On Jan 23, 11:19 am, Glenn <gamccl...@spiritone.com> wrote:

rogue wrote:

On Jan 22, 11:17 pm, Glenn <gamccl...@spiritone.com> wrote:

rogue wrote:

On Jan 22, 5:56 am, Glenn <gamccl...@spiritone.com> wrote:

TOO SOON
I want you to understand this...
...Soon, too soon, there will by nuclear war.
This is the sign of the fourth seal.

JERRY
What are you worried about?

I'm not worried. I am, however, concerned about people I am unable to
reach, to warn, who will be taken by surprise by something they don't
see coming -- like you.

No nuclear nation but China has the
capability to reach the US with nukes yet.

Just shows you how wrong you are. Russia, Britain and France all have
the ability to drop a nuke on any nation in the world.

JERRY
Oh please, the Russians can't even find all their nukes. Britain and
France won't nuke us because they know that we have a considerably
larger nuke arsenal than they do and it would be suicide for their
nations.

You are basing your conclusion on present politics.

Britain and France will (are now) become part of Modern Rome.

The present alignment of nations will not last.

The Russians aren't going to nuke us for the same reason.
If they didn't do it when the Soviets were in charge, they won't do it
now. They are also not in any kind of upheaval in the near future
that would put nukes in the hands of someone really unstable, like the
radical Islamic version of the fundy.
The only real nuclear nation that we have to fear IMO are China and
Pakistan. China because they have no real fear of the consequences
since their leaders aren't concerned overall with the survival of
their people if they can remain in power (Remember Tianeman?) and
Pakistan because the country could find itself in radical Islamic
hands in the next 5-10 years.
Of the two, China has missiles that can reach us. Pakistan doesn't,
but Pakistan would be nuking to the West (US Forces in Afghanistan)
and southeast (India).
North Korea does have missiles that can reach our Great Northwest
region but right now they don't have nukes, though they will likely
continue to try to develop them.
For that matter, Israel is also nuclear, but they aren't going to fire
nukes at the US anymore than France or Britain.
As micro-technology continues to advance we will see more and more
cases where nuclear weapons can be planted and detonated from
suitcases. Right now it would be a very large suitcase but it can be
done. Give it another 20 years and it would likely be done in an
attache case by a nation, but not necessarily a terrorist group. They
won't have the same resources to draw upon that a government does.
Fifty years from now, a well funded terrorist group could have an
attache case bomb that can be smuggled across the border and planted
in a locker in Grand Central Station. The smuggler then hops on a
train and works his way out of town before it goes off.
However, I doubt that you or I will be alive to see it when it
happens. It is an event that can happen but if the technology to find
and stop smugglers and illegal immigrants continues to develop, as
well as technology to sweep and find explosive material, we may be
able to continue putting that terrorist act off.

The united States (omitting some acts of terrorism) will not be nuked
until about 3 1/2 years after Modern Rome declares Satan as "God", and
that event is not a threat to me.

I'm sitting in
Afghanistan, right next door to the nutcases in Pakistan. ;-)

Well, I think you have a little time, but I recommend you exit that area
as soon as you are able.

Probably by 2010.

You are right about the stability -- actually INSTABILITY of the
governments in that area. I am NOT making a prediction, but it is
entirely possible that India and Pakistan do the dirty deed. In that
event, I expect major cities to be the targets. I don't expect Pakistan
to nuke Afghanistan.

JERRY
Depends on who is in charge there. If it's the al-Qaida bunch, they
would likely nuke southern Afghanistan because they consider it Holy
Ground (owned by Muslims) and invaded by infidels. There will be
factions screaming to take out India because of the fights over the
Kashmir area but the Islamic nutcases will want to take out NATO and
the US forces as quickly as they can so they can't use their supply
centers in Bagram and Kabul to retaliate.

OTOH, Iran may use them for one of several reasons. I think those
nations with reserves of oil, and governed by Taliban / Sunni Islamist
terrorists WILL go to war to prevent European/American control of their
natural resources (Oil).

JERRY
Iran, like North Korea, will continue to try to develop the weapons,
but lots can happen in a country before they get it, including perhaps
the overthrow of the Mullahs and a return to a more democratic state
from the Islamic Republic they have now. Our intelligence agencies
say it's going to take Iran at least ten years to develop a weapon.
Even if they have the bomb, they don't have cruise delivery systems
and would be stuck with short distance ballistic missiles, so their
reach still isn't as dangerous to the US as a number of other
possibilities.
On a slightly off-topic note, the US government (and I'm speaking
primarily of the Republicans right now, since Reagan scrapped our
alternative energy plan and Bush-Cheney got into bed with the oil
companies at their very first energy meeting) has to look at creating
alternatives to fossil fuels and pushing more energy efficient
vehicles. Our love of the big SUV does nothing more than put money
into the hands of the Saudis, who use it to fund schools for the
creation of more Islamic terrorists.

I am NOT into predicting dates -- however, there are prophecies in
Daniel and Revelation which include time periods, numbers of days. These
prophecies describe a sequence of events. The use of nuclear weapons are
depicted in these prophecies.

JERRY
well, we will have to agree to disagree here, Glenn, as the only
prophecies in the bible that are checkable generally turn out to have
not come true. The rest of the open-ended ones, particularly in
Daniel and in Revelations, can be interpreted anyway you want to try
to claim they are true, much like many of the writings of
Nostradamus. In fact, I would go so far to say that Nostradamus was
more accurate than the prophecies of the bible.

What I am into, is watching a sequence of events: take, for example,
rain and flood. Floods follow too much rain, but floods do not happen
BEFORE it rains. Take, for example, a tree bearing fruit -- the buds
ripen before the fruit ripens. The Fruit does not come BEFORE the buds.

JERRY
Yet, those are much more complex than you would expect. Bagram AF
here in Afghanistan, for example. My sources tell me that the
location of the air base used to be a huge lake and all of this was
part of the storied Hindu Kush area, a traveling through place for
merchants and other travelers between the Middle East and China. When
the Soviets came in, they liked the protection afforded by the
mountains all around and they diverted the rivers and drained the lake
and built the base. (That's why the dirt here is a very, very fine
silt that gets into everything during the dry season).
At any rate, long story short, even when we don't have rain for a long
time, we may still get flooding. The water table isn't very far below
the surface here and when the snow melts off the mountains, the water
goes into the water table and raises it up in the spring and we get
floods here on the base from the water table rising even though it
hasn't rained.

Thanks for making my point: re-read the sequence you just described.

JERRY
I guess I missed your point then, Glenn. I pointed out that you don't
always need rain for floods. Sometimes what you think you perceive
isn't really what is happening.

Consider a sequence of events: WW1 and WW2 FOLLOWED a sequence of
events. 9/11 followed a sequence of events.
You are in Afghanistan as a result of a sequence of events, and you
should be able to predict the sequence of events which will get you out
of Afghanistan (or get you killed there).
What I'm trying to tell you, is watch the current sequence of events.
Human, World or natural events are NOT isolated or unconnected.

JERRY
Yeah, but that's common sense, Glenn. The only reason it appears not
to be to some people are that they don't pay attention to basic
science and basic sociology as well as read the news from unbiased
sources (give up US Broadcast news sources owned by US corporations
and check out news sources from other countries. It's an eye opener
what US citizens are NOT being told by their new agencies with an
agenda toward political parties that help give them what they want in
return for news (or lack of news) favorable to them.
What you think you are seeing in the news isn't always what is really
happening.
Likewise, what you are missing from limiting your news sources keeps
you from seeing the big picture.

I don't own a TV, and don't read the paper. You don't know what source I
use for news and information.

JERRY
I meant that part more rhetorically, Glenn. I was speaking in general,
not about you specifically. Sorry for the miscommunication.

"bob young" <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:47A33301.5F4ADF3E@netvigator.com...

Gabriel wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:50:46 -0800, Glenn
<gamcclary@spiritone.com> wrote:

Gabriel wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:56:40 -0800, Glenn
<gamcclary@spiritone.com> wrote:

TOO SOON

I want you to understand this...

...Soon, too soon, there will by nuclear war.


This is the sign of the fourth seal.

Glenn
His witness

Why don't you spend time on spreading the gospel so that people
might hear the truth of God's Law and be saved, rather than do
nothing but show us how you think you know something that Christ
said No one would know?

Logic, what the hell is THAT?

And you swear upon the name of hell as a response?

Why are you more focussed on your own logic rather than following
God's Word and spreading the gospel so that the lost might hear
it and be saved?

"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They
slander each other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and
cannot come to any sort of agreement in their teachings. Each sect
brands its own, fills the head of its own with deceitful nonsense, and
makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its side."
[R.J.Hoffmann]

[yawn]

In the words of the immutable prophet Clint Eastwood, "You're beginning to
bore the hell out of me."

Ike

On 31 Jan 2008 21:00:04 -0600, bob young
<alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote:

Gabriel wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:50:46 -0800, Glenn
<gamcclary@spiritone.com> wrote:

Gabriel wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:56:40 -0800, Glenn
<gamcclary@spiritone.com> wrote:

TOO SOON

I want you to understand this...

...Soon, too soon, there will by nuclear war.


This is the sign of the fourth seal.

Glenn
His witness

Why don't you spend time on spreading the gospel so that people
might hear the truth of God's Law and be saved, rather than do
nothing but show us how you think you know something that Christ
said No one would know?

Logic, what the hell is THAT?

And you swear upon the name of hell as a response?

Why are you more focussed on your own logic rather than following
God's Word and spreading the gospel so that the lost might hear
it and be saved?

"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other.

That you claim it's "detest" and "vilest forms of abuse" shows
you're just being plain dishonest.

They
slander each other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and
cannot come to any sort of agreement in their teachings. Each sect
brands its own, fills the head of its own with deceitful nonsense, and
makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its side."
[R.J.Hoffmann]