Part Three


 As streams of waters, the king's heart is in the hand of Yahweh; He turns it wherever He desires.  Proverbs 21:1


 For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible; whether thrones, or lordships, or rulers, or authorities, all things have been created through Him and for Him.  Colossians  1:16


What would be the purpose in starting a "Holy War?"   Could there be anything gained by this?  Yes!  The fulfillment of Bible Prophecy! 


The focus of end time prophecy will be on the Middle East, and Israel in particular.  The preservation of Israel is paramount.  Despite the efforts of bad leadership, Israel will survive as a nation.  We should understand that Almighty Yahweh is in absolute control of everything.  He looks out for the best interests of Israel without fail.   Nothing happens anywhere that He doesn't know about long in advance of the actual occurrence.


War and rumors of war must precede Yahshua's second coming!  


The big question is, "Did President Bush lie to get us into the Iraq war?"  No, he did not lie!

Was President Bush deceived by the intelligence community?  Let's examine some information leading up to the decision to go to war in Iraq.

How many intelligence agencies does the USA have in place?  Are any of these agencies acting like separate entities at times?  Is there conflict between them or  President Bush?  Would any of these agencies have their own agenda?   What about the State Department? 


 Members of the Intelligence Community (IC)



Air Force Intelligence
Army Intelligence
Central Intelligence Agency
Coast Guard Intelligence
Defense Intelligence Agency
Department of Energy
Department of Homeland Security
Department of State
Department of the Treasury
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Marine Corps Intelligence
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
National Reconnaissance Office
National Security Agency
Navy Intelligence


Intelligence agencies are found in the following countries.

World Intelligence and Security Agencies

United States
New Zealand
United Kingdom


Russia / USSR





Czech Republic

Costa Rica
El Salvador


South Africa


North Korea



Palestinian Authority
Saudi Arabia

Now, with all of these foreign intelligence agencies available, (many conjoined with the domestic Intel agencies) you would think informed decisions could be made.   There are more than enough agencies providing constant information so the President, Congress, and the Senate can confidently make hard decisions.  Now, this does not seem to be the case considering the confusion over Intel results. 


The following link leads you to the Silberman-Robb Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction.



 Commission on the Intelligence of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction


But let's consider what the Silberman-Robb commission did find. The very first pages of its report inform us that:

The United States government asserted that Saddam Hussein had reconstituted his nuclear weapons program, had biological weapons and mobile biological weapon production facilities, and had stockpiled and was producing chemical weapons. All of this was based on the assessments of the U.S. Intelligence Community.

So the core assertions about which Bush is said to have lied "all" were based on the assessments of our intelligence community.

(Our intelligence agencies) listed above, collected precious little intelligence for the analysts to analyze, and much of what they did collect was either worthless or misleading.  And there was a failure to communicate effectively with policymakers; the Intelligence Community didn't adequately explain just how little good intelligence it had--or how much its assessments were driven by assumptions and inferences rather than concrete evidence.

So the administration not only received poor intelligence, it was misled into thinking the intelligence was not poor.

President Bush, then, is absolutely correct when he cites the Silberman-Robb commission as supporting the view that he did not intentionally mislead the public.

 The commission's report shows that he was not in a position to provide the public with accurate information about Iraqi WMD's, and not in a position to realize that the information he did provide was of dubious nature.

So!   It appears the President along with Congress and the Senate, were duped into believing untrue Intel?  Were they?  Was it untrue Intel?  Is this something new?  Read the following:



 And he said, Therefore, hear the Word of Yahweh: I saw Yahweh sitting on His throne, and all the host of Heaven were standing by Him, on His right and on His left.
 And Yahweh said, Who shall entice Ahab, and he shall go up and fall in Ramoth-gilead? And this one said this, and this one said that.
 And a spirit came forth and stood before Yahweh, and said, I surely will entice him.
 And Yahweh said to him, By what means? And he said, I will go out and shall be a spirit of falsehood in the mouth of all his prophets. And He said, You shall entice him, and also you are able. Go out and do so.
 And now, behold, Yahweh has put a spirit of falsehood in the mouth of all these prophets of yours; and Yahweh has spoken evil as to you!
  1 Kings 22:19-23


The false/lying spirit went forth to deceive Ahab.  Remember Ahab was the King of Israel, but he did evil in the eyes of Yahweh!  His punishment was pre-determined by Yahweh!

And you shall strike the house of your master Ahab, that I may avenge the blood of My servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants of  Yahweh from the hand of Jezebel.   2 Kings 9:7


The demise of Ahab was foretold and was carried out as Yahweh instructed.  The same can be said of the descendants of Ishmael and Esau. 


Did Intel falsely inform President Bush?  The report shows that Iraq had WMD's.  These weapons were/are a threat to Israel and the Middle East area.   Something had to be done.   And it was!   Was almighty Yahweh's hand in this?  What do you think?  Is Israel being protected by Father Yahweh?



There is a lot of  posturing on what destroyed the Trade Center Towers.  What brought those towers down?  Did they melt and collapse?  Was the fire generated by the airplane fuel hot enough to melt steel and concrete?  A lot of questions and a lot of speculation surrounds this tragedy.  What is the truth?   Let's examine some facts.


Melting temperatures of metals


Melting Point (Deg F)

mild steel


wrought iron


stainless steel


hard steel


cast iron




red brass




yellow brass


aluminum alloy


magnesium alloy






Copyright © AutoWare 1998



Eyewitness Reports Persist Of
Bombs At WTC Collapse
By Christopher Bollyn
Exclusive to American Free Press

Eyewitness Reports Persist Of
Bombs At WTC Collapse
By Christopher Bollyn
Exclusive to American Free Press

Despite reports from numerous eyewitnesses and experts, including news reporters on the scene, who heard or saw explosions immediately before the collapse of the World Trade Center, there has been virtual silence in the mainstream media.
Television viewers watching the horrific events of Sept. 11 saw evidence of explosions before the towers collapsed. Televised images show what appears to be a huge explosion occurring near ground level, in the vicinity of the 47-story Salomon Brothers Building, known as WTC 7, prior to the collapse of the first tower.
Van Romero, an explosives expert and former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at New Mexico Tech, said on Sept. 11, "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse."

The collapse of the structures resembled the controlled implosions used to demolish old structures and was "too methodical to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures," Romero told The Albuquerque Journal hours after the attack.

Implosions are violent collapses inwards, which are used to demolish buildings in areas of high density, to prevent damage to surrounding buildings. Precision-timed explosives are placed on strategic load-bearing columns and beams to cause the controlled collapse.

Demolition experts say that towers are the most difficult buildings to bring down in a controlled manner. A tower tends to fall like a tree, unless the direction of its fall is controlled by directional charges. The WTC towers "smokestacked" neatly, falling within the boundaries of their foundations.
Skeptics say this could not have happened coincidentally and it must have been caused by strategically placed and precisely timed internal charges. Videotape images may reveal these internal charges precipitating the controlled demolition of the towers and WTC 7.

Romero is vice president of research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures, and often assists in forensic investigations into terrorist attacks, often by setting off similar explosions and studying the effects.

After being hit by the aircraft, the twin towers appeared to be stable. Then without warning, at 9:58 a.m. the south tower imploded vertically downwards, 53 minutes after being hit. At 10:28, 88 minutes after being struck, the north tower collapsed.

"It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that," Romero said. If explosions did cause the towers to collapse, "It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points," he said.
"One of the things terrorist events are noted for is a diversionary attack and secondary device," Romero said. Attackers detonate an initial, diversionary explosion, in this case the collision of the planes into the towers, which brings emergency personnel to the scene, then detonate a second explosion.
Ten days after the attack, following criticism of his initial remarks, Romero did an about-face in his analysis of the collapse, "Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail," he told the Journal on Sept. 21.

The twin towers were struck by Boeing 767's carrying approximately 23,000 gallons of fuel.
However, there is other information that lends credence to Romero's controversial scenario. One eyewitness whose office is near the World Trade Center told AFP that he was standing among a crowd of people on Church Street, about two-and-a-half blocks from the South tower, when he saw "a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15." He saw about six of these brief flashes, accompanied by "a crackling sound" before the tower collapsed. Each tower had six central support columns.
One of the first firefighters in the stricken second tower, Louie Cacchioli, 51, told People Weekly on Sept. 24: "I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building."

Kim White, 32, an employee on the 80th floor, also reported hearing an explosion. "All of a sudden the building shook, then it started to sway. We didn't know what was going on," she told People. "We got all our people on the floor into the stairwell . . . at that time we all thought it was a fire . . .We got down as far as the 74th floor . . . then there was another explosion."
The accepted theory is that as the fires raged in the towers, the steel cores in each building were heated to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit, causing the support beams to buckle.

A lead engineer who designed the World Trade Center Towers expressed shock that the towers collapsed after being hit by passenger jets.
"I designed it for a 707 to hit it," Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer said. The Boeing 707 has a fuel capacity of more than 23,000 gallons, comparable to the 767's 23,980-gallon fuel capacity.
Another architect of the WTC, Aaron Swirski, lives in Israel and spoke to Jerusalem Post Radio after the attack: "It was designed around that eventuality to survive this kind of attack," he said.

Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager, watched in confusion as the towers came down. "It was over-designed to withstand almost anything including hurricanes, high winds, bombings and an airplane hitting it," he said.
Brown told AFP that although the buildings were designed to withstand "a 150-year storm" and the im pact of a Boeing 707, he said the jet fuel burning at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit weakened the steel. Brown explained that the south tower collapsed first as it was struck lower with more weight above the impact area.
Brown told AFP that he "did not buy" the theory that the implosion was caused by the fires sucking the air out of the lower floors, which has been speculated.
The contractor who is reported to have been the first on the WTC collapse scene to cart away the rubble that remains is a company that specializes in the scientific demolition of large buildings, Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Baltimore, headed by Mark Loizeaux.
CDI is the same contractor that demolished and hauled away the shell of the bombed Oklahoma City Murrah building, actions that prevented independent investigators from pursuing evidence on leads suggesting that there were bombs set off inside the building.

In February 2000, a federal grand jury indicted Mark Loizeaux, Douglas Loizeaux and Controlled Demolition, Inc. on charges of falsely reporting campaign contributions by asking family members and CDI employees to donate to the campaign of Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.).
The Baltimore Sun reported that the illegal contributions allegedly occurred between 1996 and 1998. The Loizeaux brothers and CDI were acquitted in Sept ember 2000. Cleaning up the estimated 1.2 million tons of rubble will reportedly cost $7 billion and take up to a year.

Removing the debris has also been controversial. The police said that some scrap metal has been diverted to mob-controlled businesses rather than the dump where investigators are examining rubble for clues and human remains.
The second plane nearly missed the South Tower, cutting through a corner. Most of its fuel burned in an outside explosion. However, this building collapsed first, long before the North Tower, into which a similar plane entered completely.

To explain the unanticipated free-fall collapses of the twin towers at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, mainstream experts (also see The American Professional Constructor, October 2004, pp. 12–18) offer a three-stage argument: 1) an airplane impact weakened each structure, 2) an intense fire thermally weakened structural components that may have suffered damage to fireproofing materials, causing buckling failures, which, in turn, 3) allowed the upper floors to pancake onto the floors below.

Many will nod their head, OK, that does it and go back to watching the NBA finals or whatever, but I find this theory just about as satisfying as the fantastic conspiracy theory that "19 young Arabs acting at the behest of Islamist extremists headquartered in distant Afghanistan" caused 9/11. The government’s collapse theory is highly vulnerable on its own terms, but its blinkered narrowness and lack of breadth is the paramount defect unshared by its principal scientific rival – controlled demolition. Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapses of WTC 1 (North Tower), WTC 2 (South Tower), and the much-overlooked collapse of the 47-story WTC building 7 at 5:21 pm on that fateful day.

The scientific controversy over the initial structural weakening has two parts: what caused the original tower damage and did that damage "severely" weaken the structures? Photos show a stable, motionless North Tower (WTC 1) after the damage suffered at 8:46 am and the South Tower after its 9:03 am impact. If we focus on the North Tower, close examination of photos reveals arguably "minor" rather than "severe" damage in the North Tower and its perimeter columns.





Following the facts leads us to where? 

 From the book 9/11 Synthetic Terror by Webster Griffin Tarpley the following conclusions are listed.  (Although I may not subscribe to Mr. Tarpley's theory in every application, he does have numerous valid points.  And of these, many I do agree with!)

So far we have come to the following conclusions:
1. The government’s assertion that the so-called hijackers operated without being detected by official surveillance is untenable, and evidence is strong that the alleged hijackers acted in coordination with a faction within the government itself. The hijackers were therefore in all probability expendable double agents or, more bluntly, patsies.
2. The government’s assertion that the four supposedly hijacked airliners were taken over and piloted by the four accused hijackers identified by the FBI is at or beyond the limits of physical and technical reality
9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA
The planes were in all probability guided to their targets by some form of remote access or remote control.
3. The government’s assertion that the failures of air defense were caused by the fog of war is lame and absurd. Air defense was in all probability sabotaged by moles operating inside the government.
4. The government’s assertion that a Boeing 757-200 hit the Pentagon is physically impossible. Some other type of flying object, possibly a cruise missile, must therefore be considered.
5. The government’s assertion that the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed as a result of the impact of aircraft and of the
subsequent fire is physically impossible. The fall of the towers cannot be explained without the hypothesis of controlled demolition of some form, possibly including unconventional methods employing new
physical principles.
6. The government’s assertion that World Trade Center 7 collapsed at 5:20 PM EDT on September 11 purely as a result of fire is physically
impossible. The collapse of WTC 7 is coherent with controlled demolition of the conventional type.
7. The government’s assertion that United Flight 93 crashed because of actions by the hijackers or because of a struggle in the cockpit is
physically impossible, given the pattern in which the wreckage was distributed. All evidence points towards the hypothesis that United 93
was shot down by US military aircraft.
8. The government’s refusal to investigate insider trading in American Airlines and United Airlines put options, the wholesale seizure and
destruction of evidence, the systematic intimidation of witnesses by the FBI, and a series of other incidents point unmistakably to an attempted
cover-up on the part of the entire US government and establishment.




Yours in Yahshua, Hawke




©  Truth on the Net Dot Com 2005-21