Sharon's Predictions

2008-8-31 03:48:00

This is an interesting time to reflect on Sharon's predictions of New Orleans. In May of 2005 in Sun Valley she predicted that a great hurricane would destroy it in August 2006. It turned out that her prediction came a year early and hit them August 2005. At the 2007 McCall Gathering we asked her if Katrina was the fulfillment of her prediction, but she just got the year wrong.

She told us that what she believed she saw was Katrina and a future destruction all as one devastation, but she said that the 2005 hurricane was just the first stage that it would be hit again. She thought the next hit would be last August but didn't seem sure of the timeline.

The interesting thing is she was off one year the first time and here are one year away from her second prophecy date that New Orleans would be hit again.

At this time it is not a sure thing that hurricane Gustav will hit New Orleans, but the chances are high that it could in the next few days. We'll just have to wait and see. If it does bring similar destruction to New Orleans we will certainly be impressed with her predictive ability.

She made another interesting prediction in McCall and that was Ohio would be devastated by floods. Shortly thereafter they had the worst floods in over 90 years. I think I even heard one reporter say it was the worst in 500 years.

As I listened again to her original prediction in 2005 I heard another interesting one that I forgot. She said the light in the White House would go out in the next election and be replaced by the dark that many would think of as the light. She said we could prevent this happening by our freewill but we seemed to be headed in this direction.

As we look at the two candidates the dark who is seen as the light could only refer to Obama because no one sees McCain as a great light of any kind. Most of those who plan on voting for him just see him as either a good guy or the least of two evils. Many, however, see Obama as the light that will bring hope and wonderful change. Others are very concerned that he will move us away from our cherished freedoms in an attempt to implement his agenda.

Few people knew who Obama was in 2005 so this prediction is quite interesting.

As a foreshadowing of his possible future attacks on freedom surfaced recently when he made an attempt to prosecute those who sought to expose his background.

Here is the story:

We noted here efforts by Barack Obama's campaign to shut down his critics' free speech. In particular, Obama obviously doesn't want the public to know about his long-term, cozy relationship with proud-to-be-a-terrorist Bill Ayers. Now, Obama himself has upped the ante by demanding that the conservative who funded the Ayers ad be criminally prosecuted:

Obama general counsel Bob Bauer today sent a second, sharper letter to the Justice Department, directly attacking the Dallas billionaire funding a harsh attack ad, Harold Simmons.

"We reiterate our request that the Department of Justice fulfill its commitment to take prompt action to investigate and to prosecute the American issues Project, and we further request that the Department of Justice investigate and prosecute Howard (sic) Simmons for a knowing and willful violation of the individual aggregate contribution limits," he wrote.

Obama's suggestion that it is illegal for a 501(c)(4) entity to fund issue ads that are negative toward him appears ludicrous. Here's the real question though:  if Obama is elected President, will he appoint an Attorney General who will carry out politically-motivated prosecutions like the one he is now demanding? I suppose we can't know for sure, but why wouldn't he? If he demands criminal prosecution of free speech that opposes his political interests when he's a candidate, why wouldn't he order it as President?

See:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/08/021330.php

Compare this to Bush's reaction to those who sought to do much worse to him.

Michael Moore and Hollywood spent many millions in attempting to portray Bush as involved in a conspiracy behind the 911 disaster and in cahoots with Osama bin Laden. Those accusations were much worse than anything made against Obama and with much less evidence.

What did Bush do?

He did nothing to restrict free speech and Moore was allowed to speak, write and make movies unrestrained.

I wish Obama would do the same and let the power of free speech cause the truth to prevail -- whatever that truth is.

What would he do if he became president? Many fear he would institute the Fairness Doctrine which would basically shut down all his opposition -- conservative talk radio.

In the past he seemed to support the Fairness Doctrine but recently his press secretary indicated he does not support it -- so who knows?

By the way. I may have discovered why Sharon moved to China. She said it wouldn't be as effected by the earth changes as the United States and Europe.

  

"Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.
  -- Will Durant (1885 - 1981)

  

Word of the Day

Asseverate -- Verb to declare or affirm earnestly or solemnly; aver; to state seriously or positively; assert. Example of use. "Before conservatives arrive at the point where it is appropriate to deal in grandiose ASSEVERATIONS, they most face up to homely analytical chores."
  -- W.F. Buckley Jr.