The man who planned 9/11, his name is Mike Harari (now 82 or 83 years old) who is a retired counterintelligence specialist and former Deputy Chief of the Mossad But I can assure you that this was done by the Freemasons.”


by TBFWS

(The Battle For World Supremacy)
April 4, 2010

Updated May 9, 2010

from BattleForWorld Website


Dimitri Khalezov, a former officer of the Soviet nuclear intelligence, expressed his knowledge about the September 11, 2001 so-called terrorist attack on the United States.

In what appears to have been a ‘revenge attack’, which was organized by an elite man with grievances against some of the things the United States has done. What Americans saw on their televisions as the 911 reporting unfolds were attacks contrived by U.S. officials in high places when the plan became known to them so that the ‘revenge attack’ that the elite man had organized could to be masked and explained away by a scripted televised show.

The footage that everyone saw showing the plane crashing into the World Trade Center (WTC) was digitally put together by the team working for the elite man and fed to the U.S. television stations on September 11.

No planes crashed into the WTC; the terrorist attack was all make-believe. And that the U.S. officials were the ones who used the situation to begin launching fake wars in the Middle-East.

Read transcription excerpts below for more information regarding Dimitri’s revelation interviews.


The Third Truth, by Dimitri Khalezov

“I seem to be the only person on this Planet who was able to provide satisfactorily explanation in regard to the WTC-1, 2 and 7 pulverizations, plus satisfactorily explanations regarding the Pentagon attack, anthrax letters, doomsday plane, the true nature of the 9/11 cover-up, and the rest of strange things that happened on that day.

My explanations have no flaws and I can answer any and every question about 9/11 that no other ‘conspiracy theorist’ could ever answer. I know the entire truth about 9/11 whether you like it or not.

To answer the second part of your questions:

Yes, I know the Chief Organizer (of 9/11) personally. Also before the 9/11. Moreover, I was so close to him that he did not invite anyone else but me alone to his early breakfast on the 12thof September 2001 (in Bangkok, while in the United States it was still the 11th of September) and there he shared a bottle from his collection of wines with me to celebrate the 9/11 event.

The chief organizer of 911 invites YOU and YOU only to a breakfast to celebrate the 911 attacks?

To continue answering your questions. Yes, it was only me alone who was invited and no one else, but it is not the main point of my story at all. The main point is that I know why the WTC was pulverized during its collapse and I can explain the process in precise detail, as well as explain in exact details any other parts of the 9/11 attack, including all seeming ‘inconsistencies’ which no one else could satisfactorily explain so far.

To be honest, I could tell you that a larger half of the Arab and Pakistani communities in Bangkok, not to mention Russian, Serbian, Iranian and others were openly celebrating the 9/11 event because it was love from first sight. The 9/11 attack was ugly judging from the point of view of the American people and from their obedient allies, but when it comes to the rest of the bipeds the 9/11 attack seems a bit beautiful in performance.

The US officials knew perfectly well who did the 9/11 and they even know WHY they were punished in such a manner. But they can not do anything against the real culprits, because it was them – the US officials, who did the most of the actual crimes related to the 9/11 event.

So, there is nothing to complain about.

What the chief organizer (Mike Harari) thinks about you now? I think he does not give a ####, neither do I. As I have told you the Americans can not even bring him (Mike Harari) to the court, because he did not do much in reality.

All he did was this: He rented offices on the necessary floors of the WTC twin towers and had explosives installed to imitate plane impacts and holes, plus he arranged for cameramen to film the ‘planes’ (he means the scenes with stand-in actors where the planes would then be digitally inserted into the video later, TBFWS Editor), plus he arranged for a missile with broken detonators to be fired into the Pentagon. Nothing more than that.

The US officials did the rest.

  • they shoot down two planes (with people onboard to publicly account for the WTC two explosions)

  • they brought remains of one plane to the Pentagon site

  • they demolished the twin towers (with human beings still inside and around)

  • moreover, they demolished the WTC-7 building

  • they sent unprotected workers to clean up ‘ground zero’

  • they sent anthrax letters implying that they were sent by Saddam Hussein emissaries, etc, etc, etc…

Just compare the amount of guilt of the real 9/11 organizers and that of the US officials.

So, the real 9/11 organizer does not give a #### really. Because all the high-ranking US officials know who did it anyway and my book would not add to their knowledge. It would only add to the knowledge of the general public.

If you think I know the entire 9/11 story, of course I do not know the entire chain of events in precise details (such as, for example, the exact details of the plane ‘hijackings’ or the names of the low-ranking Freemasons involved in the setup, or the exact details of how exactly they pressed the red buttons and who exactly convinced them to do so and on which minute and second of the day).”

(TBFWS Editor: The ‘red button’ is a reference to the trigger device built into the World Trade Center foundation just incase the building had to be demolished at a future date. After the chief planner of 911 gave the orders to set off the explosives in both of the WTC top floors, orders were later given by U.S. officials to press the red button to bring down the buildings.)


Who Did 911?

“I also would like to remind you that I am a specialist in nuclear weapons, unlike many of you. It was my profession for several years. (Who did 911?) It is not so simple as you might think.

Because the Mossad did it firstly, but not alone, and secondly not in its entirety. It was only certain individuals from the Mossad, not the entire Mossad. And it is quite complicated, indeed, so it is not so easy to explain it in a few lines.

Besides, the Mossad did only the minor part of the job. French secret service, for example, did much more than the Mossad.

Besides, all those ‘cameramen’ and ‘witnesses’ who ‘saw’ planes were not Mossad operatives, they were members of the Freemasonic sect. As well as ‘passengers’, pilots, stewardesses and many other actors involved. (TBFWS Editor: He is referring to people who were part of the script during the 9/11 operation.)

It is really a very complicated operation and I don’t know even 5% of its details.

Though I know some people from the Mossad and from the French secret services who were involved. I don’t know for sure who exactly fired the missile and from what kind of ship it was fired from.

But I can assure you that this was done by the Freemasons.”

The man who planned 9/11, his name is Mike Harari (now 82 or 83 years old) who is a retired counterintelligence specialist and former Deputy Chief of the Mossad; a former friend of the U.S. PresidentBush Senior and the former Deputy General Manuel Noriega – the Dictator of Panama.

A rare photo is posted below.



Nuclear Device For Building Demolition

Many years ago Rayelan Allen of RumorMillNews was told by her former husband Gunther Russbacher a CIA agent that a nuclear device was built into the United Nations foundation for its eventual demolition.

(And here we have Dimitri Khalezov of Russia revealing that it is standard policy in the United States to use such a device when constructing very large buildings.)

Dimitri replied:

“About the nuclear device under the U.N. building, I did not know that before, but it sounds reasonable to me. Because since the Controlled Demolition Inc. has patented nuclear technique for demolition, it would be reasonable to expect that they would promote it to get more contracts to secure more work for the future. This is capitalism, after all and everyone is after profits…

It should be noted that the nuclear weapons manufacturers are not ‘commercialized’ and to use nuclear devices on some commercial projects is a rare opportunity for them to get into some commerce too. So, why not use such an opportunity? So, I would not be surprised at all if this is true as reported by Russbacher.

Moreover, since the publication of my 9/11 movie, I’ve read even stranger news on the Internet regarding a Japanese architect who claimed that at least two skyscrapers in Japan also have nuclear devices installed under them by the Controlled Demolition Inc. (not surprising, considering that the initial architect of the WTC was a Japanese guy and he understandably brought this kind of idea back to Japan).

It looks awful, to be honest… I do remember that the U.N. building was promptly evacuated on 9/11 and it was also reported on television as a piece of important news.”

An alternative for the ‘Dimitri Khalezov Telephone Interview’ in below video:

911 Nuclear Demolition

Telephone interview to Dimitri Khalezov

http://blip.tv/play/AYHhlyUC


NOTE

Something mysterious has happened to Dimitri’s original Youtube channel.

Video links disabled by Israeli agent Owen Mark Le Winton:

All his videos were flagged to the ‘private’ setting and are no longer available to the public.

 

An imposter and obstructionist by the name of ‘Owen Mark Le Winton’ is claiming copyright on behalf of the Israeli government and Youtube believes him. Dimitri said that ‘Big Brother’ is extremely unhappy with his movie, and that hopefully the problem with the Israeli agent imposter Owen will be settled soon.

 

(Anyone can declare another person’s work as their own on Youtube. And in this case they are helping an imposter to suppress and steal another person’s original work).


“The Third Truth” by Dimitri Khalezov, Publisher: Lulu.com, ISBN: 1409288536; Edition: Paperback; 2009-11-25. (His book is not yet published. If you’re interested in a copy, email us and your contact information will be sent to an agent of the publisher.)


News

Note: Is there a connection between the Somali pirates hijacking the Russian oil tanker, the Israeli Mossad and the Russian government? Rumor has it that the Israelis are involved in the Somali pirate setup. Are members of the Mossad sending a warning to the Russian government regarding the Dimitri Khalezov revelation videos? 

Manuel Noriega Extradited To France

May 10, 2010
HUFFINGTONPOST.COM

The U.S. extradited former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega to France on Monday, clearing the way for him to stand trial there on money laundering charges.

The former strongman, who had been held in a federal prison just outside Miami, was placed on an overnight Air France flight to Paris, according to a Justice Department official who spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to comment on the case.

Noriega was ousted as Panama’s leader and put on trial following a 1989 U.S. military invasion ordered by President George H.W. Bush Sr. Noriega was brought to Miami and was convicted of drug racketeering and related charges in 1992.


Videos

from DiscloseTV Website

911 Nuclear Demolition

Dimitri Khalezov’s Nuclear Demolition Videos Being Scrubbed Off Web!

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9

Part 10

Part 11

Part 12

Part 13

Part 14

Part 15

Part 16

Part 17

Part 18

Part 19

Part 20

Part 21

Part 22

Part 23

Part 24

Part 25

Part 26

 

Additional Information

With Glen Beck You actually do get some truth from him albeit a watered down version with his truth comes the treachery like a dirty referee in a football game. He makes good calls all game until the score is tied and it’s 4th down and you have the ball on the goal line ready to score and he calls an offside penalty and moves you back or gives the other team the ball.

  • why when I get an email from Freedomworks entitled “Patriot, get your free gift from Glenn Beck” do I start searching for land in Chile
    7 people like this.

Absolutely know the the Truth about the Shroud of Turin

By:Daniel J Leach

Many claim that The Shroud of Turin is Jesus Christ but the  Knights Templar claim that this is Jacques de Molay.  I myself would like to think that this is Jesus Christ but with my research and understanding of history tend to lead me to believe that this is indeed Jacques de Molay and not Jesus Christ.

Geoffroi de Charny (the French Knight who died at the 1356 battle of Poitiers) and his wife Jeanne de Vergy are the first reliably recorded owners of the Turin Shroud. This Geoffroi participated in a failed crusade under Humbert II of Viennois in the late 1340s.[26] He is sometimes confused with Templar Geoffroi de Charney.[27]

This Section Copied from: http://blog.templarhistory.com/2010/03/the-templars-and-the-shroud-of-turin/

Any discussion of the Shroud of Turin is bound to be controversial. Those who view this sacred and holy relic fall into two camps, those that believe it to be the undisputed earthly evidence of a Christ risen and those who believe it to be a medieval forgery.

It is not the intention of this web site to cast doubt on or support the authenticity of the shroud, but rather to show its possible relationship to the Knights Templar. We receive many letters from angry people who wish to enter into lengthy debates about carbon 14 reliability. We are aware of new evidence that puts the reliability of carbon 14 dating in question, so please refrain from telling us of the findings or directing us to URLs that make the claims.

There are two theories that relate to the Templars having been involved with the Shroud, one, which would support the authenticity of the Shroud and another, which would refute it.

In 1204 the Crusaders sacked the city of Constantinople. Among them were the Knights Templar, whom some scholars contend took the Burial shroud of Jesus from the city. To support this theory, author Ian Wilson who wrote the book “The Shroud of Turin: Burial Cloth Of Jesus?” makes the claim that the head that the Templars were accused of worshipping was none other than that of Jesus. His belief is that the Shroud when folded depicted the head of Christ and was referred to as the “Mandylion.” There is a painted panel at Templecombe in England that shows a bearded head like that, which is depicted on the Mandylion.

In their two books, “The Hiram Key” and “The Second Messiah,” authors Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas paint a contrasting picture to the Mandylion theory. The authors theorize that the image on the Shroud of Turin is in fact that of the last Grand Master of the order, Jacques de Molay, who was tortured some months before his execution in 1307. The image on the shroud certainly does fit the description of de Molay as depicted in medieval wood cuts, a long nose, hair shoulder length and parted in the center, a full beard that forked at its base, not to mention the six-foot frame. De Molay was said to be quite tall.

However, many have criticized the theory on the basis that the Templar rule of order forbade the Templars from growing their hair long. What critics of the theory overlook is that during DeMolay’s seven years in prison it is highly unlikely that he would have been afforded such luxuries as good grooming.

Knight and Lomas claim that the shroud figured in the Templars rituals of figurative resurrection and that DeMolay’s tortured body was wrapped in a shroud, which the Templars kept after his death. Lomas and Knight further believe that lactic acid and blood from DeMolay’s tortured body mixed with frankincense (used to whiten the cloth) etching his image into the shroud.

When the shroud was first put on display in 1357 (50 years after the disbanding of the order) by the family of Geoffrey de Charney who was also burned at the stake with de Molay, the first people viewing the shroud recognized the image to be that of Christ.

The authors theorize that Jacques de Molay may have been tortured in a manner similar to Christ as a mockery. Certainly then, the wounds suffered by de Molay where the same as those of Jesus Christ on the Cross.

Today it is commonly believed by many, through carbon dating, that the shroud dates to the late 13th century and not to the date of Christ’s supposed crucifixion. It is interesting that the church revealed these carbon dating results on October 13th, 1989, which is the same day the Templars were arrested by Church and State. According to the authors:

“Carbon dating has conclusively shown that the Shroud of Turin dates from between 1260 and 1380, precisely as we would expect if it were the image of Jacques de Molay. There is no other known theory that fits the scientifically established facts. Through experimentation, we know that the figure on the Shroud was on a soft bed of some kind, which strongly suggests that the victim was not dead and was expected to recover.”

The Second Messiah pg. 161 – Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas

Regardless of whether the findings of Ian Wilson or Knight and Lomas are correct, it is evident that this most holy and venerated relic has found its way into the Templar mythos.

Lynn Picknet and Clive Prince, authors of “Turin Shroud: In Whose Image?” present another theory of interest on the matter. Readers will recognize the authors from the book, “The Templar Revelation.” In the authors’ earlier book the duo claim that Leonardo Da Vinci who created an early photographic technique manufactured the image on the shroud of Turin.

Stephanie Pappas
Live Science
Thu, 05 Apr 2012 17:01 CDT
Print

Shroud of Turin

© Public domain
Full-length negative photograph of the Shroud of Turin.

A hoax or a miracle? The Shroud of Turin has inspired this question for centuries. Now, an art historian says this piece of cloth, said to bear the imprint of the crucified body of Jesus Christ, may be something in between.

According to Thomas de Wesselow, formerly of Cambridge University, the controversial shroud is no medieval forgery, as a 1989 attempt at radiocarbon dating suggests. Nor is the strange outline of the body on the fabric a miracle, de Wesselow writes in his new book, The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection (Dutton Adult, 2012). Instead, de Wesselow suggests, the shroud was created by natural chemical processes – and then interpreted by Jesus’ followers as a sign of his resurrection.

“People in the past did not view images as just the mundane things that we see them as today. They were potentially alive. They were seen as sources of power,” de Wesselow told LiveScience. The image of Jesus found on the shroud would have been seen as a “living double,” he said. “It seemed like they had a living double after his death and therefore it was seen as Jesus resurrected.”

Believing the shroud

As de Wesselow is quick to admit, this idea is only a hypothesis. No one has tested whether a decomposing body could leave an imprint on shroud-style cloth like the one seen on the shroud. A 2003 paper published in the journal Melanoidins in Food and Health, however, posited that chemicals from the body could react with carbohydrates on the cloth, resulting in a browning reaction similar to the one seen on baked bread. (De Wesselow said he knows of no plans to conduct an experiment to discover if this idea really works.)

Perhaps more problematic is the authenticity of the shroud itself. Radiocarbon dating conducted in 1988 estimated the shroud to medieval times, between approximately A.D. 1260 and 1390. This is also the same time period when records of the shroud begin to appear, suggesting a forgery.

Critics have charged that the researchers who dated the shroud accidentally chose asample of fabric added to the shroud during repairs in the medieval era, skewing the results. That controversy still rages, but de Wesselow is convinced of the shroud’s authenticity from an art history approach.

“It’s nothing like any other medieval work of art,” de Wesselow said. “There’s just nothing like it.”

Among the anachronisms, de Wesselow said, is the realistic nature of the body outline. No one was painting that realistically in the 14th century, he said. Similarly, the body image is in negative (light areas are dark and vice versa), a style not seen until the advent of photography centuries later, he said.

“From an art historian’s point of view, it’s completely inexplicable as a work of art of this period,” de Wesselow said.

Resurrection: spiritual or physical?

If de Wesselow’s belief in the shroud’s legitimacy is likely to rub skeptics the wrong way, his mundane explanation of how the image of Jesus came to be is likely to ruffle religious feathers. According to de Wesselow, there’s no need to invoke a miracle when simple chemistry could explain the imprint. It’s likely, he says, that Jesus’ female followers returned to his tomb to finish anointing his body for burial three days after his death. When they lifted the shroud to complete their work, they would have seen the outline of the body and interpreted it as a sign of Jesus’ spiritual revival.

From there, de Wesselow suspects, the shroud went on tour around the Holy Land, providing physical proof of the resurrection to Jesus’ followers. When the Bible talks about people meeting Jesus post-resurrection, de Wesselow said, what it really means is that they saw the shroud. He cites the early writings of Saint Paul, which focus on a spiritual resurrection, over the gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, which were written later and invoke physical resurrection.

“The original conception of the resurrection was that Jesus was resurrected in a spiritual body, not in his physical body,” de Wesselow said.

These ideas are already receiving pushback, though de Wesselow says he’s yet to get responses from people who have read his entire book. Noted skeptic Joe Nickell toldMSNBC’s Alan Boyle that de Wesselow’s ideas were “breathtakingly astonishing,” and not in a good way; Nickell has argued on multiple occasions that the shroud’s spotty historical record and too-perfect image strongly suggest a counterfeit.

On the other end of the religious spectrum, former high-school teacher and Catholic religious speaker David Roemer believes in Jesus’ resurrection, but not the shroud’s authenticity. The image is too clear and the markings said to be blood aren’t smeared as they would be if the cloth had covered a corpse, Roemer told LiveScience.

“When you get an image this detailed, it means it was done by some kind of a human being,” Roemer said.

Unlike many “shroudies,” as believers are deprecatingly called, Roemer suspects the shroud was deliberately created by Gnostic sects in the first or second century. A common religious explanation for the markings is that a flash of energy or radiation accompanied Christ’s resurrection, “burning” his image onto the cloth.

If anything is certain about de Wesselow’s hypothesis, it’s that it is not likely to settle the shroud controversy. Scientific examinations of the delicate cloth are few and far between – and so are disinterested parties. Roemer, for example, recently arrived at a scheduled talk at a Catholic church in New York only to find the talk had been canceled when the priest learned of Roemer’s shroud skepticism. (The Catholic Church has no official position on the shroud’s authenticity.)

Meanwhile, de Wesselow said, people who aren’t driven by faith to accept the cloth as real generally don’t care about the shroud at all.

“The intellectual establishment, if you like, is not interested in shroud science,” he said. “It regards it as fringe and it’s not interested.”

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

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 (LatinRubicōItalianRubicone) 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 calendarG. 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

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 coupputsch,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

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑