Tag: no

Could Swedens 200 ft wide entrance be the bottomless pit that opens up in Hell from Revelation chapter 9 of the Bible?

Revelation chapter 9 commentary

And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace

The CELESTIAL Convergence

GEOLOGICAL UPHEAVAL: STUNNINGLY MASSIVE 200 FOOT WIDE “ENTRANCE TO HELL” OPENS UP IN SWEDEN – MYSTERIOUS HOLE IN MALMBERGET IS 150 METRES HIGH?!

 Have a look at the following image of a massive land subsidence in Sweden, that mysteriously collapse to reveal a 200 foot wide open.

Revelation chapter 9 commentary

by Don Koenig

 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.

The fifth angel sounds his trumpet and a star falls from heaven. This star has the key to the bottomless pit. Stars sometimes have a double reference to angelic beings in the scriptures. This star is called “him” so it is an angel. The angel was given the key to open up the place under the earth where fallen angels are bound (2 Pe: 2 1-10). Some think this angel is Satan and others think it is another angel. I think this angel still has the key when he locks Satan in the bottomless pit for a thousand years after the tribulation is over (Rev 20:1-2). Therefore, the angel is from God and is not Satan.

It is too soon for Satan to be cast out of heaven permanently since the Beast he incarnates when he is cast out of heaven comes out of the pit months after the time of this fifth trumpet. The Beast comes out of the pit just prior to the seventh trumpet just before he kills the two prophets who have completed their 1,260-day testimony (Rev 11:7).

If this was actually the time when Satan and his angels were cast out of heaven by Michael and his angels there should be a description of more than one star falling from heaven. This angel appears to be on an assignment and does not appear to be an angel being banished from heaven.

Although it is clear that this star is a personality, I do not think we can say that the comet had nothing to do with opening the pit in a physical sense. Physical and spiritual events can be interrelated. Mankind being limited to four dimensions cannot understand the mystery of how the physical and the spiritual are interrelated (Mat 16:19, Mat 18:18). These physical judgments on earth are the end result of spiritual prayers. We read in the last chapter that a censor containing the prayers of the saints was filled with fire by an angel. This angel cast the censor upon the earth and then these physical judgments came.

When the comet hits the earth it will penetrate the crust of the earth and open the bottomless pit. We see this physically happens on earth by the description of the great smoke that comes out of the pit that darkens the skies. The opening of the bottomless pit provides a way out for devils or demons that have been bound in the pit (by gravitational forces perhaps?).

 

3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.

The bottomless pit is opened and tormentors come on the earth. Their satanic role probably is to make life on earth so unbearable that a counterfeit savior will be accepted. Out of the smoke of the pit comes a strange type of locust upon the earth. These locusts have power like scorpions. What these beings are is not certain and I have no natural explanation. The stinging locusts last on the earth for five months. We can be sure they are demonic beings because they come out of the bottomless pit and we are told that they will have a demonic king ruling over them.

 

4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.

5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.

These locusts were commanded by God not to hurt anything green so these are not  normal locusts or any natural mutation. They sting only those who do not have the seal of God in their foreheads. The 144,000 most likely are not the only ones sealed. Those who believe and follow Jesus may also be sealed since they are also servants of God. Scripture does not tell us that believers will be sealed but I see no reason for God to let believers to be tormented by demonic beings. The fact that they are commanded and cannot harm those sealed by God say that these beings are intelligent and have no choice but to obey spiritual authority given to the angels of God.

These locusts will not be given power to kill anyone but they will have the power to torment unsealed people for five months. Some make this judgment a result of nuclear warfare. They claim that this judgment is talking about radioactive poisoning but many who suffer this do die. It is obvious from the description of these locusts that this is not what is being described. Some say that they are spiritual demons that torment man mentally but passages that follow indicate that these beings have physical form. The scorpion sting is said to be the most painful of all stings. Those on earth who are not sealed have this type of pain to look forward to for five long months.

 

6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

This is going to be so bad that people will seek death but they will not find it. Why man cannot find death is unknown but God gives and takes life. Perhaps, because the pit of hell is opened, no one can die and go there until after the five months is up. It may be 5 months of the real Night of Living Dead for people on earth.

God, for His own reasons is not allowing any unsealed person to escape this torment. I think this is the ultimate tough love program. I believe God is allowing demons to give men of flesh a five month taste of the Lake of Fire. It is given in love so they will choose not to go there for eternity when they later are required to make a choice between taking the mark of the Beast and going to this place of torments for eternity or choosing God’s Son and losing their physical lives so their soul will be saved from it. All mankind will still have another chance to come to Jesus and not choose to go to the place of eternal torments.

 

7 And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men.

8 And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.

9 And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle.

10 And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months.

11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

This passage gives the actual physical description of these creatures. They are not like anything we know. They are not helicopters or jets shooting missiles filled with chemical or biological weapons as some have speculated. These creatures come out of the smoke of the pit and the angel of the bottomless pit is ruling over them. This is not Satan because Satan at this point has not yet been cast out of heaven.

The king over these beings is named Abaddon. The name Abaddon actually means the destroyer. These locusts are led by the destroying angel who is probably Satan’s commander of the dimension called the underworld. These locusts are actual physical beings that ascend out of the same pit the angel in verse two opened with his key. The five months of this torment will be a literal hell on earth.

 

12 One woe is past; and, behold, there come two woes more hereafter.

After the five months of torment by these hellish creatures, one woe is past but there are still two more left to come when the sixth and seventh angels sound their trumpets.

 

13 And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God,

14 Saying to the sixth angel which had the trumpet, Loose the four angels which are bound in the great river Euphrates.

15 And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men.

16 And the number of the army of the horsemen were two hundred thousand thousand: and I heard the number of them.

After the sixth trumpet blast, four angels are loosed that are bound in the Euphrates River. This prophecy gives the number of the horsemen (cavalry men) that will now be allowed to pass to the east of the Euphrates to kill one third of men. The number John said he heard was two hundred million. There never was a time when such an army was possible before this generation.

Today such an army could come from the East; there are now more than three billion people east of the Euphrates River. The CIA fact book of the year 2004 said that China alone has more than two hundred million military fit men.

Abortion and infanticide of female children in China and India in this generation will create a disposable surplus of over one hundred million adult men who will have no chance for marriage and a normal family life. To a lesser extent for much the same reason there will also be surpluses of men in other countries of the Far East. It is as if these men were born for a special time to fulfill this prophecy. That is exactly what the wording of this passage implies. There will be almost enough adult men to make up this army from just the surplus males of military age that will exist in China and other Far-East nations by 2035 AD.

Some commentators think that this is an army of demons. In all cases, demons seek to possess bodies so a reasonable compromise is that two hundred million demons will come out of the pit and possess, and control this two hundred million-man army. This army will cross the Euphrates and come into the Middle East and the West. This army will kill one third of all men that survived the previous disasters on the earth. By the time the prior judgments and this second woe is completed over half of the world’s population will be dead.

Some commentators are hung up on the word horsemen thinking that all the men would have to be riding horses. Since these believe it is not possible to assemble two hundred million horses, they dredge up demons that look like men on horses. More likely, the wording simply means the leaders are mounted on horses or the men travel on something mobile (i.e. military vehicles).

 17 And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone: and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone.

18 By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.

19 For their power is in their mouth, and in their tails: for their tails were like unto serpents, and had heads, and with them they do hurt.

The description in this passage is probably only supernatural in the sense that angels were loosed for a specific time to allow this to happen and that demons are now free to deceive and inhabit those who dwell on the earth. The entire wording of this judgment makes it fairly clear to me that this is describing a great all out world war between the West and the East.

The fire that comes out of the mouths of the horsemen is every modern weapon of warfare like tanks, and artillery. The tails like serpents that had heads that did harm sound exactly like modern rockets and bombs with warheads. This will be an all out world war using nuclear, chemical and biological warfare and billions will die.

 

20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:

21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

Even after mankind uses all the weapons of warfare they made with their own hands against one another they still will not repent of the works of their hands. Instead of trusting in God to save them, they trust and worship the created instead of the Creator. Most of the East will still pray to statues that represent Buddha or countless other demon gods. Instead of obeying God’s servants on earth, they will follow doctrines given by demons. Instead of coming to God to be changed and to be given a new heart they will continue in their insane practices. Instead of worshiping the God of heaven, they will now worship the image of the Beast possessed by Satan.

Because the world did not want to believe the truth, they will now be given a lie and they will accept Satan’s counterfeit savior and his counterfeit kingdom (2Th 2:11). This deception happens because these still love to murder, use drugs, commit adultery and steal. They love evil and that is why they will not receive the truth and be saved.

Back to The Revelation index
To Revelation chapter 10

The Prophetic Years | Bible prophecy – Christian Worldviews and Commentary

3

American Hero Indiana Governor Signs Bill Allowing Citizens To Use Deadly Force Against Police Officers Into Law

With our Worlds history you will see Tyrannical Governments oppressing people!  If more Governors would think like this, America would truly be a free Nation not a slave 1984 police state!

Republican Governor Mitch Daniels has signed Senate Enrolled Act 1 into law in Indiana. The new law allows citizens to use deadly force against police officers they think are illegally entering their homes. Earlier this month, Addicting Info reported  that the bill had passed the Senate. Republicans say the bill is designed to keep police safe, but Democrats say the bill will lead to the wanton killing ofpolice officers.

 “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin (sometimes Thomas Jefferson)

 “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Thomas Jefferson

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” Thomas Jefferson  

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

“The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” Thomas Jefferson

“I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.” Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson Quotes, to me this seems to make the most sense of why this Law is a good Idea.  But as you will see in the story that I found on my facebook page disagree’s with our founding fathers Wise men who truly understood Freedom and Liberty!

“In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war* and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms*, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny.  If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”
* Note that Adams and the Founding Fathers believed they were engaged in a defensive war against tyranny.

 

Indiana Governor Signs Bill Allowing Citizens To Use Deadly Force Against Police Officers Into Law

March 23, 2012

By 

Republican Governor Mitch Daniels has signed Senate Enrolled Act 1 into law in Indiana. The new law allows citizens to use deadly force against police officers they think are illegally entering their homes. Earlier this month, Addicting Info reported  that the bill had passed the Senate. Republicans say the bill is designed to keep police safe, but Democrats say the bill will lead to the wanton killing ofpolice officers.

Rep. Craig Fry, a Democrat, says the bill “is going to cause people to die and it’s too late after somebody dies for a jury to sort it out. Somebody’s going to die, whether it’s a police officer or an individual who thinks a police officer is entering their home unlawfully. People are going to die.”

Fry’s colleague, Democratic Rep. Linda Lawson, a former police captain, says the bill would create an “open season on law enforcement,” and it is opposed by “1,250 state police officers and 14,000 men and women in blue, brown and green.”

The new law reverses a state Supreme Court ruling that homeowners do not have the right to use force against law enforcement officials who they believe are illegally entering their homes. According to the Evansville Courier Press, an Evansville resident fought a police officer who followed him into his house during a domestic dispute call. “The state Supreme Court found that officers sometimes enter homes without warrants for reasons protected by the law, such as pursuing suspects or preventing the destruction of evidence. In these situations, we find it unwise to allow a homeowner to adjudge the legality of police conduct in the heat of the moment,” the court said. “As we decline to recognize a right to resist unlawful police entry into a home, we decline to recognize a right to batter a police officer as a part of that resistance.”

While announcing his decision to sign the bill into law, Governor Daniels tried to claim that the law doesn’t declare an open season on police officers.

“Today is an important day to say: Indiana’s outstanding law enforcement officers put their lives on the line every day to protect all Hoosiers. The right thing to do is cooperate with them in every way possible. This law is not an invitation to use violence or force against law enforcement officers. In fact, it restricts when an individual can use force, specifically deadly force, on an officer, so don’t try anything. Chances are overwhelming you will be breaking the law and wind up in far worse trouble as a result.”

But Governor Daniels is merely attempting to put political spin on a bad bill. Indeed, Daniels admits that he nearly vetoed it precisely because the bill could be grossly misinterpreted and could lead to killings of police and citizens. This law is basically a loophole for citizens to kill police officers and claim self-defense. There are many people out there who think no police officers have the right to enter homes or property, even if there is a warrant.

As the state Supreme Court said, sometimes police officers have to enter homes to prevent the destruction of evidence or to prevent someone from grabbing a weapon in their home to use against police or someone else. Sometimes police must pursue suspects in their homes. But this bill reverses that ruling and gives those suspects the legal authority to slay police officers. It’s the equivalent of Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ law that led to the killing of Trayvon Martin. In that incident, George Zimmerman believed he had the legal right to gun down a kid for walking through the neighborhood simply for being a young African American male strolling around the community at night. Zimmerman, believing the innocent boy to be a threat, followed him and then shot him to death. Because of the Florida law, Zimmerman remains a free man because he can claim self-defense. This Indiana law will allow people to do the same thing to police officers on their property and in their homes. It makes the already dangerous job of law enforcement even more dangerous and will ultimately lead to the legal murder of police officers who are just trying to do their job.

2

American Coup d’état Crossing the Rubicon The Point Of No Return

Miecze.svg

The United States has ceded control of its affairs to international bureaucrats

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, March 8, 2012

Alex Jones: “This represents absolute 100 per cent proof that the military industrial complex which runs the United States is under the control of foreign central banks who are imposing a military dictatorship.”

The Pentagon is engaging in damage control after shocking testimony yesterday by DefenseSecretary Leon Panetta at a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing during which it was confirmed that the U.S. government is now completely beholden to international power structures and that the legislative branch is a worthless relic.

During the hearing yesterday Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.

Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”

The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”

Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.

“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”

Panetta’s assertion that he would seek “international permission” before ‘informing’ Congress about the actions of the US military provoked a firestorm of controversy, prompting the Pentagon to engage in damage control by claiming Panetta’s comments were misinterpreted.

  • A D V E R T I S E M E N T

“He was re-emphasizing the need for an international mandate. We are not ceding U.S. decision-making authority to some foreign body,” a defense official told CNN.

However, this is not the first time that the authority of international bodies has been framed as being superior to the US Congress and the Constitution.

In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”

Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”

Panetta’s testimony that the US looks to obtain “international permission” before it acts, allied with Obama citing the UN as the supreme authority while trashing the power of Congress, prove that the United States has ceded control over its own affairs to unelected international bureaucrats, just as the countries of the European Union have done likewise.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.

Rubicon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Rubicon (disambiguation).

Presumed course of the Rubicon

The Rubicon to the right of Cesena, at Pisciatello

The Rubicon (Latin: Rubicō, Italian: Rubicone) is a shallow river in northeasternItaly, about 80 kilometres long, running from the Apennine Mountains to the Adriatic Sea through the southern Emilia-Romagna region, between the towns of Rimini andCesena. The Latin word rubico comes from the adjective “rubeus”, meaning “red”. The river was so named because its waters are colored red by mud deposits. It was key to protecting Rome from Civil War.

The idiom “Crossing the Rubicon” means to pass a point of no return, and refers toJulius Caesar‘s army‘s crossing of the river in 49 BC, which was considered an act ofinsurrection. Because the course of the river has changed much since then, it is impossible to confirm exactly where the Rubicon flowed when Caesar and hislegions crossed it.

Contents

[hide]

[edit]History

During the Roman republic, the river Rubicon marked the boundary between theRoman province of Cisalpine Gaul to the north and Italy proper (controlled directly by Rome and its socii allies) to the south. Governors of Roman provinces were appointed promagistrates with imperium (roughly, “right to command”) in their province(s). The governor would then serve as the general of the Roman army within the territory of his province(s). Roman law specified that only the elected magistrates(consuls and praetors) could hold imperium within Italy. Any promagistrate who entered Italy at the head of his troops forfeited his imperium and was therefore no longer legally allowed to command troops.

Exercising imperium when forbidden by the law was a capital offence, punishable by death. Furthermore, obeying the commands of a general who did not legally possess imperium was also a capital offence. If a general entered Italy whilst exercising command of an army, both the general and his soldiers became outlaws and were automatically condemned to death. Generals were thus obliged to disband their armies before entering Italy.

In 49 BC, supposedly on January 10 of the Roman calendar, G. Julius Caesar led one legion, the Legio XIII Gemina, south over the Rubicon from Cisalpine Gaul to Italy to make his way to Rome. In doing so, he (deliberately) broke the law on imperium and made armed conflict inevitable. According to the historian Suetonius, Caesar uttered the famous phrase ālea iacta est (“the die has been cast”).[1] Caesar’s decision for swift action forced Pompey, the lawful consuls (G. Claudius Marcellus and L. Cornelius Lentulus Crus), and a large part of theRoman Senate to flee Rome in fear. Caesar’s subsequent victory in Caesar’s civil war ensured that punishment for the infraction would never be rendered.

Suetonius’s account depicts Caesar as undecided as he approached the river, and attributes the crossing to a supernatural apparition. The phrase “crossing the Rubicon” has survived to refer to any individual or group committing itself irrevocably to a risky or revolutionary course of action, similar to the modern phrase “passing the point of no return“.

[edit]Location confusion and resolution

After Caesar’s crossing, the Rubicon was a geographical feature of note until Emperor Augustus abolished the Province of Gallia Cisalpina(today’s northern Italy) and the river ceased to be the extreme border line of Italy. The decision robbed the Rubicon of its importance, and the name gradually disappeared from the local toponymy.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, and during the first centuries of the Middle Ages, the coastal plain between Ravenna and Rimini was flooded many times. The Rubicon, as with other small rivers of the region, often changed its course during this period. For this reason, and to supply fields with water after the revival of agriculture in the late Middle Ages, during the 14th and 15th centuries, hydraulic works were built to prevent other floods and to regulate streams. As a result of this work, these rivers eventually started flowing in straight courses, as they do today.

With the revival of interest in the topography of ancient Roman Italy during the 15th century, the matter of identifying the Rubicon in the contemporary landscape became a topic of debate among Renaissance humanists.[2] To support the claim of the Pisciatello, a spurious inscription forbidding the passage of an army in the name of the Roman people and Senate, the so-called Sanctio, was placed by a bridge on that river. The Quattrocento humanist Flavio Biondo was taken in by it;[3] the actual inscription is conserved in the Museo Archeologico, Cesena.[4] As the centuries went by, several rivers of Italian Adriatic coast between Ravenna and Rimini have at times been said to correspond to the ancient Rubicon.

The Via Aemilia (National Road N°9) still follows its original Roman course as it runs between hills and plain; it would have been the obvious course to follow as it was the only major Roman road east of the Apennine Mountains leading to and from the Po Valley. Attempts to deduce the original flow of the Rubicon can be done only by studying written documents and other archaeological evidence such as Roman milestones, which indicate the distance between the ancient river and the nearest Roman towns.

It is important to underline that the starting point of a Roman road (some kind of “mile zero”), from which distances were counted, was always the crossing between the Cardo and the Decumanus, the two principal streets in every Roman town, running north-south and east-west, respectively. In a section of the Tabula Peutingeriana, an ancient document showing the network of Roman roads, a river in north-eastern Italy labeled “fl. Rubico” is marked at a position 12 Roman miles (18 km) north of Rimini along the coastline; 18 km is the distance between Rimini and a place called “Ad Confluentes”, drawn west of the Rubicon, on the Via Aemilia.

In 1933, after various efforts spanning centuries, the river now called Fiumicino, crossing the town of Savignano di Romagna (now Savignano sul Rubicone), was officially identified as the former Rubicon. The final proof confirming this theory came only in 1991,[5] when three Italian scholars (Pignotti, Ravagli, and Donati), after a comparison between the Tabula Peutingeriana and other ancient sources (including Cicero), showed that the distance running from Rome to the Rubicon river was 320 km. Key elements of their work are:

  • The locality of San Giovanni in Compito (now a western quarter of Savignano) has to be identified with the old Ad Confluentes (“compito” means confluence of roads and it is synonymous with “confluentes”)
  • The distance between Ad Confluentes and Rome, according to the Tabula Peutingeriana, is 320 km
  • The distance from today’s San Giovanni in Compito and the Fiumicino river is 1 Roman mile (1.48 km)

[edit]Present

Today there is very little evidence of Caesar’s historical passage. Savignano sul Rubicone is an industrial town and the river has become one of the most polluted in the Emilia-Romagna region. Exploitation of underground waters along the upper course of the Rubicon has reduced its flow—it was a minor river even during Roman times (“parvi Rubiconis ad undas” as Lucan said, roughly translated “to the waves of [the] tiny Rubicon”)—and has since lost its natural route, except in its upper course between low and woody hills.

Coup d’état

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Page semi-protected
For other uses, see Coup d’état (disambiguation).
“Coup” redirects here. For other uses, see Coup (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with Coup de tête (disambiguation).
Warfare
Miecze.svg
Military history
Portal

A coup d’état (English: /ˌkuːdeɪˈtɑː/, French: [ku deta]; plural: coups d’état; translation: strike (against the) state, literally: strike/blow of state)—also known as a coup, putsch,andoverthrow—is the sudden, illegal deposition of a government,[1][2][3][4] usually by a small group of the existing state establishment—typically the military—to replace the deposed government with another body; either civil or military. A coup d’état succeeds if the usurpers establish their dominance when the incumbent government fails to prevent or successfully resist their consolidation of power. If the coup neither fully fails nor achieves overall success, the attempted coup d’état is likely to lead to a civil war.

Typically, a coup d’état uses the extant government’s power to assume political control of the country. In Coup d’État: A Practical Handbook, military historian Edward Luttwak says, “A coupconsists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder”, thus, armed force (either military or paramilitary) is not a defining feature of a coup d’état.

Contents

[hide]

Etymology

Although the coup d’état has featured in politics since antiquity, the phrase is of relatively recent coinage;[5] the Oxford Dictionary identifies it as a French expression meaning a “stroke of State”. Prof. Thomas Childers, of the University of Pennsylvania, indicates that the English language’s lacking a word denoting the sudden, violent change of government derives from England’s stable political traditions and institutions. French and German history are coloured with such politico-military actions.

Since the unsuccessful coups d’état of Wolfgang Kapp in 1920 (the Kapp Putsch), the Swiss German word Putsch (pronounced [ˈpʊtʃ]; coined for the Züriputsch of 1839) also denotes the same politico-military actions: in Metropolitan France, putsch denoted the 1942 and 1961 anti-government attacks in Algiers, and the 1991 August Putsch in the USSR; the German equivalent is Staatsstreich (the German literal translation of coup d’état), yet a putsch is not always a coup d’état, for example, the Beer Hall Putsch was by politicians without military support.

Usage of the phrase

Linguistically, coup d’état denotes a “stroke of state” (French: coup [stroke] d’ [of] État [state]).[6] Analogously, the looser, quotidian usage means “gaining advantage on a rival”, (intelligence coup, boardroom coup). Politically, a coup d’état is a usually violent political engineering, which affects who rules in the government, without radical changes in the form of the government, the political system. Tactically, a coup d’état involves control, by an active minority of military usurpers, who block the remaining (non-participant) military’s possible defence of the attacked government, by either capturing or expelling the politico-military leaders, and seizing physical control of the country’s key government offices, communications media, and infrastructure. It is to be noted that in the latest years there has been a broad use of the phrase in mass media, which may contradict the legal definition of coup d’état.

Pronunciamiento

Main article: Pronunciamiento

The Pronunciamiento (Pronouncement) is a Spanish and Latin American type of coup d’état. The coup d’état (called golpe de estado in Spanish) was more common in Spain and South America, while the Pronunciamiento was more common in Central America. ThePronunciamiento is the formal explanation for deposing the regnant government, justifying the installation of the new government that was effected with the golpe de estado. The difference between a coup and a pronunciamento is that in the former, a military faction deposes the civilian government and assumes power, in the latter, the military depose the civil government and install another civil government.[7]

History

Coups d’état are common in Africa; between 1952 and 2000, thirty-three countries experienced 85 such depositions. Western Africa had most of them, 42; most were against civil regimes; 27 were against military regimes; and only in five were the deposed incumbents killed.[8]Moreover, as a change-of-government method, the incidence of the coup d’état has declined worldwide, because usually, the threat of one suffices to effect the change of government; the military do not usually assume power, but install a civil leader acceptable to them. The political advantage is the appearance of legitimacy, examples are the collapse of the French Fourth Republic, and the change of government effected in Mauritania, on 3 August 2005, while the president was in Saudi Arabia.

Types

The political scientist Samuel P. Huntington identifies three classes of coup d’état:

A coup d’état is typed according to the military rank of the lead usurper.

  • The veto coup d’état and the guardian coup d’état are effected by the army’s commanding officers.
  • The breakthrough coup d’état is effected by junior officers (colonels or lower rank) or non-commissioned officers (sergeants). When junior officers or enlisted men so seize power, the coup d’état is a mutiny with grave implications for the organizational and professional integrity of the military.
  • In a bloodless coup d’état, the threat of violence suffices to depose the incumbent. In 1889, Brazil became a republic via bloodless coup; in 1999, Pervez Musharraf assumed power in Pakistan via a bloodless coup; and, in 2006, Sonthi Boonyaratglin assumed power inThailand as the leader of the Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy.

The self-coup denotes an incumbent government — aided and abetted by the military — assuming extra-constitutional powers. A historical example is President, then Emperor, Louis Napoléon Bonaparte. Modern examples include Alberto Fujimori, in Peru, who, although elected, temporarily suspended the legislature and the judiciary in 1992, becoming an authoritarian ruler, and King Gyanendra‘s assumption of “emergency powers” in Nepal. Another form of self-coup is when a government, having been defeated in an election, refuses to step down.

Resistance to coups d’état

Many coups d’état, even if initially successful in seizing the main centres of state power, are actively opposed by certain segments of society or by the international community. Opposition can take many different forms, including an attempted counter-coup by sections of the armed forces, international isolation of the new regime, and military intervention.

Sometimes opposition takes the form of civil resistance, in which the coup is met with mass demonstrations from the population generally, and disobedience among civil servants and members of the armed forces. Cases in which civil resistance played a significant part in defeating armed coups d’état include: the Kornilov Putsch in Russia in August 1917; the Kapp Putsch in Berlin in March 1920; and the Generals’ Revolt in Algiers in April 1961.[9] The coup in the Soviet Union on 19–21 August 1991 is another case in which civil resistance was part of an effective opposition to a coup: Boris Yeltsin, President of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, stood on top of a tank in the centre of Moscow and urged people to refuse co-operation with the coup.

Post-military-coup governments

After the coup d’état, the military face the matter of what type of government to establish. In Latin America, it was common for the post-coup government to be led by a junta, a committee of the chiefs of staff of the armed forces. A common form of African post-coup government is the revolutionary assembly, a quasi-legislative body elected by the army. In Pakistan, the military leader typically assumes the title of chiefmartial law administrator.

According to Huntington, most leaders of a coup d’état act under the concept of right orders: they believe that the best resolution of the country’s problems is merely to issue correct orders. This view of government underestimates the difficulty of implementing government policy, and the degree of political resistance to certain correct orders. It presupposes that everyone who matters in the country shares a single, common interest, and that the only question is how to pursue that single, common interest.

Current leaders who assumed power via coups d’état

Title Name Assumed office Country Area of the World
Sultan Qaboos of Oman* 23 July 1970  Oman Middle East
President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo 3 August 1979  Equatorial Guinea Sub-Saharan Africa
President Blaise Compaoré 15 October 1987  Burkina Faso Sub-Saharan Africa
President Omar Hasan Ahmad al-Bashir 30 June 1989  Sudan Sub-Saharan Africa
President Idriss Déby[10][11][12][13][14] 2 December 1990  Chad Sub-Saharan Africa
President Yahya Jammeh** 22 July 1994  The Gambia Sub-Saharan Africa
Emir Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani* 27 June 1995  Qatar Middle East
President François Bozizé** 15 March 2003  Central African Republic Sub-Saharan Africa
Acting Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama 5 December 2006  Fiji South Pacific
President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz*** 6 August 2008  Mauritania Sub-Saharan Africa
President of the High Transitional Authority Andry Rajoelina 17 March 2009  Madagascar Sub-Saharan Africa

* Monarchs who overthrew their own fathers.

** Both Jammeh and Bozizé were subsequently confirmed in office by apparently free and fair elections.[15][16] The election confirming Jammeh was marked by repression of the free press and the opposition.[17] An opposition leader described the outcome as a “sham”.[17]

*** Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz was subsequently confirmed by a narrow margin in the Mauritanian presidential election, 2009, which were regarded as “satisfactory” by international observers.

Other uses of the term

The term has also been used in a corporate context more specifically as boardroom coup. CEOs that have been sacked by behind-the-scenes maneuvering include Robert Stempel of General Motors[18][19] and John Akers of IBM, in 1992 and 1993, respectively.[20][21]

Steve Jobs attempted management coups twice at Apple Inc.; first in 1985 when he unsuccessfully tried to oust John Sculley and then again in 1997 which successfully forced Gil Amelio to resign.[22][23]

See also

References

  1. ^ Legal thought in the United States of America under contemporary pressures: Reports from the United States of America on topics of major concern as established for the VIII Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law Authors: International Academy of Comparative Law, American Association for the Comparative Study of Law Editors John Newbold Hazard, Wenceslas J. Wagner Publisher: Émile Bruylant, 1970 Length 689 pages p. 509 Quote: “But even if the most laudatory of motivations be assumed, the fact remains that the coup d’etat is a deliberately illegal act of the gravest kind and strikes at the highest level of law and order in society…”
  2. ^ Coup d’etat: a practical handbook By Edward Luttwak  p. 172 Quote: “Clearly the coup is by definition illegal, “
  3. ^ USAID [dead link]
  4. ^ Coup d’etat Definition from Auburn U.  Quote: A quick and decisive extra-legal seizure of governmental power by a relatively small but highly organized group of political or military leaders…
  5. ^ Julius Caesar’s civil war, 5 Jan 49 BC.
  6. ^ “In French “État” is capitalised, for denoting “sovereign political entity””. 66.46.185.79. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  7. ^ Edward Luttwak, Coup d’État: A Practical Handbook, Harvard University Press, 1969, 1980. ISBN 0-674-17547-6.
  8. ^ George Klay Kieh, Jr. and Pita Ogaba Agbese (eds.), The Military and Politics in Africa, Ashgate Publishing, 2004. ISBN 0754618765, pp. 44–5.
  9. ^ Adam Roberts, ‘Civil Resistance to Military Coups’, Journal of Peace Research, Oslo, vol. 12, no. 1, 1975, pp. 19-36, covers these and some other cases.
  10. ^ http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/talktojazeera/2010/05
  11. ^ “BBC News – Chad country profile” . Bbc.co.uk. 2011-05-12. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  12. ^ “Chad Conflict History – International Crisis Group” . Crisisgroup.org. 1960-08-11. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  13. ^ “IRIN Africa | CHAD: Idriss Deby, a president under siege | Conflict | Governance” . Irinnews.org. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  14. ^ “Chad – Idriss Deby, a President Under Siege” . Worldpress.org. 2006-04-19. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  15. ^ “Gambia, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices” . State.gov. 2002-03-04. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  16. ^ “Central African Republic, 2008” . Freedom House. 2004-05-10. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  17. ^ a b “The Gambia, 2008” . Freedom House. 2004-05-10. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
  18. ^ Bunkley, Nick (10 May 2011). “Robert C. Stempel Is Dead at 77; Led G.M. During a Troubled Period” . The New York Times.
  19. ^ Miller, Stephen (11 May 2011). “Engineer Ran GM in Dark Early ’90s” . The Wall Street Journal.
  20. ^ Black, Larry (27 January 1993). The Independent (London).http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/ibm-fires-akers-and-slashes-dividend-1481080.html .
  21. ^ [1]
  22. ^ Seibold, Chris (2011-05-24). “May 24, 1985: Jobs Fails to Oust Sculley” . Apple Matters. Retrieved October 8, 2011.
  23. ^ “Apple Formally Names Jobs as Interim Chief” . The New York Times (New York). September 17, 1997. Retrieved June 27, 2011.

Bibliography

1

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑