Yet, is there a single nation that has not oppressed its neighbor? Or where in the world will you find a people that has not plundered the property of another? The Dead Sea Scriptures, by Theodor H. Gaster, p.429.


(Psalm 75:4-10)

Therefore thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Drink ye, and be drunken, and spue and fall, and rise no more, because of the Sword that I shall send among you.

And it shall be, if they refuse to take the cup at thine hand to drink, then thou shalt say unto them (to the warriors of the earth), Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Ye shall certainly drink.

For, lo (I have already brought evil on the City which is called by My Name), and should ye be utterly unpunished? Ye shall not be unpunished: for I will call for a Sword upon all the inhabitants of the earth, saith the Lord of hosts.

Therefore prophesy against them all these words,and say unto them, The Lord shall roar from on high, and utter His Voice from His holy habitation; He shall give a shout, as they that tread the grapes, against all the inhabitants of the earth.

A noise shall come, even to the ends of the earth (the West), for the Lord hath a controversy with the nations, He will plead with all flesh; He will give them which are wicked to the sword saith the Lord...(Jeremiah 25:27-31; 1 Thess.5).


The sound of battle (shall be) in the land, and a great destruction.

How shall the hammer of the whole earth (be) cut asunder and broken: How (will) Babylon become a desolation among the nations.

I have laid a snare for thee, and thou (shalt be also) taken, O Babylon, and thou wast not aware: thou art found and caught, because thou hast striven against the Lord...(Jeremiah 50:22-24).


Enter not in the path of wicked men, and go not in the way of evil men; for they eat the bread of wickedness, and drink the wine of violence.

But the path of the just is as the Shining Light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day...(Proverbs 4:14-18).


Do not drink wine, nor strong drink, Thou nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die. It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations...(Leviticus 10:9).


Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight.

Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink...

Therefore as the Fire devoureth the stubble, and the Flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as the dust: because they have cast away the Law of the Lord of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel...(Isaiah 5:19-24).


There is NO peace, saith the Lord, unto the wicked...(Isaiah 48:22).

And thou, profane, wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end.

Thus saith the Lord, Remove the crown...exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high.

For I will overturn, overturn, overturn it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it to him...(Ezekiel 21:25-27).


(A profile of the Antichrist)

"While not a pacifist in the Quaker or Mennonite sense, as a practicing Christian Carter took the ideas of redemption and reconciliation seriously. (Twice the American Friends Service Committee, an organization that puts into practice the beliefs of the religious Society of Friends--Quakers--nominated Carter for the Nobel Peace Prize). ALTHOUGH HE BELIEVED THAT IF AMERICA'S NATIONAL SECURITY WAS DIRECTLY THREATENED, A MILITARY RESPONSE MIGHT BE JUSTIFIABLE, it could be so only as a last resort. For all practical purposes, the former president had become a true believer in Quaker nonviolence...

The light of the body is the Eye, if therefore thine Eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

But if thine Eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light in thee be darkness then how great the Darkness...(Mth.6:22-23).

...Thus it was not surprising that Carter disapproved of every U.S. military intervention since he had left the White House...Carter's extraordinary letters of December 1990 and January 1991 promoting peace to the UN Security Council and Arab leaders, which some critics saw as tantamount to treason, exemplified just how loose a cannon Carter would let himself look if it meant preventing armed conflict.

After all, to a good Christian, there were things far worse than treason. AS CARTER WROTE IN Living Faith, 'CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS IN ORDER WHEN HUMAN LAWS ARE CONTRARY TO GOD'S COMMANDS TO US. JESUS WENT TO HIS DEATH, AND PAUL SPENT HIS FINAL YEARS IN PRISON RATHER THAN CONFORM TO RELIGIOUS AND SECULAR LAWS WHICH THEY COULD NOT ACCEPT.' These religious underpinnings informed Carter's approach to his projects, especially the dogged determination to resolve civil wars and border disputes that made his years in the White House so brazenly unique...

Washington officials saw Carter as a bull in the china shop of diplomacy; fellow Baptists thought he was continuing a time-honored missionary tradition. But Carter paid neither his critics nor his champions much mind, MARCHING TO THE BEAT OF HIS UNFAILING BELIEF IN JESUS CHRIST AS HIS PERSONAL SAVIOR... The Unfinished Presidency, pp.471-73.

I am come in my Father's Name, and ye receive me not. If another will come in his own name, him ye will receive.

How can ye believe which receiveth honour one from another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God alone...(John 5:39-44).

What is the continuing point here? What does it say:

Verily I say unto you, He that entereth not by the Door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

But he that entereth in by the Door is the shepherd of the sheep.

To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice; and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them OUT.

And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice.

And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers...

This parable spake Jesus unto them; but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.

Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, I say unto you I AM THE DOOR of the sheep.

All that came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.

I AM THE DOOR: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go In and Out, and find pasture.

The thief cometh not, but for to Steal, to Kill, and Destroy; I am come that they might have Life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

I am the Good Shepherd: the Good Shepherd giveth his life for the sheep...(John 10:1-10).

Had Jimmy Carter come through the DOOR into the Christian way of life, and not by some other (purely intellectual, and purely nationalistic) way, he would know, or at least sense what his own Master has been accomplishing in the lives of his followers all these centuries. Mark the perfect man, for the end of that man IS peace...not just talk of it. (Psalm 37:37). And with the mind of Christ he would be able to recognize the Face of his Father, the Lord of hosts, risen up in the sum of every reality, and especially in the sum of all the judgments that are attending the world at this moment in time. Had Jimmy Carter come through the DOOR he would not approach the Word with a double heart as he does. He would not be speaking of America's responsibility to assure such peace in the world in the first breath, and then of America's military responsibilities as a last resort. He would not be harboring in his heart a secret willingness to wage war in the extreme as he does. It is this very business of war itself that will separate the children of Light from the children of Darkness in the end, and Christ from Antichrist. For God is a Man of War, the Lord is his Name (Ex.15:3), and will have no other gods before him.

The great paradox is that the God of War will reveal Himself to none but children of Perfect Peace. (Hebrews 12: 13-14). Thus the children of Light resort to the Light, and refuse to kill in a day of battle and war. The children of Darkness on the other hand, despite all of their aspirations, sentiments, and lofty rhetoric, resort to the Darkness and to the commission of war in the Day of War.

"Vondel's Lucifer...is a familiar type: a self-serving political leader who camouflages his egotistical aims behind altruistic rhetoric. His flaws are the typical satanic ones: pride, envy, ambition, jealousy. He stirs up the rebellion in heaven with cunning hatched from subtlety...

But if Vondel portrays Lucifer's rebellion as egotism parading under the pretext of selfless public service and respect for law (Lucifer's grievance against God is that He has violated his own celestial hierarchy in creating and elevating man), Vondel's God is not a 'conservative,' nor is the universe He created a static hierarchy...Lucifer rebels, not because he wants change, but because he wants to preserve his original place in the celestial hierarchy, which God Himself is changing and perfecting."

"Lucifer, the stateholder, clings to the old order even if it means war, while God unfolds His infinitely complex, changing, and self-perfecting universe." Paradise Lost, The Rise of the American Republic, pp.24-26.

Had Jimmy Carter come through the DOOR he would take the Scriptures seriously, and not simply selectively as he does, and would rejoice in the words: For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord (Psalm 12:5). He would then open the Book of Psalms and apply all the words of that Book to these times as well. And he would also find himself written there, and repent. And he would see the world that he inhabits, the world of modern capitalists, political leaders, bankers, industrialists, intellectuals, and militarists written there as well--the world which he defies in his own mind, but to which he himself also belongs--and he would come out from among them. He would resign himself from all of their hapless attempts to reorder the affairs of the world, and to recreate it in their own fallen image. He would see how Hegel's dialectics have finally reached the stage of Western diabolics, and how God is now poised everywhere throughout the earth to overthrow it:

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord, and against His anointed, saying,

Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision...(Psalm 2).


Document broadens nuclear arms scenarios

MOSCOW, January, 15, 2000__Russia unveiled its new national security doctrine yesterday, broadening the Kremlin's authority to use nuclear weapons and accusing the United States of trying to weaken Russia and become the world's dominant power...

Russia's attitude to the West has hardened following the eastward expansion of NATO and the alliance's intervention in Yugoslavia and the nation's economic reform efforts have suffered serious setbacks.

Acting Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the "Concept of National Security" into law on Monday, but the full document was not published in Russian newspapers until yesterday.

The most significant change in the lengthy document...concerns the use of Russia's powerful nuclear arsenal...

The level and scale of military threats is growing," the doctrine said, as if to justify the new emphasis on the potential use of nuclear weapons...

The doctrine identifies two "mutually exclusive" trends in international relations following the end of the Cold War: one an attempt to create a mutltipolar world and the other an alleged effort led by the United States to dominate the world. The Associated Press.


Let no man (no Western leader), deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

Be ye therefore not partakers with them.

For ye were sometimes darkness, but now ye are light in the Lord...walk as the children of Light.

And have no fellowship with the Unfruitful works of Darkness, but rather reprove them.

For it is a shame to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.

But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the Light, for whatever doth make manifest is Light...

See then, that ye walk circumspectly (understand the whole matter), not as fools, but as wise.

Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

Wherefore be ye not unwise, understanding what the will of the Lord is...(Ephesians 5:8-17).


Among the many noted Americans speaking out on this grave issue were: General Andrew Goodpaster, Former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe; Walter Cronkite; Alan M. Dershowitz; Senator Alan Cranston, President, Global Security Institute; Lester Crown, Chairman, General Dynamics Corporation; Father Theodore Hesburgh, Notre Dame; Michael Douglas, Actor, UN Messenger of Peace; Martin Sheen, also an actor; Robert McNamara, Former Secretary of Defense; Ambassador James Leonard, Council on Nonproliferation and US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency; Ted Turner and the list goes on; but also among them, of course, Former President Jimmy Carter.

Among all of these leading lights Carter shines brightly (and especially since he has been finally awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace, placing him among other such noted men of peace as Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Henry Kissenger, Manachem Bagin and Yassar Arafat), and on the subject of Nuclear proliferation Carter waxes eloquent. Yet when we turn the page we read:


By Jamie McIntyre

WASHINGTON (CNN)--The US Navy will name the third and final submarine of the Seawolf class, the "USS Jimmy Carter", after the 39th President of the United States, CNN has learned...


By Susanne M. Schafer

The Former President said he first learned of the decision when he visited President Clinton at the White House in January.

"When I was in the Oval Office, he told me that he and the Secretary of the Navy had decided that they wanted to name one of the Seawolf class submarines for me," Carter said. "OBVIOUSLY, I'M HONORED."...

It will be able to conduct surveillance missions, collect intelligence information, dispatch special warfare troops, conduct mine warfare AND UNLEASH CRUISE MISSILES...Using either Tomahawk cruise missiles or Mark 48 torpedoes, "Jimmy Carter will be able to safely conduct deep strike missions while submerged far off an enemy's coast," the statement said.


Brethren, be ye followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an example.

For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you weeping; that they are enemies of the cross of Christ:

Whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.

For our conversation is in heaven (in the higher realities--the real-politic), from whence we look for the Savior, the Lord...(Philippians 3:10-21).

The Good Shepherd leads the flock by still waters..(Psalm 23).

Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made...(Genesis 3:1).

Behold, I send you forth as sheep among wolves, BE YE THEREFORE WISE AS SERPENTS AND HARMLESS AS DOVES.

But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to their councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues.

And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them, and the Gentiles.

But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak, for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak...

And ye shall be hated of all men for my Name's sake; but he that ENDURETH to the end shall be saved...(Matthew 10:16-23).

In the days of the voice of the Seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as He hath declared to His servants the prophets...(Revelation 10:7).


Please see:

The Number Six Hundred, Sixty and Six

Jimmy Carter, Just War Theorist

The Teacher of (Un)Righteousness

Carter and the Baptist World Alliance

Carter and Geneva

Carter and the Religious Right

Deep Dark Lies

The Mystery of Iniquity