2009 August 08 Saturday
Bush Invaded Iraq To Thwart Gog And Magog
Really, I am not making this up. James A. Haught reports George W. Bush pitched Jacques Chirac to join in America's religious battle against Gog and Magog.
Incredibly, President George W. Bush told French President Jacques Chirac in early 2003 that Iraq must be invaded to thwart Gog and Magog, the Bible’s satanic agents of the Apocalypse.
Honest. This isn’t a joke. The president of the United States, in a top-secret phone call to a major European ally, asked for French troops to join American soldiers in attacking Iraq as a mission from God.
Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their “common faith” (Christianity) and told him: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.”
Truth is stranger than fiction.
But even if we accept the Bible as the inerrant word of God is Bush talking sense? Nope. Bred DeLong chides Bush for misinterpreting scriptures from Revelations 20.
That George W. Bush gets Revelations so wrong--you see, Gog and Magog do not arise until 1000 years after the "first resurrection." It won't be time for Gog and Magog to show until 1000 years after an angel comes down from heaven and binds the Devil and casts him into the bottomless pit, and those who were beheaded for their witness of Jesus are resurrected and reign with Christ for a millennium.
Sure enough, I went and looked at a bunch of parallel translations of the Revelations 20 and found this translation is pretty clear that Satan will have to spend 1000 years in prison before he gathers Gog and Magog together to make war.
7 And after the thousand years, Satan will be released from his prison,
8 and he will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to the war; the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 They went up over the breadth of the earth, and surrounded the camp of the saints, and the beloved city. Fire came down out of heaven from God, and devoured them.
10 The devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are also. They will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
Bush was fighting the wrong war. Does anyone want to make the effort to read Revelations and tell us what Bush should have been fighting if not Gog and Magog? Maybe Obama is following scripture in Afghanistan? Nah, I doubt it.
Update: If we are to believe one Christian Pastor Ezekiel 38 has an assortment of nations including Libya and Iran attacking Israel but suffering defeat. It is God's will that these nations should attack. As I see it Dubya was trying to defeat God's will by undermining their ability to attack.
Chapter 38 begins with a prophecy against Gog. Verse 3 states, “I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.” In a short explanation, the names mentioned are sons of Japheth (Noah’s son). They are also the brothers of Magog, all who settled to the north of present day Israel. Vss 5,6 “Persia, Cush, and Put will be with them, all with shields and helmets, also Gomer with all its troops, and Beth Togarmah from the far north with all its’ troops- the many nations with you.” Cush is the upper Nile region (presumably northern Egypt ) and Put is modern day Libya. Gomer is another son of Japheth and Beth Togarmah is Gomer’s son. Historically, they are regarded to have originated north of the Black Sea . North of the Black Sea is present day Ukraine and the western most reaches of Russia. All put together, the nations described are currently Muslim nations that surround Israel from all sides.
Verse 8 proclaims that these nations will “invade a land that has recovered from war, whose people were gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel, which had long been desolate.” The land that is invaded can only appear to be Israel, a nation whose people have been gathering from all over the world for 50 years.
God has intended this invasion however. In vs. 16 he declares, “In days to come, O Gog, I will bring you against my land so that the nations may know me when I show myself holy though you before their eyes.” Verses 17-23 describe the exact catastrophes that will befall the invading nations. They are supernaturally destroyed and no harm is done to Israel. God will not let his people be harmed. The miraculous Six Day War of 1967 should have taught everyone that, but the world has turned a blind eye.
Go read Ezekiel 38 and see for yourself. How do you interpret it?
Can't we just for once have a reasonable choice for leader. They are all so awful. They are all so delusional. I couldn't bring myself to vote for Bush or Gore or Kerry, I finally broke down and voted for McCain just because Obama was worse.
There hasn't be a legitimate President of the United States since the electoral college was queered by the (unconstitutional) party system. The electoral college's clearly stated intent was to have uncommitted electors (in the same number as Congressmen, but specifically not to be Congressmen) sent by the State legislatures to meet in Washington for the purpose of selecting a President.
Like so much of the original intent of the Constitution, it has been out "living documented" by criminals posing as politicians.
The very phrase "faithless elector" is a Constitutional travesty.
Perhaps Chirac is off his meds.
Many Christians are Preterists, which means that they believe Jesus has already returned to Earth and most of Revelation is in the past. This used to be the dominant interpretation, I believe, but as time passed people came to think that was too boring. Even so, the time scale wouldn't really mesh with Gog and Magog being nations in the modern world (though I note there is a town named Magog in Quebec and a Gog in Afghanistan).
It has been suggested elsewhere that Bush was emulating Nixon's "madman" strategy in order to get what he wanted. Is this possible?
using the madman strategy makes sense when one is trying to intimidate an opponent, or opponents. As in President Nixon against the Soviet and Vietnamese Communists. However if one is forming a coalition and winning over potential supporters it is a counterproductive strategic choice. Rational actors are loath to join a coalition about to embark on a war under the leadership of someone who is unpredictable. Significantly President Nixon used the strategy while he was extricating the USA from a war at the lowest possible price. There was cunning and calculation in President Nixon's application of the madman stratagem.
President Nixon was also a great builder of coalitions in addition to a being a rational madman. Wooing China and allying with it was major coup for the USA and strengthened its position vis-a-vis the Soviets.
His choice of Mr. Kissinger as a National Security Advisor and later as Minister of Foreign affairs was brilliant too. Mr. Kissinger is an expert of the European order after the defeat of revolutionary France in 1814. Mr. Kissinger gave the Nixon administration credibility with the media and the academic world which were left leaning even back then. OTOH the moral shortcomings of President Nixon are well-known too.
It seems to me that the intellectual quality of the politicians of that era was significantly higher than it is now. Political parties in Europe and the USA seem to have lost the ability to recruit and retain quality human material.
The eminences grises who put Clinton, Bush II and Obama forward seem to have selected these people mostly on account of their ability to campaign and strike a chord with the American public, rather than on an ability to represent the USA internationally.
The reference to the "Camp of the Saints" in the quotation from Revelation is the source for the book by Jean Raspail of the same name. It describes prophetically the invasion of Europe by people from the Third World, but was written well before the current crisis.
The collapse of the Soviet Union made the election of Bill Clinton possible. After the USSR collapsed the American people discounted gravitas and ability to handle national security issues. During the Cold War Presidents were seen as needing to embody more masculine characteristics. An Obama would have been seen as too lightweight. Whether Dubya could have been elected during the Cold War I do not know.
if that's what Bush really said, he didn't mean Rev 20, he meant Ezekiel 38-39 which does happen before return of Jesus. This is the most common way to understand Gog and Magog, since nobody really cares about issues centuries from now. Well, if Bush were to read Ezekiel carefully, he would have seen that his help is not needed, though.
Good thing we had a president in the early part of the new millennium who understood the threat of Gog and Magog to our everyday lives. I doubt most members of the Obama administration even know who Gog and Magog are, much less understand how to defeat them. They probably don't even know the secret Stonecutter handshake either.
Even though Yahweh is all-powerful and all-knowing, he needs the help of us mortals to decipher and unquestioningly accept vague ancient scripts from schizophrenic weirdos in nomadic desert tribes (which are often miscopied or politically altered by scribes through the eons). Us mortals must support leaders who will rise up and lead our christian soldiers onward behind Field Marshall Jesus, who will drop kick us end over end through the goalposts of the Tigris and Euphrates.
Just leave it to Bush to - provided he's going to believe in some insane supernatural shit or other - pick out two beings whose names could be the names of goddamn neanderthals... or of their dieties.
Just where on the phylogenetic tree does America's most atavistic president truly belong? The question is not exactly growing simpler with time. A tangled catalog-full of contrary synapomorphies have been asserted by various authorities, and it this point it will probably take a full genome sequence before we can be 100% certain.
There is still one, and only one thing that can top this. And that is if Bush was served a pancake or omlette or something in which he discovered an incredibly realistic likeness of Jesus. And this face of Christ urged him to attack Iraq, speaking not audibly, but as a voice directly inside his mind - "just as plain and clear as I am talking to you right now."
It is possible, though not proven, that Cheney may more than once have rented a realistic God suit or possibly archangel suit from a halloween shop, and visited Bush's bedroom in the wee hours to deliver the latest divine oracles.
This entire story is based on an undocumented interview by a French reporter with a corrupt French ex-politician, both of whom are known to be anti-U.S.
Besides which - France worked overtime to prevent and undermine the war against Saddam. For instance, French emissaries lobbied the parliament of Turkey against allowing the U.S. 4th Infantry Division to attack Iraq from the north. The French threatened Turkey with a permanent ban on admission to the European Union.
Meanwhile, Chirac, who allegedly had this devastating story to reveal, said nothing about it till years later.
In any case, Bush is not a fundamentalist Christian, or a pentecostal. He's a fairly conventional Methodist.
I think the Bush is misinterpreting the words from the revelations. The war in the Iraq that he started is the perfect example for that. I think the religion and the @@fashion for play @@ concept that follows are the basic problem with the previous president of America.