We

 

“We are standing at a historical frontier: Ahead is probably the most dangerous, unpredictable and, at the same time, important decade since the end of World War Two.”

most certainly are.

Matthew 24:21

For then shall be great tribulation, 

such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

The "great tribulation starts in about 3.5 years/ 

Tribulation starts any day now and I already said, many times and years ago what the signaling of that will be denoted by.

I love you honey :-).

TTYS baby.

I

 

mean what more you gotta know to be able to see where this is headed?

US Navy chief warns China could invade Taiwan before 2024

"The head of the US Navy has warned that the American military must be prepared for the possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan before 2024, as Washington grows increasingly alarmed about the threat to the island."

“When we talk about the 2027 window, in my mind that has to be a 2022 window or potentially a 2023 window,” Gilday told the Atlantic Council on Wednesday. “I don’t mean at all to be alarmist . . . it’s just that we can’t wish that away.”

(Or inflation, 

or climate change, 

or Ukraine,

 or,

 or,

 or,

...any of the other myriad crisies we face.

We cant just be like the so-called experts and say to ourselves:

"Oh it will be better middle of next year."

cause its not gonna be, 

and we need to be ready and face full on the glory that awaits us.

Go out in glory for goodness sakes.

The cowardly aren't gonna like their place in eternity.

Revelation 21:8

It's

 

never fixed inflation before 

(Interest rates below the rate of inflation)

 so why are they going to stop well short of what it takes to fix it now?

Discerning minds wanna know. 

Actually?

We already do know.

Fed's Harker bemoans 'disappointing' inflation progress: 'We are going to keep raising rates for a while'

"Fed officials have penciled in around a 4.6% stopping point for rate rises by next year, but some policy makers and outside forecasters believe a higher rate will be needed given the persistence of inflation."

(It's not its persistence, it's the fact that you have to get interest rates above it and we just cant do it. They are going to try and walk a tight rope of trying to lower inflation some and not defaulting on the interest payment on the national debt by stopping raising interest rates at 4.6% and they are gonna fail on both counts.

We have never beat inflation without interest rates above the rate of inflation and everybody at the Fed knows it so WHY would they stop at 4.6%?

Because they know what happens and they think they can straddle that tightrope and hope for the best on both counts.

Good luck.

In the words of Jamie Dimon:

"Brace yourselves."

Or?

Look at it this way:

"I always go back to: Why would we believe that the people who made the decisions to put us in this situation we find ourselves in now, why would they also be the same people who would be able to get us out of the position that they put us in?"

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE U.S. DOLLAR LOSES RESERVE CURRENCY STATUS? The CEO of Relai brings up some important considerations for the possibility that the U.S. dollar fails to maintain its status of world reserve currency.

Come riddle me that one somebody...

anybody?

The answer is pretty obvious,

They cant.

And everything between now and total world wide economic collapse is just like Peter Schiff said, "We are just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic at this point."

THE FIRST LETTER TO TIMOTHY

 

again, from:

THE FIRST LETTER TO TIMOTHY

The three letters, First and Second Timothy and Titus, form a distinct group within the Pauline corpus. In the collection of letters by the Apostle to the Gentiles, they differ from the others in form and contents. All three suggest they were written late in Pad's career. The opponents are not "Judaizers" as in Galatians but false teachers stressing "knowledge" (gnosis; see note on 6:20-21). Attention is given especially to correct doctrine and church organisation. Jesus' second coming recedes into the background compared to references in Paul's earlier letters (though not Colossians and Ephesians). The three letters are addressed not to congregations but to those who shepherd congregations (Latin, pastores). These letters were first named "Pastoral Epistles" in the eighteenth century because they all are concerned with the work of a pastor in caring for the community or communities under his charge.

The first of the Pastorals, 1 Timothy, is presented as having been written from Macedonia Timothy, whom Paul converted, was of mixed Jewish and Gentile parentage (Acts 16:1-3). He was the apostle's companion on both the second and the third missionary journeys (Acts 16:3; 19:22) and was often sent by him on special missions (Acts 19:22; 1 Cor 4:17; 1 Thes 3:2). In 1 Timothy (1.3), he is described as the administrator of the entire Ephesian community.

The letter instructs Timothy on his duty to restrain false and useless teaching (1:3-11:4:1-5; 6:3-16) and proposes principles pertaining to his relationship with the older members of the com munity (5:1-2) and with the presbyters (5:17-22). It gives rules for aid to widows (5:3-8) and their selection for charitable ministrations (5:9-16) and also deals with liturgical celebrations (2:1-15). selections for the offices of bishop and deacon (3:1-13), relation of slaves with their masters (6:1-2), and obligations of the wealthier members of the community (6:17-19). This letter also reminds Timothy of the prophetic character of his office (1:12-20) and encourages him in his exercise of it (4:6-16). The central passage of the letter (3:14-16) expresses the principal motive that should guide the conduct of Timothy-preservation of the purity of the church's doctrine against false teaching. On this same note the letter concludes (6:20-21).

From the late second century to the nineteenth, Pauline authorship of the three Pastoral Epistles went unchallenged. Since then, the attribution of these letters to Paul has been questioned. Most scholars are convinced that Paul could not have been responsible for the vocabulary and style, the concept of church organization, or the theological expressions found in these letters. A second group believes, on the basis of statistical evidence, that the vocabulary and style are Pauline, even if at first sight the contrary seems to be the case. They state that the concept of church organization in the letters is not as advanced as the questioners of Pauline authorship hold since the notion of hierarchical order in a religious community existed in Israel before the time of Christ, as evidenced in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Finally, this group sees affinities between the theological thought of the Pastorals and that of the unquestionably genuine letters of Paul. Other scholars, while conceding a degree of validity to the positions mentioned above, suggest that the apostle made use of a secretary who was responsible for the composition of the letters. A fourth group of scholars believes that these letters are the work of a compiler, that they are based on traditions about Paul in his later years, and that they include, in varying amounts, actual fragments of genuine Pauline correspondence.

If Paul is considered the more immediate author, the Pastorals are to be dated between the end of his first Roman imprisonment (Acts 28:16) and his execution under Nero (A.D. 63-67); if they are regarded as only more remotely Pauline, their date may be as late as the early second century. In spite of these problems of authorship and dating, the Pastorals are illustrative of early Christian life and remain an important element of canonical scripture.

The principal divisions of the First Letter to Timothy are the following:

I. Address (1:1-2)

II. Sound Teaching (1:3-20) 

III. Problems of Discipline (2:1-4:16)

IV. Duties Toward Others (5:1-6:2a)

V. False Teaching and True Wealth (6:2b-19)

VI. Final Recommendation and Warning (6:20-21)

FYI, "The Catholic Letters"

 

from:

"THE CATHOLIC LETTERS

In addition to the thirteen letters attributed to Paul and the Letter to the Hebrews, the New Testament contains seven other letters. Three of these are attributed to John, two to Peter, and one each to James and Jude, all personages of the apostolic age. The term "catholic letter" first appears, with reference only to 1 John, in the writings of Apollonius of Ephesus, a second-century apologist, known only from a citation in Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History. Eusebius himself (A.D. 260-340) used the term to refer to all seven letters."

The reason for the term "catholic," which means "universal," was the perception that these letters, unlike those of Paul, which were directed to a particular local church, were apparently addressed more generally to the universal church. This designation is not entirely accurate, however. On the one hand, Hebrews has no specifically identified addressees, and originally this was probably true of Ephesians as well. On the other hand, 3 John is addressed to a named individual, 2 John to a specific, though unnamed, community, and 1 Peter to a number of churches that are specified as being located in Asia Minor.

While all seven of these writings begin with an epistolary formula, several of them do not appear to be real letters in the modern sense of the term. In the ancient world it was not unusual to cast an exhortation in the form of a letter for literary effect, a phenomenon comparable to the "open letter" that is sometimes used today. With the exception of 1 Peter and 1 John, the ancient church showed reluctance to include the catholic letters in the New Testament canon. The reason for this was widespread doubt whether they had actually been written by the apostolic figures to whom they are attributed. The early Christians saw the New Testament as the depository of apostolic faith; therefore, they wished to include only the testimony of apostles. Today we distinguish more clearly between the authorship of a work and its canonicity: even though written by other, later witnesses than those whose names they bear, these writings nevertheless testify to the apostolic faith and constitute canonical scripture. By the late fourth or early fifth centuries, most objections had been overcome in both the Greek and Latin churches (though not in the Syriac), and all seven of the catholic letters have since been acknowledged as canonical.

I

 

use the New International Version of the Bible (put together by the former International Bible Society) a lot and it has most of my highlighted, underlined, and starred notes etc :-).

But I have had a few instances where I am in  total disagreement with their wordings of text, I highly recommend having several versions of the bible in your home to be able to cross reference with and always default back to the King James Version when in doubt about a particular text and even then have a King James Bible that has a  Hebrew/Chaldean dictionary handy for the Old Testament and a Greek Dictionary for the new testament such as in this:

I can not recall all the verses that I have had problems with the NIV with but I can provide two glaring examples, one of which was on full display this past Sunday during worship:

Jeremiah 29:11

New International Version

For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

As compared to:

Jeremiah 29:11

King James Version

For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.

It's like the seed of the modern prosperity gospel were planted right there in that one verse, especially when taken out of the context of the rest of the passage as Pastor Bridgette so adeptly pointed out Sunday.

and this one as well:

Daniel 12:4

New International Version

But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.”

Daniel 12:4

King James Version

But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

The King James Version just says that knowledge will be increased, NOT,  that many will be running to and fro for the purpose of increasing knowledge. 

The very first time I ever read that passage I thought those were two very distinct thoughts, almost worthy of being two different sentences and that was when reading the NIV Version. Then I read the King James one day and just kinda went:

oh thank goodness, that makes much more sense.

Point is:

Have a couple of versions available to be able to cross reference and have one with the dictionaries of the original Hebrew/Greek words :-).

Somebody

 

said a while back:

"At 2.5% there goes the housing market."

Yup...

US saw record drop in home sales in September: Redfin

"Home sales declined the most on record in September as mortgage rates surged and pushed prospective buyers out of the once-hot housing market, according to a new report."

"A report from the real estate company Redfin shows the number of homes sold fell by 25 percent and new listings dropped by 22 percent last month, marking the biggest declines on record in both categories — excluding numbers at the onset of the coronavirus pandemic in April and May 2020."

"Although prices have declined recently, sky-high mortgage rates have pushed monthly payments up by more than 50 percent year over year, according to the report.

The median home price in the U.S. rose by 8 percent year over year in September to $403,797.'

(I'm nuts for living in a garage? How about you people are nuts for paying $403,797 on average for a home? I mean seriously, which option is more crazy these days?)

“With inflation still rampant, the Federal Reserve will likely continue hiking interest rates,” Zhao said. “That means we may not see high mortgage rates—the primary killer of housing demand—decline until early to mid-2023.”

Mortgage rates have more than doubled since last year, reaching a 20-year high last week, according to data released Wednesday by the Mortgage Bankers Association."

(I just love it when "experts" just say something and then offer no explanation as to why they believe that outcome would be that way:

"That means we may not see high mortgage rates...decline until early to mid-2023."

Based on what exactly?

What makes them think that?

What are they citing and where is the reference?

1 Thessalonians 5:3

For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

false prophets 

in social commentary

in media

in politics

in economics

ought to be telling you where we are exactly.

Does

 

it not make sense to everybody that when "Joe sixpacks" (yes plural) start saying, 

"Well we oughta..." Fill in the blank with whatever you want.

I just typically get up and leave the room?

I mean can people not understand why that is?

Lil more info, FYI

 

A game of numbers: How air defense systems work and why Ukraine is eager for more protection

Iain Boyd, Professor of Aerospace Engineering Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder

Tue, October 18, 2022 at 7:39 AM

"To understand Zelenskyy’s emphasis on air defense, it’s important to look at the types of air weapons that Ukraine faces and how air defenses work to counteract those threats. It’s also important to understand why this type of warfare is all about the number of assets each side has at its disposal."

Increased air attacks

On Oct. 10, 2022, Russia launched a large barrage of airborne weapons against a variety of targets in Ukraine. The types of weapons involved in the attack included short-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

(Remember that, short-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles )

"Ballistic missiles are accelerated by rockets from the ground or from aircraft, tend to follow a predictable path and are somewhat easier to track. Cruise missiles carry a propulsion system that allows them to maintain speed and fly more unpredictable flight paths, including trajectories that are close to the ground. They are much more difficult to detect, track and shoot down."

"Then, on Oct. 17, Russia launched a barrage of explosive drones at Ukraine’s capital city, Kyiv. Explosive drones, known as loitering munitions, tend to be small weapons that are difficult to defend against. By circling overhead, they are able to surveil a region of interest, gathering information before identifying a specific target to attack. Russia has acquired explosive drones from Iran, according to U.S. officials."

"Air defense systems

The defense against all such air threats involves an integrated system of several elements.

Early warning radars located at Ukraine’s borders first detect the approach of missiles. These weapons are further tracked along their flight trajectories by a dispersed network of additional radars. The primary defensive countermeasure against ballistic and cruise missiles involves surface-to-air missiles (SAMs): You destroy a missile using a missile. This is no easy feat because the SAM must track, home in on and hit a high-speed target that may be changing direction."

"In the U.S., key strategic assets such as the White House are protected against aerial attack by the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS). NASAMS was designed to counteract a variety of incoming threats, including cruise missiles, aircraft and drones. Each NASAMS contains 12 interceptor SAMs. No information is available publicly on its effectiveness. NASAMS is one of the options being considered by the U.S. to help support Ukraine."

(Notice it didn't it protects from mention hypersonic weapons? Because it doesn't.)

"Another notable example of an air defense system is the Israeli Iron Dome. The system is designed to defend against rockets and artillery shells launched from up to 155 miles (250 kilometers) away. Each Iron Dome missile battery consists of three to four missile launchers, each with up to 20 interceptor SAMs.

The system is reported to have a 90% kill rate for rockets launched against Israel. Veteran national security correspondent Mark Thompson described Iron Dome as possibly the most effective missile defense system the world has seen."

(Already discussed that, its designed to shoot down slow, low flying, low yield missles/rockets made in garages in the West bank basically, not Russian cruise and balistic missiles. Again, no good options...)

"Both NASAMS and Iron Dome are reported to be effective against drones. However, SAMs are an expensive way to defend against such low-cost targets, and they could be overwhelmed by large numbers of drones. Directed energy weapons such as high energy lasers are being developed and deployed to provide a potentially more cost-effective approach to neutralizing low-cost drones."

(We got time to develop those? I'm glad we are and Ive read an article that was saying just how far along we are in their development but this conflict is right here right now. Again, going back to the Fionna Hill piece, "Time is not on our side.")

"A numbers game

"The significance of the plea by Zelenskyy for additional air defense systems can be understood in the context of a numbers game. Different air defense systems have a range of effectiveness against different aerial threats. However, none of the defense systems is 100% effective."

"Moreover, an adversary can significantly reduce the effectiveness of air defense by launching salvos of multiple weapons simultaneously. Therefore, an attacker can always overwhelm a defender if the attacker has more attack missiles than the defender has defensive missiles. Conversely, a sufficient number of defensive systems may cause an attacker to stop firing altogether. It becomes a war of attrition, with the winner being the side with the most missiles."

(Given his credentials I'm surprised he didn't mention that the missiles being launched are far more inexpensive than the SAM's used to try and shoot them down,  it becomes a game of economics as well.

"The primary defensive countermeasure against ballistic and cruise missiles involves surface-to-air missiles (SAMs): You destroy a missile using a missile. This is no easy feat because the SAM must track, home in on and hit a high-speed target that may be changing direction."

And that is why they are so much more expensive.)

"Ukraine likely has sufficient air defenses to protect strategic military targets such as command and control centers and ammunition dumps. They do not have coverage of many other key assets such as transportation hubs and power and water facilities, the types of targets Russian forces have been targeting in recent days."

"Should the West agree to provide significant numbers of air defense systems to Ukraine, it could significantly change the course of the conflict. At some point, Russia will have to confront the finite depth of its missile stockpile."

(And the west will have to confront the high cost of providing such systems to Ukraine as well. What  we need to provide them is far more expensive and difficult to produce than the missiles russia is using. It's an economic war of attrition and quite frankly we dont know how many precision Guided Missiles Russia has, it obviously has more than we thought it did just a few days ago would be my contention given the recent attacks. Article goes on to state: The number of remaining Russian high-precision missiles is already reported to be running low. And then links to the article I just did a piece on previous to this one entitled: I thought they were out of missiles? )

"Without the ability to wear down and demoralize Ukraine through airstrikes, Russia would be faced with the much more daunting and drawn-out prospect of relying solely on ground forces to grind out its objectives."

(Just like the Fiona Hill interview, not one mention of the Hypersonic missiles that have already been employed by Russia in this conflict, which was the first time they have ever been used in a theatre of war. Not one mention of their use, not one mention of any possible defense against them. This is from: "Iain Boyd, Professor of Aerospace Engineering Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder" who BTW  according to the article, "receives funding from the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of Energy, NASA, Lockheed-Martin, and L3-Harris." The question to me is: Why no mention of Hypersonic missiles previous use in this conflict and why no mention of defensive systems that can be employed against them? I think the answers are glaringly obvious. There isn't one...yet anyway...and we dont have the time to develop a defense against a technology we haven't even mastered ourselves and the powers that be know this, they just dont want you to know.

(Everybody should be required to watch a documentary on the siege of Leningrad to see just what lengths the Russians will go to tp persevere to accomplish their goals. They lost 28 million people in WW2, to them? they are out to redo the out come of that conflict to terms more favorable to them and they just happened to pick the timeframe when we are at our weakest.

God speed everybody.

Journey well my friends.)

I love you baby.

I

 

reiterate:

Ukrainians told to 'charge everything' as power grid hit by Russia

"Serious damage was reported to power facilities in Kryvyi Rih in central Ukraine and Burshtyn in the west. Ukrenergo (Ukraines electric co basicly) said there had been more attacks in the past 10 days than in the whole preceding period since Russia's invasion on 24 February."

I thought they were out of missiles?

I thought they were out of missiles?

 

Russia’s airstrikes, intended to show force, reveal another weakness

Oct 14th 1 AM EDT

"...no matter how many times Russia fires at Ukraine, pro-war Russian nationalists want more, even though targeting civilian infrastructure is potentially a war crime."

"But the hawks, who are demanding publicly on TV broadcasts and on Telegram to know why Russia does not hit more high value targets, won’t like the answer: The Russian military appears to lack sufficient accurate missiles to sustain airstrikes at Monday’s tempo, according to Western military analysts.

(Baloney. your Western Military analysts are flat out wrong. The reason they aren't hitting more high value targets is to draw this conflict out as long as they can, and only a select few know it, that's why the Russian war hawks aren't being told and wont be told whats going on. Mob bosses dont go around telling every lieutenant exactly what they are up to. Too many cooks spoils the dinner etc...)

“They are low on precision guided missiles,” said Konrad Muzyka, founder of Gdansk, Poland-based Rochan Consulting, offering his assessment of Russia’s sporadic air attacks. “That is essentially the only explanation that I have.”

(Sandbaging for the real conflict is not even a possibility there Mr. Muzyka? Really? Nobody else is even considering this?)

"The experts said the reason Russia had yet to knock out electricity and water service across the country was simple: it can’t."

"Since May, Russia’s use of precision guided missiles (PGMs) has declined sharply, with analysts suggesting then that Russian stocks of such missiles may be low.

(Opps. That was six days ago. Look at what is going on now:

Ukrainians told to 'charge everything' as power grid hit by Russia

Not one "expert", not one? is even suggesting that the Russians are sandbagging for the real conflict when it comes? Why? Not even one is suggesting as much? Why?)

“If Russia had a limitless supply of PGMs, I think that they would still strike civilian targets, because that’s what the Russian way of warfare is,” Muzyka said.

("They dont fight wars like we do.")

"He said analysts did not have confirmed information about Russian missile stocks or production levels, and judgments were based on the decline in usage of PGMs and Moscow’s greater reliance on less accurate missiles."

(Thats faulty logic, black or white thinking, it is ignoring the possibility of other options that do exist.

Another example: Russia isn't using as many precision guided missiles as it was before, therefore it's stockpiles of such weapons must be running low. That argument just flat out ignores the other possibilities that exist.)

"But a clue lies in Russia’s failure to destroy the kinds of targets that Ukraine is able to hit using U.S.-supplied HIMARS artillery. “If we take a look at what HIMARS has done to Russian supply routes, and essentially their ability to sustain war, they’ve done massive damage to Russia’s posture in this war,” Muzyka said. “So technically, you know, if the Russians had access to a large stock of PGMS, they could probably inflict a similar damage to Ukrainian armed forces, but they haven’t.”

(Again, that is a logical fallacy. The argument is being presented as either or when in fact other options do exist.

"if the Russians had access to a large stock of PGMS, they could probably inflict a similar damage to Ukrainian armed forces, but they haven’t."

Maybe because they want this conflict drug out? 

Because it benefits them and hastens the fall of the US and the West?

Thats not even a remote possibility as to why they are engaging in this conflict in the manner they are?

No "expert" ever thought of that?

I have a hard time believing that, I really do.

Remember the Fiona Hill interview piece I did a few days ago? What did she say?

"Time is not on our side."

So if you could destroy a country pretty much at will, but dragging it out benefits your side long term and hurts more serious foes abroad than the foe you are engaged with? why wouldn't you conduct the conflict in such a manner as is being waged?")

“They actually failed to,” he continued. “They even failed to interdict the main Ukrainian supply roads. They failed to destroy bridges, railway, railway intersections, and so on and so forth.”

(Yeah, they are saving it for later...duh...)

“Russia lacks the missiles to mount attacks of this sort often, as it is running out of stocks and the Ukrainians are claiming a high success rate in intercepting many of those already used,” Freedman (Lawrence Freedman, professor of war studies at King’s College London) wrote. “This is not therefore a new war-winning strategy but a sociopath’s tantrum.”

(Maybe Mr. Freedman should read the news today:

Ukrainians told to 'charge everything' as power grid hit by Russia

"President Volodymyr Zelensky said three energy facilities had been destroyed on Wednesday and energy companies were preparing for "all possible scenarios" for winter. He was due to address a summit of EU leaders, who are trying to reach an agreement on bringing down gas prices.

(Ukraine is worried about survival and the EU wants to lower gas prices...nice.)

Serious damage was reported to power facilities in Kryvyi Rih in central Ukraine and Burshtyn in the west. Ukrenergo (is an electricity transmission system operator in Ukraine and the sole operator of the country's high-voltage transmission lines.) said there had been more attacks in the past 10 days than in the whole preceding period since Russia's invasion on 24 February."

They are running low remember? 

Or are we just wishing they were? False prophets of the media etc...

Those quotes are from the article in the link above, not the article I'm currently going through :-). back to the task at hand.)

Putin’s “need to calm his critics also explains why he has lashed out against Ukrainian cities,” Freedman wrote. “The hard-liners have been demanding attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure for some time and they now have got what they wanted. But they will inevitably be disappointed with the results.”

(That I agree with. Recent attacks serve Putin's purposes, drag out the conflict, make Ukraine suffer, pleases his hardliners etc, so that makes sense.)

“These attacks could well be repeated, because it is part of the mind-set of Putin and his generals that enemies can be forced to capitulate by such means,” he added. “But stocks of Kalibr and Iskander missiles are running low.”

(Well they are being repeated...just like they said, they have started a new phase of the conflict. "But stocks of Kalibr and Iskander missiles are running low.”...Remember what the article said earlier? "Analysts did not have confirmed information about Russian missile stocks or production levels, and judgments were based on the decline in usage of PGMs and Moscow’s greater reliance on less accurate missiles." So just how does Mr. Freedman know PGM stocks are running low? They are just now starting to get started. God help us all.)

"One apparent goal of Russia’s strikes on six electrical substations in Lviv, western Ukraine, was to stop Ukraine exporting electricity to Europe, Shagina said. The strikes also crippled the city’s power supply."

(Lviv, it's practically in Poland for goodness sakes, so why didn't they hit it earlier if they could? They obviously had the capability the experts were saying they didn't have. So which argument makes more sense, "They are not hitting them because they can't." Or, "they weren't hitting them  before because the goal is to drag this on as long as possible?" Discernment yo.)

"Muzyka said Russia, ignoring international conventions, has consistently targeted civilian apartment blocks and infrastructure in two Chechen wars, in Syria and Ukraine.

(They dont fight wars by western standards, they just don't, haven't, and wont.)

“Definitely they focus on the power grid as a way of making civilian lives miserable,” he said. “For Russians, striking civilian areas, residential areas and anything that can potentially impact the lives of civilians is a military objective, because for Russia, the war is total.”

(They were all in from the get go, I listed seven of Putin's goals in the Fiona Hill piece, there will never be a negotiation, Ukraine will have a nuclear weapon detonated on its territory or The West will stand down...Again, there are no really good options are on our table.)

Grand Rising Massive

 

My sunshine.

I love you baby.

TTYS Honey :-).

Tell

 

me about it...

I love you baby :-).

Just

 

gonna keep hammering on it...

Russia’s use of Iranian drones in Ukraine raises stakes for US, Europe

“In order to guarantee the protection of our skies, we need significantly more modern air defense systems. And this is not only Ukrainian interest. The fewer terrorist opportunities Russia has, the sooner this war will end.” 

Zelensky said in his evening address Monday."

(If that is the case why isn't Moscow using it's air force? And why hasn't it been using it all along? And why are people asking this question?)

"German air defense systems arrived in the country last week, and Spain has committed to sending its own “Hawk” air defense systems. Counter-drone equipment from NATO and more U.S. air defense support is said to be on the way."

When

 

exactly 

are people going to understand 

what the current confluence of crises is really all about?

Matthew 24:21

‘Bad situation’: Soaring US dollar spreads pain worldwide

Strong Dollar Global Impact

 "A surging U.S. dollar makes their local currencies weaker, contributing to skyrocketing prices for everyday goods and services. This is compounding financial distress at a time when families are already facing food and energy crunches tied to Russia's invasion of Ukraine."

(Again, this was all part of the calculus way ahead of time.)

“A strong dollar makes a bad situation worse in the rest of the world,’’ says Eswar Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell University. Many economists worry that the sharp rise of the dollar is increasing the likelihood of a global recession sometime next year."

(I dont know when it is going to come, it will be a process more than an event, but it will not be a recession, it will not be a depression, it will not be a financial crisis, it will be a total and complete economic collapse, and its coming...)

"The reasons for the dollar’s rise are no mystery. To combat soaring U.S. inflation, the Federal Reserve has raised its benchmark short-term interest rate five times this year and is signaling more hikes are likely. That has led to higher rates on a wide range of U.S. government and corporate bonds, luring investors and driving up the U.S. currency."

"Most other currencies are much weaker by comparison, especially in poor countries."

"A rising dollar is causing pain overseas in a number of ways:

— It makes other countries' imports more expensive, adding to existing inflationary pressures.

— It squeezes companies, consumers and governments that borrowed in dollars. That's because more local currency is needed to convert into dollars when making loan payments.

— It forces central banks in other countries to raise interest rates to try and prop up their currencies and keep money from fleeing their borders. But those higher rates also weaken economic growth and drive up unemployment."

"The soaring dollar in 2022 is uniquely painful, however. It is adding to global inflationary pressures at a time when prices were already soaring. Disruptions to energy and agriculture markets caused by the Ukraine war magnified supply constraints stemming from the COVID-19 recession and recovery."

(I'd revisit Matthew 24:21 again if I was you, and to those who would argue this has all happened before? Not with the likes of deception we have in the world now it hasn't,  (Matthew 24:4) along with several other arguments I have postulated previously, ie the falling away has happened, the great apostasy has happened, the antichrist being revealed etc...It's different this time, the world has never seen the confluence of crisies like it is currently witnessing and were still not even to the tribulation period, let alone "the great tribulation".)

It's

 

exactly what they want US to be doing...

My Goodness...

Dipping into its oil reserves is America’s strongest response to OPEC cuts for now

"Come winter, more oil sales could be on the table “if needed due to Russian or other actions disrupting global markets,” the White House said."

By the digits

180 million: 

barrels authorized for release by Biden back in March have now been exhausted with the latest 15 million

36%: 

how much the strategic petroleum reserve (SPR) has declined by since Biden took office

400 million: 

barrels of oil left in the US strategic reserve—the lowest since 1984

19.89 million: 

barrels of oil the US consumed daily in 2021, suggesting the 15 million release won’t even satiate one day’s appetite.

2 million: 

barrels a day OPEC+ cut back on

$3.854: 

national average gas price—high, but still lower than the June peak of $5

$67 to $72: 

the price at or below which the US government will restock the strategic reserve

12 million: 

daily US oil production, 1 million shy of pre-pandemic levels

(Lets see here, 400 million barrels in the SPR, 

US consumed 20 million barrels a day in 2021 so that's

20 days of consumption left in the SPR...

Like I said in an earlier post, 

What could possibly go wrong?

We walked right into Russia's trap...We really did.)

"Oil prices aren’t only affected by SPR releases. Market forces, recession fears, and reopening of refineries under maintenance all play a part in the cooling off, too."

(Agreed but our and our ally's SPR drawdowns were the single biggest determining factor in bringing down gas prices this summer.)

"And in addition to releasing reserves and replenishing stock, there’s another way to bring prices down: taking from the deep pockets of oil giants. Biden has called on companies to pass on lower energy costs to consumers “right away”

(Oh I'm sure they will get right on it...plz...)

"You are about to see a global energy crisis the likes of which you can not even imagine."

I remember somebody saying a lil bit ago...

John 16:13

1But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Good Read

 

How Russia is disrupting the US election (again)

"Prices are increasing at an average pace of 8.2% per year, considerably more than incomes are rising. A surge in the cost of staples such as food and rent leaves many Americans with no way to offset their declining purchasing power."

(Yeah, a recent bank of America note said we are stuck with this for the next 10 years. What is going to be left of US at that point becomes my question.)

"Inflation has no single cause, and some Biden critics want voters to think of the Democrats’ 2021 stimulus bill as the main trigger of higher prices. But Russian acts of aggression, both military and economic, are probably the biggest factors pushing food and energy prices higher."

(Inflation may not have a single cause that is true, but what is not being said (Discernment) is creating 6 trillion $ in two years was the single biggest factor in inflations rise and it is here to stay for a good while. The money supply is what was inflated, so now your currency isn't worth what it used to be, and yes good ole corporate America never misses an excuse to raise prices and yes incomes are going up but like the article says not near as much as the cost of goods and services etc)

“Ranging from higher oil prices to a global food crisis all the way through to the imminent threat of energy security in Europe, the conflict has certainly taken its toll,” Moody’s Analytics economists wrote in a recent report on global commodity markets. “Higher oil and gas prices have dealt a huge blow to purchasing power in major developed nations such as the U.S. and Germany, pushing them to the brink of recession.”

(It's kinda the game plan yo.)

'Maximum damage for the West'

(It's becoming so apparent what the aim of the conflict is that it just can not be kept under wraps any more)

"The Russian war against Ukraine has pushed prices up in several ways. Ukraine is a major grain exporter, and Russia has interdicted some of that trade, causing shortages and higher prices. Strict sanctions imposed on Russia by the United States and Ukraine’s other allies have caused further shortages, even though those sanctions aim to exempt staples such as food.'

(Yeah, they backfired on us, just like somebody in the Kremlin knew they would.)

"Then there’s Russia’s oil and natural gas, which accounts for more than 10% of global production. Russia has used that leverage to starve Europe of desperately needed natural gas, and keep oil markets tight. Russian ally Saudi Arabia seems to be helping, by imposing a cut in oil production on the OPEC+ oil cartel. That has helped Russia earn a windfall in oil revenue, while consuming nations have to pay more.

(First time I have ever seen that in print: "Russian ally Saudi Arabia." They were never really our ally.)

"This is not mere collateral damage, the unintended economic consequence of military action. Russian President Vladimir Putin actually practices what strategists call “hybrid war”—a military war on the battlefield coupled with nonmilitary efforts to harm anyone opposing him, and weaken their resolve."

(Well no kidding, thanks for the heads up.)

“Russia is in a hybrid war with the collective West,” Tatiana Mitrova, a research fellow at Columbia University, said during an Oct. 12 energy forum. “In the West, people do not actually understand that they are at war with Russia. But one goal of this war is to wage maximum damage for the West.”

(Like I said above, it's become so obvious what he is doing that it just can not be ignored any more...Only took what...7, 8 months? Somebody was saying it day one of the conflict and he's not a "research fellow at Columbia University.")

"Another coming shock is a surge in heat and electricity prices this winter. That has everything to do with Putin’s energy war and an acute shortage of gas in Europe, now that Russia has pulled the plug. US natural gas prices haven’t surged as much as they have elsewhere, but we’re not immune to those price hikes, either."

(If you are employed in an industry that uses a lot of natural gas? Brace yourselves...)

"Energy is a key component in many manufactured and processed goods, including food. That’s one explanation for grocery costs that are up 13% during the last year. There’s also a global shortage of fertilizer, because Russia and Belarus (also subject to certain sanctions, as a Russia ally) produce key components. Fertilizer accounts for nearly 20% of a typical American farm’s operating costs, and near-record prices raise the retail price of food. So does the higher cost of energy for farm equipment and transportation."

(So, I'm just trying to get this right in my mind here, cause you know, I'm no "research fellow at Columbia University" or anything like that... Energy cost are going to go up but inflation has peaked? How does that work exactly if oil and natural gas go into 6000 different consumer products?

Somebody said it (inflation) hasn't even really started let alone peaked yet.)

"Food inflation may be a bigger problem for Biden now than gasoline costs. Soaring gas prices during the spring directly correlated with a decline in Biden’s approval rating, which then recovered as gas prices fell. But the average family only spends about 3% of its budget on gas. Food is about 12% of total spending, or four times as much as gas. That 13% hike in food costs means many families are struggling to pay for something they can’t do without."

(Energy and food, the two things you need the most for survival.)

Journey well my friends.

Godspeed everybody.