Endtime Prophecy Net - Endtime Prophecy Net - Article By The WordWeaver Endtime Prophecy Net - Endtime Prophecy Net - Article By The WordWeaver Endtime Prophecy Net - Endtime Prophecy Net - Article By The WordWeaver

   PART 2

Endtime Prophecy Net - Article By The WordWeaver

Copyright 1994 - 2011 Endtime Prophecy Net

Published On : January 4, 2007

Last Updated : January 4, 2007

America's Four-Step War Strategy, Iraqis Hurt By UN Sanctions
Iranian Uranium Enrichment, Israeli Factor, Ecuador & Dollars
Iraq/Iran Threaten America With Oil For Euros, Euro Is A WMD
Regime Change, WMD Deception, Iraq No Threat, US Propaganda
America's Strategy To Divide And Destroy OPEC, Axis Of Evil
Kim Jong Il & North Korea, Muammar el-Qaddafi And Libyan Oil
U.S. Deals With & Finances Dictators, Saddam Hussein's Death

So ask yourself: Why was the U.S.A. so bent on going to war
against Iraq, even when international opinion condemned just
such an act? And why is the the United States so determined
now to give us a repeat performance, but this time with Iran?
What's really going on? What are the true motivations behind
America's behavior? Now, some of you reading this may say to
yourselves, "Wait a minute! What is all of this talk about
the U.S.A. attacking Iran? President Bush has no such plans!
In fact, sanctions were just leveled against Iran by the UN."

Excuse me, but are you certain that Bush has no such plans?
If you honestly believe that, then I wonder if you've really
been paying attention to the news, and using your critical
thought processes to their maximum potential. Do you really
not see the parallels between how the Bush Administration
demonized Saddam Hussein, used the WMD wild card, and then
attacked Iraq, and how the same exact tactics are being used
against Iran right now? It is the same familiar pattern all
over again: discredit, demonize, feign patient diplomacy,
and then attack! Here it is again:

Discredit - Demonize - Feign Patient Diplomacy - Attack

Yes, sanctions were just recently implemented against Iran;
but wasn't that same action taken against Iraq for many years
as well? Didn't the Americans and the British set up no-fly
zones over Iraq? In the end, the Iraqi people were hurt more
by the sanctions than Saddam Hussein and the Baathists were.
I was just looking at an Associated Press news article that I
shared with the members of our mailing list in July of 2000.
This article clearly states that it was the U.N. sanctions,
which were imposed following Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, and
the Gulf War, which crippled the economy of Iraq, and drove
literally millions of Iraqis into poverty. We can argue that
it was Saddam's fault that the sanctions were imposed in the
first place, but the truth is, that the United Nations, under
American pressure, implemented the sanctions, which resulted
in millions of Iraqis suffering:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Saddam made no mention of the U.N. trade sanctions which
have crippled the economy and driven millions of Iraqis into
poverty. The sanctions were imposed after Iraq's 1990
invasion of Kuwait, which led to the Gulf War."

----- End Quote -----

In spite of the sanctions, and the no-fly zones, is it not
true that the USA still ended up attacking Iraq anyway, and
against world opinion at that? So what makes you so certain
that the current sanctions against Iran are going to deter
the Bush Administration from attacking Iran, if and when it
feels that the time is right?

You see, despite outward appearances, I suspect that Iran's
adamant refusal to discontinue processing its uranium, may be
exactly what the United States wants, and may even be working
to the US's favor. Why? Because then, just as with Iraq, the
United States can go to the U.N., and say "See! The sanctions
aren't working; something more drastic needs to be done in
order to stop the uranium enrichment being done by Iran."

Let me remind you again that the Bush Administration has
repeatedly said, insofar as Iran is concerned, all options
are still on the table; and that obviously includes military
options. Of course, it doesn't necessarily mean that the US
will be the one to crack the whip. As you may have heard on
the news, or read somewhere on the Internet, there has been
some talk that Israel may decide to strike first, in order to
knock out Iran's uranium enrichment capabilities; just as she
took similar action against Iraq, when Israeli Prime Minister
Menachem Begin ordered the attack against the Osirak nuclear
power plant in 1981. These rumors could turn out to be true,
or they may just be a diversionary tactic. Based on what I
know now, I suspect that the United States is looking for a
more permanent solution to their problem; just as they did
with Iraq. Destroying Natanz, for example, won't eliminate
the real problem.

You see, what you need to understand is that the uranium
enrichment issue is not the real problem; at least I don't
think it is. Were WMD the real problem in Iraq, or was that
just the red herring; that is, the excuse that America used
to attack Iraq? I think most of you already know the answer
to that question, or at least you should. So that brings us
back around to our main questions again: If WMD wasn't the
real problem that the USA was having with Iraq, then what
was? And if uranium enrichment, which the USA alleges, will
ultimately result in Iran manufacturing nuclear weapons, is
not the real problem now, then what is?

What if I were to tell you that the problem, or perhaps I
should really be saying the threat, that the United States
perceived from Iraq, and now perceives from Iran, are one
and the same? What kind of threat could possibly convince
the American Government, in spite of world opinion being
totally against it, that it must go to war? There is only
one logical answer here: the threat of losing its place of
dominance in the world. Remember what I told you earlier.
America's secret weapon is the billions of US dollars that
it has foisted upon the world over the last three decades,
as a result of the convenient agreement that it made with
Saudi Arabia, and other OPEC nations. As long as the world
has been forced to pay for their oil in US dollars, America
has remained in charge, and she has pushed her weight around
at every given opportunity. The last six years of the Bush
Administration are clear proof of this, but it didn't start
with Bush by any means. He is just one of the more blatant
U.S. presidents to tell the rest of the world what to do.

Let me give you a clear example of this. I was just looking
through some old email that was sent out on our mailing list
in the early part of the year 2000. I came across one email
entitled "US Dollar Official Currency In Ecuador", where I
included a news article regarding how Congress had passed a
law which would make the U.S. dollar the official currency
of Ecuador. What?! Isn't Ecuador a sovereign South American
nation? You bet it is; or at least it was. As a result of
internal financial problems, Ecuador's local currency, the
sucre, was seriously devalued, and the Ecuadorean economy
became the most unstable economy in all of Latin America. In
an attempt to stabilize the economy, the nation's president
decided to "dollarize" the nation. Part of the article says:

----- Begin Quote -----

In a desperate attempt to stabilize South America's most
rickety economy, Congress passed a law in early March to
phase out the sucre, which lost two-thirds of its value last
year amid a severe recession. The sucre now trades at 25,000
to the dollar, and its rapid devaluation fueled annual
inflation rates of 80 percent -- the highest rate in Latin

Under the government plan, the dollar will be the main
domestic currency, replacing the sucre, which will only
remain in circulation for small purchases. As of April 1,
Ecuadoreans have found that bank cash machines dispense only
greenbacks and not the multicolored sucres -- often filthy
and torn.

----- End Quote -----

Without going into a lot of detail, the article explains that
some of the reasons why Ecuador fell into financial disarray,
is because of low prices on its primary export, (oil), natural
disasters which wrecked the nation's infrastructure, as well
as its crops, and its inability to pay its external debts. In
other words, as with so many poor nations, it became caught in
the trap of owing too much money to the International Monetary
Fund, which it couldn't pay back. Let me also remind you that
the price of oil is artificially manipulated. In short, the
powers-that-be purposely created the problem by wrecking the
economy of Ecuador, and then they offered their own solution,
and put Ecuador squarely in America's grip. The article also
states that many Ecuadoreans were confused, and not happy at
all with the sudden switch to a U.S. dollar economy; but what
can they do? Absolutely nothing. Ecuador is now another slave
of the American Empire, plain and simple.

But let's get back to our discussion regarding Iraq and Iran.
So how did Iraq threaten American dominance? What did Saddam
Hussein do that caused King George (Bush) to say "Off with
Saddam's head!"? He did the exact same thing that Iran is
doing now. What is Iran doing that is so threatening to the
United States? Actually, I have already given you the answer;
or at least what I now believe may be the real answer. It is
the Iranian Oil Bourse. It's quite possible that I read about
this years ago, and just forgot about it; but according to
Professor Petrov, and other sources, in late 2000, Saddam
Hussein decided, or perhaps "insisted" is a more appropriate
word, that he would only accept Euros for Iraqi oil, just as
Iran is doing now. In his commentary, Professor Petrov
states in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The man that actually did demand Euro for his oil was
Saddam Hussein in 2000. At first, his demand was met with
ridicule, later with neglect, but as it became clearer that
he meant business, political pressure was exerted to change
his mind. When other countries, like Iran, wanted payment in
other currencies, most notably Euro and Yen, the danger to
the dollar was clear and present, and a punitive action was
in order."

"Bush's Shock-and-Awe in Iraq was not about Saddam's nuclear
capabilities, about defending human rights, about spreading
democracy, or even about seizing oil fields; it was about
defending the dollar, ergo the American Empire. It was about
setting an example that anyone who demanded payment in
currencies other than U.S. Dollars would be likewise

----- End Quote -----

As Petrov states, if Saddam would have gotten away with it,
other OPEC countries may have very well followed suit. In
fact, as you can see, Iran was very quick to hop on the Euro
bandwagon, because it wanted to hurt the United States, the
"Great Satan", just as bad as Saddam did. As we have already
seen, the United States of America simply couldn't allow it
to happen; just as it cannot allow it to happen now with
Iran; because the success of the Iranian Oil Bourse would
eventually result in the destruction of the U.S. economy,
and as a by-product, terminate America's dominance in the

So that, my friends, is what I now believe, and what others
also believe, is the real problem; as it is perceived from
America's perspective. It has absolutely nothing to do with
real WMD in either Iraq or Iran. In both instances, WMD has
only been the red herring that the Bush Administration has
used to try to deceive the American people, and fool the
rest of the world. The real problem, the real threat to the
American Empire, as Professor Petrov referred to it, is the
simple fact that both Iraq and Iran chose to convert their
economies to the Euro. They decided to accept Euros, instead
of U.S. dollars, for their oil exports, and that is a direct
threat to the U.S. dollar's current standing as the world's
currency reserve. In a February 21, 2003 commentary entitled
"Why Black Americans Should Oppose Bush's War -- Of Oil, The
Euro And Africa", Dr. Sonja Ebron, CEO of "blackEnergy" says
it very well when she tells us that the real WMD in Iraq and
Iran, is Euros. She writes:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Enter the real "weapon of mass destruction," the euro.
Eleven European countries formed a monetary union around
this currency on January 1, 1999; Britain and Norway, the
major European oil producers, were conspicuously absent. Due
to the strength of European economies, the euro now presents
a serious challenge to the dollar in its role as key reserve

"Given the highly leveraged and fragile state of our economy,
an OPEC switch from the dollar to the euro would bring a
quick and devastating dollar and Wall Street crash that would
make 1929 look like a $50 casino bet."

----- End Quote -----

So what did the United States do to try to stop Saddam from
carrying out his plan? News articles from that time period
make it very clear what America did. As we saw a moment ago,
the Iraqi economy had already been crippled by almost ten
years of U.N. sanctions, and millions of people were out of
work. In addition to this, the country had been sliced up by
the Americans and the British into three sections, with a
no-fly zone in the northern sector, and another no-fly zone
in the south. In spite of these tactics, Saddam was still in
power. During the same year that Saddam began making demands
for Euros in exchange for Iraqi oil, (2000), the American
Government, under President William Jefferson Clinton, made
it very clear what its intentions were regarding the Iraqi
leader. One way or another, they were determined to get him
out of office. An Associated Press news article, which I
also shared with our mailing list members on August 4, 2000,
confirms that the so-called "regime change" plans did not
begin with George W. Bush; they began with Bill Clinton:

----- Begin Quote -----

"WASHINGTON (AP) - The 10th anniversary of Iraq's invasion
of Kuwait passed with the Clinton administration admitting
that many U.S. goals remain unfulfilled, including the ouster
of President Saddam Hussein . . . Welch conceded that the
February 1991 liberation of Kuwait by a U.S.-led coalition
was not the final chapter of the Iraq saga. Saddam has not
given up his weapons of mass destruction and continues
abusive practices, officials said."

----- End Quote -----

Please also notice from the previous news excerpt, that the
WMD deception did not begin with George W. Bush. President
Bill Clinton was pushing the very same lie, as a strategy to
demonize Saddam Hussein. How could Saddam give up something
which he did not possess, as U.N. inspections had clearly
shown? George W. Bush just continued the WMD deception, in
order to justify the coming war before the eyes of a naive
American public. Both U.S. presidents knew that Saddam did
not possess WMD, because Mohamed ElBaradei, Hans Blix, Scott
Ritter, and other members of the International Atomic Energy
Agency had repeatedly told them so. In another news article
that I shared with our list readers on August 4, 2000, Scott
Ritter stated that Iraq did not pose a threat to any of its
neighbors. In late January 2003, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, who
is the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency,
addressed the U.N. Security Council, after having conducted
a two-month investigation in Iraq. According to a CNN News
report, while elBaradei didn't give Iraq a perfect score, he
did conclude his lengthy report with the following remarks:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Mr. President, members of the council, for the past 60 days
the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency
have been engaged in the process of verifying the existence
or absence of a nuclear weapon program in Iraq . . . we have
to date found no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear
weapon program since the elimination of the program in the

----- End Quote -----

In spite of these, and other attempts, to convince the U.S.,
and other members of the United Nations, that Iraq did not
possess WMD, from 2000, until the Spring of 2003 when the
U.S. invasion of Iraq actually occurred, the United States
Government, as well as the British Government, engaged in
a concerted effort to convince their constituents of the
exact opposite. As I've already stated, the public of both
nations were repeatedly bombarded with sly insinuations,
baseless allegations, and carefully crafted disinformation,
in order to heighten the levels of fear and paranoia, so
that in the end, they would support their governments, and
agree to the illegal invasion and destruction of Iraq. It
obviously worked.

Dr. Sonja Ebron, who we discussed earlier, likewise mentions
America's strategy in her 2003 commentary. Please note that
her article was written several months prior to the actual
invasion of Iraq. Not pulling any punches, she explains that
once the U.S.A. realized how serious Saddam Hussein was
regarding switching to the Euro, and realizing how adversely
it would affect the American economy if other oil-producing
nations were to follow his example, they crafted a strategy
to destroy OPEC. She writes:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The U.S. strategy to destroy OPEC is twofold: pressure
non-OPEC producers to flood the oil market and retain
denomination in dollars in an effort to weaken OPEC's market
control, and change the leadership of any country switching
oil denomination from the dollar to the euro (hence, the
"axis of evil")."

"[The U.S. strategy to destroy OPEC] . . . requires that the
U.S. military assert our interests in oil and gas deposits
worldwide. U.S. interests in the Caspian Sea have been
secured through regime change in Afghanistan and a deal for
a new pipeline through that country."

"U.S. interests in southwest Asia are being secured through
the planned invasion of Iraq, then Iran (both OPEC members)
if it switches oil denomination."

----- End Quote -----

So in essence, according to the American strategy, as viewed
by Dr. Ebron and Professor Petrov, any world leader who would
attempt to switch their country's economy from a dollar-based
economy to a Euro-based economy, would automatically become a
target of American aggression, and would also be eligible for
elimination, if they didn't back down from their decision. In
other words, this was Clinton and Bush's "regime change" plan
in action.

As crazy as that may seem to some people, I am convinced that
it's exactly what the United States decided to do; and she's
proven it by her very own actions. Please also note that in
her previous comments, Dr. Ebron states in parentheses "hence,
the "axis of evil". As you will recall, earlier we discussed
how President George W. Bush assigned that description to the
nations of Iraq, Iran and North Korea. According to the Bush
propaganda, this is supposedly because all three countries
have been illegally striving to create nuclear weapons.
As I stated at the very beginning of this article, when it
comes to the American Government, things are not always what
they seem; and this is clearly a case of that. For years
now, the American Government has been feeding us a distorted
picture regarding this entire issue. Millions of American
citizens are currently convinced that the reason why George
W. Bush has gone after Iraq, Iran and North Korea, that is,
their "Axis of Evil", is because of WMD. It's bogus. It's a
lie. It's an utter deception being used to hide the truth
from all of us.

We have already seen why the U.S.A. has demonized Iraq, Iran
and Afghanistan, but how in the world does Kim Jong Il's
North Korea fit into the picture? It is not Islamic or Arab;
and it is most certainly not an oil exporter; so why has the
leader of North Korea been targeted? Personally, I would have
never figured it out, but Dr. Ebron's article has established
a clear link; and it fits perfectly into everything that we
have been discussing. In her same commentary she writes:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Iraq's move to the euro -- and Iran's expected move -- are
placing tremendous pressure on OPEC countries and other oil
producers to drop our dollar as the main transaction
currency for oil."

"Jordan began using euros to buy oil as soon as its major
supplier, Iraq, began using them to sell, and North Korea
switched to the euro late last year to protest the U.S.'
halt in fuel aid."

----- End Quote -----

You see; exactly what America feared, began to happen as soon
as Saddam Hussein made the decision to accept Euros for his
oil, instead of U.S. dollars, and that is why they held him
accountable, and decided that it was time for him to go. It
had nothing to do with any alleged WMD in his country. Iran
then followed suit and also decided that it would switch to
a Euro-based economy. Jordan likewise made the same decision.

But lo and behold! Look who else decided to start purchasing
their oil with Euros instead of dollars in 2002: Kim Jong Il
of North Korea. He knew exactly how to hit the USA where it
hurts; and that is why he has been blacklisted as part of the
US's so-called Axis of Evil. Under U.S. pressure, North Korea
was deprived of its fuel aid, and so Kim Jong Il fought back
in December of 2002 by dumping the U.S. dollar from the North
Korean economy. A BBC news report dated Dec. 1, 2002, with a
heading of "North Korea Embraces The Euro", states in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

Communist North Korea has said it will stop using American
dollars from Sunday and start using euros instead.

The decision was made soon after a US-led international
consortium announced that it was halting fuel aid to the
state because of its covert nuclear weapons programme.

No official reason was given for the move but many analysts
believe the dollar ban is a direct political response to
Washington's decision last month to halt fuel aid to the
North because of its nuclear programme."

----- End Quote -----

Of course, that is not the only reason why the United States
is so upset with Kim Jong Il. It seems that for some time
now, ever-resourceful Kim has been flooding the world money
market with counterfeit $100 bills. In a Dec. 2006 article
with the heading "The Plan To Destroy America - Via The
Dollar", well-known author Hal Lindsey had this to say:

----- Begin Quote -----

"For years, North Korea's Kim Jong-il has been flooding the
global economy with so-called "supernotes" – counterfeit
U.S. $100 bills so good even Secret Service agents can't
tell the difference without conducting sophisticated tests."

"The strategy is to flood the market with counterfeit
dollars to deflate its value. Then to convert U.S. holdings
to euros, thus pushing the dollar into a deflationary

----- End Quote -----

All of this makes perfect sense to me. It fits like a hand
in a glove. All three nations, Iraq, Iran and North Korea
became victims of America's WMD lies and accusations, and
all three nations chose to drop the dollar, and move to a
Euro-based economy. Do you think that this is just merely a
coincidence? I most certainly don't.

In that same article, Lindsey also mentions how China, Iran
and Venezuela have each taken great strides to convert their
economies to a Euro-based framework, thus hoping to speed up
the destruction of the U.S. dollar:

----- Begin Quote -----

"In January 2006, China announced an intention to reduce 75
percent of its foreign exchange reserves currently held in
U.S. dollars."

"Since China is the world's second-largest holder of U.S.
dollar-denominated foreign-exchange reserves, it has the
power to create a catastrophe. At the same time, Venezuela
and Iran are now demanding that all payments for oil
shipments be paid for in euros – not dollars.

"In addition, both nations are planning regional central
banking schemes designed to hold all foreign exchange
holdings of participating countries in euros instead of
dollars. This explains why enemy operators, spearheaded by
members of the Saudi royal family, have flooded hundreds of
millions of dollars into Venezuelan held bearer-bonds that
are used to buy as many banks as possible throughout the
Caribbean and South American areas.

"All these factors cannot be coincidence. They reveal a
concerted, well-coordinated strategy to destroy America
through economics."

----- End Quote -----

Well the plot continues to thicken. Those of you who read the
news a lot are probably aware of the fact that in May of last
year, (2006), after almost three decades of hostilities, the
United States restored full diplomatic ties with the North
African nation of Libya. If you are not yet convinced of the
arguments I have presented in this article, perhaps this bit
of news will push you a little further in my direction. How
do you suppose the Bush Administration decided to explain
this surprise reversal to the American public? Believe it or
not, the U.S. Government's propaganda organ, the mass media,
splashed the news that this "wonderful event" had come about
as a result of Libya's iron-fisted Islamic dictator, Colonel
Muammar el-Qaddafi, who has been in power since 1969, coming
to his senses, by renouncing terrorism, and coming over to
the "good side".

As you may recall, over the past two decades, Libya has been
implicated in a number of terrorist-related activities. In
1986, it was the Berlin discotheque bombing in which two U.S.
servicemen died. In 1988, it was the Pan Am Flight 103 attack
over Lockerbie, Scotland, in which 270 people perished, 189
of whom were Americans. In 1989, it was a French airliner,
UTA Flight 772, in which 171 individuals died in Niger. When
Libya refused to acknowledge its crimes, the U.N. Security
Council imposed sanctions in 1992, and then again in 1993. In
2003, after ten years of sanctions, Libya supposedly had a
change of heart, acknowledged its crimes, and agreed to pay
almost three billion dollars in compensation. It also said
that it was renouncing terrorism.

As I told my mailing list readers last May, I don't believe
the media's story for a minute. There may be some elements
of truth to the story, but I think the American decision to
restore ties with Libya has very little to do with Libya's
so-called "good behavior". Qaddafi is a dictator for life,
just like his neighbor, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, who receives
billions of dollars in U.S. aid every year. Qaddafi has been
associated with terrorism, which has resulted in hundreds of
people losing their lives. Finally, his human rights record
is absolutely atrocious. In 2004, the U.S. Department of
State listed Libya's human rights record as "poor". In 2005,
in its annual report, the Freedom House organization rated
political rights in Libya as "7", civil liberties as "7",
and gave Libya the freedom rating of "Not Free". Their scale
is based upon "1" meaning the most free, and "7" being the
least free.

All Middle Eastern dictators, whether it is Saddam Hussein,
Hosni Mubarak, Muammar el-Qaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, al-Saud
dynasty, King Abdullah, or anyone else, treat their citizens
the same. If one overly criticizes the government, they may
just disappear for life. In spite of this fact, the American
Government openly supports some of these leaders, and pays
them millions or billions of dollars a year in financial
aid to keep their regimes afloat; and then it turns around
and proclaims to the world that it is a defender of human
rights, and points the finger at other nations.

This concocted impression of America is an absolute lie. As
I've stated many times before, America doesn't really care
how a foreign leader runs his country, just as long as that
leader is pro-American, and is smart enough to do America's
bidding. When you don't, you end up like Saddam Hussein at
the end of a rope. Earlier I spoke about how over the years,
certain stop-gap measures have had to be implemented, in
order to keep the U.S. economy from crashing. While I was
speaking in economic terms, it is safe to say that in the
case of Saddam Hussein, the stop-gap measure they resorted
to was a permanent solution. He will never be able to defy
the U.S. again. Maybe the Shi'ite executioners pulled the
lever, but they did it with the U.S.'s tacit consent, and
everyone knows it. As Professor Petrov remarked, what the
U.S. has done in Iraq is a warning to other would-be rebels.

What really upsets me, is the politically-correct hypocrisy
that we are now seeing in the world press. I am by no means
a Saddam Hussein fan; but he sat in solitary confinement for
three years, and the world hardly peeped a word. Now that he
is dead, suddenly, all of these world leaders are lamenting
that he was executed under such questionable conditions, and
with such haste. I suspect that many of them are only doing
this, because they know that it is what is expected of them
by the public. They are just playing their roles.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Endtime Prophecy Net Search Engine

Additional Endtime Prophecy Net Links Endtime Prophecy Net Other Links

Home Page EPN Blog Bible Study Tools Map Resources
EPN Site Info EPN Forum KJV Verse Lists TCS Topsites List
Armageddon BBS EPN Chatroom Our World Message EPN Articles In PDF
Contact Us EPN Guestbook KJV Online Bible WW's Mini-Bio
Armageddon FTP EPN Plugboard EPN Search Engine WW's Gallery

WordWeaver's Facebook Page  Facebook WordWeaver's Twitter Page  Twitter WordWeaver's Blogger Page  Blogger WordWeaver's Tumblr Page  Tumblr WordWeaver's MySpace Page  MySpace

Please Help To Promote Endtime Prophecy Net Please Help To Promote Endtime Prophecy Net
While we do not ask for donations on the Endtime Prophecy Net website, we do ask that you help to support us in other ways. If you have been blessed by the information that you have found on the Endtime Prophecy Net website, please consider the following options:

1.  If you have a Facebook account, please consider clicking on the Facebook recommend/like button, if you find one on this page. It is usually located right above the "Endtime Prophecy Net Other Links" table. In addition to using this button to add a recommendation for our site to your Facebook page, the button will also allow you to add a comment as well.

2.  Click Here To Recommend EPN To Your Friends Via An Email Message

3.  Click Here To Learn How To Link To The Endtime Prophecy Net Website

4.  Please consider clicking some of the banners below to vote for Endtime Prophecy Net. Click as many as you like, but only once a day. Once you arrive on the other site, you may have to click a link or button for your vote to count for us! God bless you, and thanks so much for your support! Please click here for an explanation regarding how the topsites system works.

Top Christian Sites Topsites List
Independent Fundamental Baptist Topsites Top Prophecies of the Bible Websites IFB1000 - KJV Websites Close Encounters A Walk With Christ Bible Believers SBG - King James Only Directory
Top 100 Christian Websites Preaching Tools.Net Top 100 Websites Free Christian Content.org's Crown Sites Top 100 True Believin' Bible Thumpin' Sites FamilyNet International Topsites
Preaching The KJV 1611 Only EverGreat Christian Topsites The 1000 Such Days Topsites Blessings Top Site List
KJV Fundamental Christian Links The Best Baptist Web Sites at Baptist411.com Powerfulchuck's Top 100 Christian Sites The G12 Top 100 Christian Sites Top 50 Christian Websites
JCSM's Top 1000 Christian Sites Top Christian Websites Sharing Christ Top 100 Visitors List www.sitestop200.com Top 25 Golden Dove Websites Top Conspiracy Sites
Christian Top 1001 KJV-1611 Authorized Version Topsites Noah's Ark Christian (Christianity) - TOP.ORG The Top 100 Cool Sites Alternative Christian Topsites
Christian Topsites Growing In Grace Magazine's Top 100 Gospel Top Sites Born Again Sites Top Christian Communities God's Grace Saves Top List
UFO Chronicles Alienation Moons Of Jupiter Top Paranormal Sites Top 100 Sites for Christian Parents The Top 100 Christianity Sites
The Top 100 Family Friendly Sites Wrighteous Network Topsites Surrendering To God Top Christian Sites Share God's Love Top Christian Websites
Silent Messenger Top Christian Sites Christian Rankings Sovereign Grace Baptist Churches Christian Top 100 Serenity Hollow Top 100 Family Sites Top 100 Christian Sites
Top Christian Websites Kristi Ann's Haven Top Christian Sites The Christian-Traffic Topsites List Top Local New Testament Baptist Church Sites Great Sites Top 100+ On The Web
Christian Blog Topsites Wordpress Topsites BlogTopList Top Blogs - Increase SEO of Your Blog, Blogging Resources BlogTopList Blog Roll Center
Under His Wings Christian Topsites Johnson's Top 100 Sites Top 100 Jesus Sites The Top 100 Christian Fellowship Sites COCNET.us Top List Top Prophesy - Top Profecia
Contend For The Faith Holy Bible Message To The World Christian Traffic eXchange Top 100 Cyber-Evangelists
The Baptist Top 1000 Fundamental Christian Topsites Christian Top 1000 Bible Top 1000 The Fundamental Top 500
Top 100 Church Sites UCNET.us Top 100 A Christian Net Top 1000 The Banner Hotel Salt and Light Top 100 Christian Sites CyberSpace Ministry
The Mission Field Orthodox Christian Church Top 100 Websites SombodyCares4U 100 Greatest Sites
Top Christian Homemaker's Sites Nailed4all.Com Top Christian Sites The WahmBB Top Sites Iglesias Cristianas International Christian Ministry Top 100
Top Elite - The Most Popular (Yet Clean!) Sites on the Web Christian Link Exchange Bible Study Notes - Best Sites Live God Network KJV Bible Top 500
Bible Believers Top 100 Pastor Jon's Top 100 Christian Sites Christians Unite WKJV Radio's Top 100 Sites Top Christian Webpages
Top Christian Warrior Sites Jesus Is My Joy Ministries Must Join Groups Spirit 1 Christian Broadcasting Top Links