L.B.: The Antichrist Checklist

Left Behind, pp. 135-142

Buck Williams has his work cut out for him. He's in charge of investigating and reporting the biggest story in the history of the human race.

What caused the instantaneous disappearance of 1/3 of the world's population? Could this strange event have been the result of foul play? Are the missing still alive? Is it possible they could return just as suddenly and mysteriously? What does it mean to suddenly find ourselves in a world without children?

None of these questions occur to Buck or to his editor, Steve Plank, as they sit down to discuss his duties in the days ahead. They aren't yet able to answer even the most basic questions about the disappearances — who, what, when, where, why, how? — but none of this seems to bother them.

Buck thinks he should be investigating international financiers. Steve, on the other hand, thinks Buck should focus on the Jews. Yes, you don't have to be a member of the John Birch Society to work here … but it helps!

Here again we see the hurdle facing LaHaye and Jenkins: So much prophecy, so little time. They haven't got the luxury of following up on the aftereffects of the "rapture" because they've got a rise-of-the-Antichrist to follow. Buck and Steve have already moved on to this next plot point. Even though neither one of them is aware of the importance of the Antichrist in premillennial dispensationalist mythology, and neither is aware that Nicolae Carpathia will become the Antichrist, the authors know all of this, and so the authors begin Chapter 8 with an extended conversation about Carpathia.

The Antichrist of PMD is the same one you may have read about on old heavy metal album covers. Iron Maiden and Hal Lindsay may be cheering for opposing sides, but they share a common mythology.

These are the sources to which you'll have to turn to learn about this character, the Antichrist, and what he means to folks like L&J. Without this basic Darby/Lindsay/Scofield/Iron Maiden framework in mind, it's unlikely that you would come away from the Bible with this idea of "The Antichrist." The word "antichrist," after all, only appears in one book of the Bible and it's not Revelation. The term doesn't come from John's Apocalypse, but rather from his epistles. And there, actually, the word is plural: "you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come."

The singular, capital-A Antichrist of PMD prophecy is based on a variety of passages cobbled together from throughout the Bible. He is the Beast of Revelation; the King of the South and the King of the North from Daniel; the false Christ(s) that Jesus warns against in Matthew's Gospel and Paul's "man of lawlessness" from Thessalonians (which is a delightfully Nietzschean phrase). The composite sketch derived from all these descriptions yields a portrait that looks a little like Nebuchadnezzar, a little like Antiochus Epiphanes, a little like Nero or Diocletian, and a little like Victor von Doom.

The favorite passage of both metalheads and prophecy experts is from Revelation 13:16-18. Many of the items on the Antichrist Checklist are derived from this passage:

He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.

Later, we'll explore some of the details of the Antichrist Checklist. For now, the particulars of this list are less important than the basic point that the list exists, and that it forms the outline for the remaining chapters of Left Behind. This checklist is the subtext of today's section of the book, and why the authors have Buck and Steve improbably discussing the new president of Romania:

"Didn't they just elect a leader, what, 18 months ago?" Buck said, remembering Dirk's tip that a new leader would seem out of place and time.

"Big shake-up there," Steve said. "Better check it out."

Scarcely 36 hours ago the world was plunged into chaos. Against such a cataclysmic backdrop, it's hard to imagine how any change of political leadership anywhere could seem out of place. Apparently, however, not a single head of state was among the disappeared, so aside from Romania, every other administration remains intact. This means that every head of state is both a heathen and an expert politician — since each of them has been able to weather the turmoil that might be expected to follow the disappearance of all of their nation's children.

Their discussion of Carpathia continues, offering choice bits of dialogue such as:

"… the only wrinkle in Carpathia's history is some rumors that he was ruthless with his business competition years ago."

"How ruthless?"

"People took dirt naps."

"Ooh, Steve, you talk just like a mobster."

Plank does have a fleeting flash of perspective, but Buck talks him out of it:

"We're talking Romania here, Buck. Romania. Nonstrategic, scant gross national product, never invaded anybody, never anyone's strategically. There's nothing there but low-level internal politics."

"It still smells major to me," Buck said. "Rosenzweig was high on this guy, and he's an astute observer. Now Carpathia's coming to speak at the U.N. What next?"

Here again the United Nations is spoken of as an effective, powerful, prestigious authority. Buck seems in awe of the idea that Carpathia could rise to become the next Boutros Boutros Ghali.

This view of the U.N. only makes sense in light of the Antichrist Checklist. If the Antichrist is eventually going to rule over everyone and force them to accept his mark, then he will have to preside over a single, all-powerful World Government. If you believe that this One World Government is destined by prophecy, and that this prophecy is going to be fulfilled very soon, then you will look on any existing multilateral, international organizations — no matter how ineffectual or marginal they may appear to be — as the precursors of this global totalitarian reign.

This is why everybody in LB speaks of the U.N. as an all-powerful and malevolent institution. This is also how readers who swallow the LB perspective come to think of the U.N. and or of any multilateral cooperation or treaty. Another small reminder of the way these books and their popularity influences American politics and policy.

Steve reminds Buck that his assigned priorities are the upcoming conventions in New York of "Jewish Nationalist" leaders, "Orthodox Jews" (a separate, but equally Jew-y group) and "international monetarists setting the stage for one world currency."

All of these conventions are still on, their schedules unchanged and undisturbed by the events of the last few days. It doesn't occur to Steve or Buck or the conferees themselves that a global cataclysm might be expected to alter either their travel plans or their pre-cataclysm agendas.

Steve sends Buck home to rest before returning to the office later that evening. Mercifully, Jenkins only spends half a page detailing the logistics of Buck's cab ride.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Harv

    To answer Ginger’s post:
    But if you don’t have faith, the only reason to do good deeds is because it is the right thing to do. There’s no reason to do it out of fear of hell or selfish desire for heavenly reward. Hence to inculcate good motives in people it would be best to preach non-faith. Furthermore a truly good God would hide his existence, and certainly that of heaven and hell, and let people choose right for the right reasons. Or so a strong argument goes.
    First, I think you sort of straw-manned my argument by adding an assumption to it – that being that faith is the only way to know what is right. I didn’t suggest that – and I doubt God cares if you do right because you believe or don’t believe in a specific religion. An all-good God would only care that good was done, not necessarily why.
    I’ll take your counter on in several of its assumptions – first, the argument suggests that the purpose of God for the world is to sift out the good people from the bad. Therefore, God would want to see if you choose right or wrong without being given the answer. I don’t think that makes sense – would not an all-good God want all people to do the right thing? So therefore would not God try to point the way for people to help them do the right thing? Therefore, faith would be one of the better ways to lead one to knowledge of the right things.
    It’s hard to argue something so complex as faith in a message forum – so many things can’t be laid out. I will add this to help others understand my position – I don’t believe that the purpose of life is to sort out people who will be saved and those who will not. Therefore, I also do not believe that *anyone* winds up in hell; the God I believe in is all-powerful but also all-merciful – there is no one whose sins can not be forgiven, no one who can not be redeemed. Wih that, my position on faith may make a little more sense – faith has no reward other than itself.
    Is it infallible – can it never be misinterpreted? Certainly not – and it doesn’t diminish faith to suggest that. But then again faith is not based on reason alone – it has other parts to it – mystical, emotional, spiritual. And that can’t be argued by logic – it has to be experienced directly.

  • chris Borthwick

    Are there any Jewish Messianic coming novels? With, say, Rebbe Schneerman (wasn’t it)?

  • natasha

    666 grams – The molar mass of the Beast.
    Devon – “It’s part of the current covenant and whatever the rules were before Jesus died were replaced with the new rules, namely, accept the gift or go to hell.”
    I second the commentor above: what the heck kind of gift is that? It turns god into Prince Humperdinck with his marry me or die offer, and that’s just bloody inconceivable.

  • Hopea

    Here in Finland a Lutheran pastor wrote a book about redemption with the title “Everybody goes to heaven” (rough translation), needless to say he got into hot water with his bishop. Although I have not read his book, I met him at a party and he explained his main argument to me. The gist was that he defined “faith” in a very special way. According to him faith was something close to hope, and that everybody needed hope and faith in order to live. Thus everybody has faith and because faith is the only thing necessary for salvation, everybody is saved. Through I had sympathy for the argument I could not but think that his theory was a piece of sophistry designed to update dated ethical thinking contained in Lutheran church doctrine.
    It was also a reminder how much depends on the exact meaning of terms like “faith”.
    Heh, it occurred to me that what I’m doing is pretty hazardous according to Catholic doctrine: Only a fully-informed, freely-given and knowing rejection of Jesus Christ warrants damnation in Catholic theology.
    Perhaps it’s safer to be ignorant…
    Of course, I’m hardly a remote islander, so maybe I’m already in for it. Once again much depends on what exactly terms like “fully informed” and “rejection” mean. I haven’t had time to read Dominus Iesus yet, so maybe those terms a clarified there.

  • Hopea

    From Dominus Iesus:
    Faith is a gift of grace: “in order to have faith, the grace of God must come first and give assistance; there must also be the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and gives ‘to everyone joy and ease in assenting to and believing in the truth’”.
    This comes close to predestination in my mind. I have always wondered about the supposed volitional character of faith. I could not choose to believe that the Moon is made of cheese. It’s contrary to everything I know about the natural world. Similarly, I don’t think I could start to believe in god, simply by deciding to do so. I could say that I believe, but that would be a lie. So the passage from Dominus Iesus certainly rings true. But that takes us back to square one. Who gets the grace that enables belief? Certainly not everybody, for I have not had any such experience.
    reading on….

  • aunursa

    In Tribulation Force, the sequel to Left Behind, the president is a foul-mouthed Democrat in the middle of his second term.

  • ajb

    Thanks for checking out the encylical.
    Your first comment, about “ignorance”, is actually true. In fact, we give it the cool, superhero title “invincible ingorance” (God can’t jack you for ignoring a teaching that you don’t know about).
    And, you’re right. Arguably by exposing someone to the Gospel, you’re putting their salvation in jeopardy should they choose not to believe! Of course, ultimately one has to consider WHY someone doesn’t respond to being evangelized. This undoubtedly has alot to do with our earlier conditioning and formation alot of stuff that probably works on a subconscious level that I’m not smart enough to understand. It also undoubtedly has alot to do with the hugely flawed, sinful, humans that God chose to spread his Word. For instance, many people would view exposure to the Gospel as just a “new set of rules” (all the “thou shalt nots. . . “). But we know that God should be a blessing and not a burden, and our Faith something to celebrate and not mourn.
    I sometimes wonder, if the Truth about God is as great as we Christians believe it to be, it doesn’t seem that anyone would knowingly, with full consent, reject that Truth. Is there a nanosecond in that amorphous point between “life” and “death” in which we’re presented with the unvarnished Truth (and by that I also mean the Truth stripped of the religious baggage that alot of “believers” attach to it) and challenged to either accept or reject it? If so, would anyone rationally reject it?

  • ajb

    With respect to your second point, there are actually different types of “grace”, or rather, different concepts that we articulate using the label “grace”.
    For example being in a state such that we’ll go to heaven should we die at that moment is considering being in a state of “sanctifying grace”. We refer to other gifts, blessing, etc, that we receive from God as “actual grace(s)”.
    The Christian concept of “original sin” is the idea that, because of some defect in human nature that resulted from whatever happened that scripture describes mythologically as the “fall” in the “garden”, we are born without “sanctifying grace”.
    According the Gospel, Jesus said the ONLY way to get back into this state is through Baptism.
    But then, Scripture also tells us that God is all good, all loving, all just, desires EVERYONE to be save and calls EVERYONE to Himself.
    The reconilication of those two competing concepts is what Pope John Paul was grappling with in the encylical.
    Earlier in Church history, theologians developed concepts like “limbo” for children who die before being Baptized (this was never officially adopted by the Magisterium, though). The Church also speaks of “baptism by blood”, referring to those who die for the Faith even before Baptism. And also, “baptism by desire” for those who’ve begun the process of conversion but died before being Baptized.
    It seems that sanctifying grace is made available to all in some mysterious way, but that it also requires both the cooperation of each individual, as well as the assistance of the community of believers that Jesus left behind and commissioned to go out and preach the Gospel.

  • cjmr’s husband

    Discussions getting to serious again, so here’s more Fun with Calculators:
    6.66×10^23 – Avagadro’s Number of the Beast
    1.0106×10^1593 – Factorial of the Beast
    2.82347 – log of the Beast
    I’d say that this is getting derivative, but the Beast is a constant, and the derivative of a constant is 1.
    Alas, I don’t have a good one for “999”.

  • Devon

    999 would be the number of the Dyslexic Beast.

  • Hopea

    $6, 66/month Rent-a-Beast. For your own private affordable apocalypse.
    Since I’m spoiling the thread with seriousness.

  • B. Gates

    666 KiloBeasts should be enough for anybody.

  • Dan Layman-Kennedy

    83.25 – Hemidemisemibeast.

  • pharoute

    have we done the sine of the beast? sine(666) = -0.0176416 where 666 is the angle in radians

  • R. Mildred

    I sometimes wonder, if the Truth about God is as great as we Christians believe it to be, it doesn’t seem that anyone would knowingly, with full consent, reject that Truth. Is there a nanosecond in that amorphous point between “life” and “death” in which we’re presented with the unvarnished Truth (and by that I also mean the Truth stripped of the religious baggage that alot of “believers” attach to it) and challenged to either accept or reject it? If so, would anyone rationally reject it?
    The truth hurts, what if the truth is that God has been pretty much hands off since life started up in the primordial swamp, and that there is no plan, and that every single act of barbarism and hatred and pointless violence happens wihtout meaning.
    We’re a funny species, we’ll quite gladly reject a truth if it isn’t the truth we want, I could imagine many fundies denying that great truth if it involves them not being god’s special little elite children, if all the people they hate, the loose women, the homosexuals, the liberals and non-white non-americans were to get into heaven and the fundies had a choice to either go to this heaven or reject it for whatever else, then I reckon a great many would, or if not actively reject it, decide that the great Truth is a lie, and reject it anyway just because it’s not the answer they were expecting.
    Maybe that’s what a good life really is, just becoming a person who will accept that final Truth regardless of whether it’s what we wanted precisely. maybe not.
    What if it’s all just 42? how would you react?

  • Hopea

    Well, not at all I guess, because if it is all just ”42”, there is no point when the pointlessness of all is revealed. Anyway, that is what I expect.
    When asked whether I’m an agnostic or an atheist, I find it difficult to answer. It turns into a word game about what exactly an atheist is supposed to be claiming. If you wade through the epistemology and semantics, I think that “atheist” would be a truer description, but I usually call myself an agnostic. Too many people believe being an atheist involves claiming to know that there is no god, which is logically impossible.
    I come from a home where religion played no role. I don’t think I have had any religious experiences and frankly, religion seems to me to be about projecting our human wishes unto an uncaring universe.
    My interests on this site are rather selfish. I have no interest in convincing anybody to share my opinions; rather I’m trying to understand those of others. I feel that religion and faith specifically is something I don’t really understand. While I think it rather unlikely that I would change my mind about religion, I’m open to the possibility.
    I’ve been posting on this site because a lot of smart people from different religious backgrounds and/or philosophies write comments here. It also seems almost miraculously troll free. But I realize this comment thread is about Left behind, so if there is a place that would be more appropriate for the kind of stuff I’ve been writing, I’d be grateful for any suggestions.

  • Harv

    Hey it’s all fair game I think on the message boards – discussions evolve as they do because it seems we all tend to respect each other. No need to apologize – the nature of faith is very relevant topic for Left Behind.
    And I appreciate your honesty about your personal views – and I think anyone who is totally honest with themselves would admit *they* don’t understand religion and (especially) faith. I think you are commendable for asking honest questions and being open-minded. Just don’t be surprised if getting an answer never fully happens – for me (who grew up much like you)that’s been a lesson learned over time.
    I don’t worry about the people who express doubt concerning their faith; it’s the ones who assure me they have no doubts that I think are in peril. They give a false sense of what it takes to be a Christian to those asking the question – as if Jesus/God requires you to never, ever doubt in order to “join the fold”. That leads to either rejection based on false information, or acceptance under standards that can never be met (which leads to all kinds of nasty things like guilt and hypocrisy).
    Good luck, and hope to see your posts here in the future.


    Two Prophesies in the Garden of Eden.
    (Absolute Foundation Prophecy)
    God say’s, if you eat or even touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that is in the midst of the garden you will Surely Die.
    The Serpent / Satan say’s, if you eat or even touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that is in the midst of the garden you will Surely Not Die.
    Question: When the prophet Jesus comes and offers the gift of eternal life which/whose prophecy does he fulfil.
    Two schools of
    Food for thought Satan in the 21st century
    Yours Sincerely
    There is a school of thought that say’s that the second coming of Jesus may have actually been Muhammad and that Islam is really christianity take two.
    Holy Smoke
    There is an interpretation that when
    God was speaking too Moses from the Burning Bush Moses was actually smoking
    cannabis and having hallucinations / visions as is not all too uncommon with those
    who partake of the holy weed if this were true would it mean that Moses was
    inspired by Satan or God?
    Left handed bible story ( Unorthodox )
    Ehud son of Gera the Benjaminite , the left handed man who saved Israel , [Judges 3;12-30, Holman Christian Standard Bible , Biblegateway.com]
    12 The Israelites again did what was evil in the LORD’s sight. He gave Eglon king of Moab (N) power over Israel, because they had done what was evil in the LORD’s sight. 13 After Eglon convinced the Ammonites and the Amalekites to join forces with him, he attacked and defeated Israel and took possession of the City of Palms. (O) [i] 14 The Israelites served Eglon king of Moab 18 years.
    15 Then the Israelites cried out to the LORD, and He raised up Ehud son of Gera, a left-handed (P) Benjaminite, [j] as a deliverer for them. The Israelites sent him to Eglon king of Moab with tribute (Q) [money].
    16 Ehud made himself a double-edged sword 18 inches long. [k] He strapped it to his right thigh under his clothes 17 and brought the tribute to Eglon king of Moab, who was an extremely fat man. 18 When Ehud had finished presenting the tribute, he dismissed the people who had carried it. 19 At the carved images near Gilgal he returned and said, “King [Eglon], I have a secret message for you.” The king called for silence, and all his attendants left him. 20 Then Ehud approached him while he was sitting alone in his room upstairs [where it was] cool. Ehud said, “I have a word from God for you,” and the king stood up from his throne. [l] 21 Ehud [m] reached with his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh, and plunged it into Eglon’s belly. 22 Even the handle went in after the blade, and Eglon’s fat closed in over it, so that Ehud did not withdraw the sword from his belly. And Eglon’s insides came out. 23 Ehud escaped by way of the porch, closing and locking the doors of the upstairs room behind him.
    24 Ehud was gone when Eglon’s servants came in. They looked and found the doors of the upstairs room locked and thought he was relieving himself [n] in the cool room. 25 The servants waited until they became worried and saw that he had still not opened the doors of the upstairs room. So they took the key and opened the doors—and there was their lord lying dead on the floor!
    26 Ehud escaped while the servants waited. He crossed over [the Jordan] near the carved images and reached Seirah. 27 After he arrived, he sounded the ram’s horn throughout the hill country of Ephraim. The Israelites came down with him from the hill country, and he became their leader. 28 He told them, “Follow me, because the LORD has handed over your enemies, the Moabites, to you.” So they followed him, captured the fords of the Jordan leading to Moab, and did not allow anyone to cross over. (R) 29 At that time they struck down about 10,000 Moabites, all strong and able-bodied men. Not one of them escaped. 30 Moab became subject to Israel that day, and the land was peaceful 80 years.

  • omg satire

    Steve reminds Buck that his assigned priorities are the upcoming conventions in New York of “Jewish Nationalist” leaders, “Orthodox Jews” (a separate, but equally Jew-y group) and “international monetarists setting the stage for one world currency.”
    All of these conventions are still on, their schedules unchanged and undisturbed by the events of the last few days. It doesn’t occur to Steve or Buck or the conferees themselves that a global cataclysm might be expected to alter either their travel plans or their pre-cataclysm agendas.
    Clearly the reason these conferences are still on is because Jews derive their sustenance from eating non-reasoning children and now they need to figure out how they’re going to survive in this child-free environment.

  • Jason

    Two Prophesies in the Garden of Eden.
    (Absolute Foundation Prophecy)
    God say’s, if you eat or even touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that is in the midst of the garden you will Surely Die.
    The Serpent / Satan say’s, if you eat or even touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that is in the midst of the garden you will Surely Not Die.
    Question: When the prophet Jesus comes and offers the gift of eternal life which/whose prophecy does he fulfil.
    Two schools of
    Food for thought Satan in the 21st century
    Yours Sincerely
    For Tanya,
    There is one way both prophecies can be. God and Satan are one in the same! It makes sense, because they are both there at the beginning. We always assume there was some war in heaven with Lucifer becoming evil and Jehovah becoming good. Perhaps it was a split of necessity rather than a split of disagreement, a test to see what the creatures of Earth would choose between. That would explain why the Bible at times can seem so confusing. Of course it is when the person inspiring it has a split personality.
    Does that make what Jesus did wrong, no. It just means we as human’s cannot begin the phathom the true existence of God. In the end, the end times so to speak, God does not so much triumph over Satan, as much as they simply become one again. I mean let’s face it, if God already knows what is going to happen, what’s the real incentive for Satan anyway? Yeah, take a few billion souls to an inhospitable place, but don’t you think he’d really want to win? I would.
    That’s like saying one football team is destined to beat another. When that final game arrives, the chosen one knows its going to win, while the other loser does everything it can to shake it up. The destined team gets caught off guard while the loser looks more superior. However, the destined team plays up to its level and suppresses the loser team. If this is true, and continues that way, all they can do is tie. Neither can win. So what was the real point, other than trying to confuse people and get them to place all their bets on one or the other?
    You can either be good or evil, not both at the same time. Since neither would ever come to a common ground, they can either destroy one another completely, or become one and agree to disagree. And that person would be Jesus Christ. He has experienced what light and darkness are all about, as a human. The reasons, humans tend to ride the fence within themselves, dabbling in both light and darkness. It’s just human nature to be indecisive until something goes off in your head and makes you choose something. That’s why I believe in Christ, because he chose to be for something far greater than himself. It may have been predestined, the cards may have been stacked againts the bad guy. On paper, Jesus looked invincible. But until the game is played, you never know how things are going to turn out.
    That’s why I find the Left Behind books a bit uninteresting. They are trying to predict how the world is going to end. And its not even that interesting, I stopped reading them after half of Apollyon because it was obvious the books were simply regurgitating the Bible and not coming up with anything entertaining. Books are meant to entertain unless they are about something that is true. The end times have not happened yet and we’d better pray they don’t anytime soon. Because I don’t want to know how the end times will truly unfold. I know these guys were just writing to try and make an entertaining, christian story, but after the first book I feel the message just gets lost. And the worst part, people started thinking these books were like prophetic fact. I got sucked in too. But, I saw the error of my ways. They are just books and nothing more. But if they are true, if these books can predict the future, then you’d better really hope my book isn’t true. It is a far more gruesome end than Left Behind ever has shown.
    As far as Hell, I really do believe there is a place like that, where souls go. But not because God sends us there, because we send ourselves there. It is, once again, a choice. Whether it is because you don’t believe in Christ or simply cannot forgive yourself, I believe we put ourselves in that Hell. Ever since man sinned, we’ve been given the chance to control our own fates, which is why there is the choice to accept Christ’s salvation. A lot of people consider Christ’s sacrafice as a second chance, but maybe that is flawed. Perhaps, it just simply gives a way towards God since going towards Satan is so much more readily available? I mean, all it took was deciding to eat an apple to turn on God. But it takes a man being willing to give up his life to give us even some slim chance at redemption. It’s not a second chance, its the only chance. So why so grandiose? Well, its only grandiose after the fact and I think that is why people get mixed up with the end times stories. I don’t believe the end times will unfold in some grandiose series of events like in Left Behind. I believe it will be very subtle and catch us so off guard we’ll never see it coming, until it is too late.
    What that will be? Well, we’ll just have to wait and see won’t we?

  • hapax

    Jason! Dude! Loved you as Robin, really, but ever since that Red Hood thing? La-a-ame…

  • Abraithwaite70

    eglon earth tax lord 1970 will up rise in 2012 anticrist

  • Assuming you’re the real hapax, you certainly don’t sound very hapax-y. :P

    Anyway, this?

    “Ooh, Steve, you talk just like a mobster.”

    Did Buck really say that? He sounds like he’s got a huge crush on Steve the way he sounds all gushy in that sentence.

    And that’s so weirdly un-Buck-like, TBH, because he usually avails himself of being a massive ‘splaining douchebag.

  • Reading this I’m reminded a conversation with my Mum, years ago, in which she chastised me strongly for voicing a pro-EU membership opinion (I’m British) – warning me to recall the Left Behind books, and that “it all starts off in Romania”

    It should be said that, since then, my mother has had an attack of sanity and is no longer a PMD :) – but, still, it beggars belief that any sane person could make such a series of logic steps.

  • nameslikehumansworthless

    Anybody unmarked will have their head disconnected