CHAPTER II
aThey are the guardians of the Tree of Life kept for G-d’s new creation. They are seen on the veil of the Tabernacle and on the Mercy-Seat, guarding the seat of Atonement for the whole of G-d’s creation. They are the four heads of the living creation - the lion of the wild beasts; the ox of the tame beasts; the eagle of the birds; and man the head of all (again four is divided into 3+1). These four living creatures call forth and announce the judgments or plagues in Revelation 6, and whenever they speak it is in connection with the earth.

Hence, as guardians of creation these four cherubic forms were placed in the signs of the
Zodiac, and so placed that they divide it into four equal parts, thus uniting in one the twelve signs which set forth the hope of a groaning creation.
b Tuesday, February 4, 1997, the consequences for the apostasy of ceding the
covenanted Land, in particular Hebron, struck our people: 2 IDF helicopters on their way to Lebanon crashed into each other killing 73 young Israeli soldiers. Not our enmies, but our leaders’ sins killed them! The warning to Benjamin  Netanyahu that judgment and retribution would be immediate for this grievious apostasy went unheeded. The price for ceding Hebron were 73 wonderful sons, the best of the nation’s youth. And Rachel is weeping still!
c When I watched the year’s 1996 Christmas Programs I was totally dumbfounded by
the blindness and hypocrisy of Christians. They read about “Bethelehem Ephratah, smallest among the clans of JUDAH (NOTamong the clans of the Philistines), from you shall come forth one Who shall be ruler in ISRAEL (NOT of a Palestinian state)...” (Micah 5:2). A much advertized program was “Christmas in Washington”. At the conclusion President Clinton, his face shining like that of a little boy, sang happily together with all the other “confessed” Christians, that the “King of Israel” (not of Palestine) was born in Bethlehem. And it seemed not to strike him, even for just one single moment, that he was standing there as a giant hypocrite: for he is pressuring the very people, from whom His Savior comes, to give that very city of the Savior’s birth to the enemies of Israel, to a murderer and man of lawlessness.

The whole world knows that Yasser Arafat is a terrorist and murderer. Yet they love him so much, they want him to have all that belongs to the King of Israel, Who is the Savior of the world. While they sing with jolly faces how much they love this Jesus, Ruler in Israel, born in a manger in the city of David, Bethlehem, they spit Him with their actions in the face. They sing of His Second Coming and Return to Jerusalem, His holy city. But then they have absolutely no misgivings to impose on Israel the division of this city, to make half of it the capital of a Palestinian state (Arafat has no intention of being satisfied with only half; he wants ALL of Jerusalem). Those Christians speak of the “Holy Land”, and G-d’s Covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Yes, they even speak of themselves as being the “true” seed of Abraham --- but then, without blinking an eye, betray the patriarch they claim for themselves. They insist on giving the “Holy Land”, G-d’s OWN Land, unto most unholy people, men of lawlessness who have but one thing in mind: to destroy the State of Israel and to annihilate the Jewish people.

And the city which was allotted to Caleb and belongs within the borders of Judah, which has been guardian of the tombs of the patriarchs and matriarchs, and has been home to a Jewish presence throughout the past 2,000 years, they also insist on giving to the enemies of Messiah and Israel.

This “Christian” blindness is so beyond all comprehension, so beyond all possible realms of belief and imaginable height of hypocrisy, that I have only one explanation: G-d Himself has established them in the arrogance and wicked conceit of their heart just as He had done with pharaoh, in order that it may become plain who they really are and to whom they belong. They most certainly are not Messiah’s, for they can neither see, perceive nor understand the truth, even when it stares them directly in the face.
d Neither Islam nor the Arab world adhere to “democratic” rules of governing. Modern democracy is built upon the tenets of Hellenism, an ideology regarded as decadent by the Arab world. Islam and Hellenism are opposing poles. Before Muhammad united the Arab world with Islam, they were feuding, marauding tribes, true offspring of Ishmael. Arabs have only known a totalitarian rule, where one man’s word decides the fate of citizens and country. Islam equally subscribes to a totalitarian regime, the spread and rule of Islam being of the highest priority, to which everything else is subordinate. Due to British and French influence in the Middle East and the socialist-democratic nationalism of the fledgling nation of Israel, the “moderate” Sunni Moslems began to emulate some of the West’s “decadent” ways, and the wealthier of the Arabas and Moslems sent their sons to study at Western universities, such as king Hussein of Jordan. However, the re-awakening of Arab nationalism (subdued by Turkey for 500 years) and of Shi’ite Moslems vengeful fundamentalism eradicated whatever “democratic traces” there may have been.  The PLO’s rule is totalitarian, their religion is totalitarian Islam, their manner of rule is terror, oppression, torture, spreading fear and death. No one who wanted to stay alive dared vote against Arafat. And the few who actually dared to run against him were given no chance whatsoever by any of the PA’s Media branches, and have not been heard of anymore. “Free elections” and “democratic rule” are euphemisms in the Arab world, especially in the PA.
e By the time of retyping the edited part of this document the outcome of the elections is known. 48% of the American public did not go to the polls to vote, almost half of the nation. Therefore one may say without being slanderous, that the Clinton Administration did not receive the people’s overhwelming majority support. The people were at such a loss whom to vote for, that almost half the nation chose rather not to vote at all than to cast their vote for a man whom they did not want to entrust with the mandate of leading the greatest nation on the face of the earth. With this statement I do not mean to slight Bob Dole and his charming wife. In fact, I would venture to say that had MRS. DOLE run for the presidency, she might have won the mandate of the people. What caused Bob Dole to lose the elections and Bill Clinton to win them was above all, I believe, the question of leadership ability. Bob Dole may be a good and decent man, but he displayed indecisiveness, weakness in bold and quick decision making. Such weakness in the chief executive can prove fatal for the whole nation. With all the possible information at his disposal, and with all the counsel of the best professionals of the nation, he can and MUST make far reaching decisions for the welfare of the nation and her allies. Bob Dole may have been a fine senator, but he did not show the steel it takes to be the President of the US. Instead Clinton had shown that he can lead, and make bold decisions, right or wrong. A weak leader frightens the people and makes them feel insecure. Therefore, in the final analysis, a little over a quarter of the people preferred a President who can lead, although his moral qualities were more than questionable, than a morally decent man who lacked in leadership ability. The remainder chose morals over leadership, and the other half of the nation chose that none of the candidates qualified for the presidency. Then freedom and liberty, righteousness and justice, equality for all in one nation under G-d, wept!