blog.Tribulationperiod.com

ANNAPOLIS – SWEET AND BITTER!

November 16, 2007

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Revelation 10:7-11 – But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. [8] And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me again, and said, Go and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. [9] And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. [10] And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

[11] And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

Revelation 11:15,18 – And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

[18] And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

An exposition of the Scriptures above is found following the Jerusalem Post Article in this Blog.

The events of the Middle East since my many incursions into it in from 1952 to 2000, plus all current and prophesied future events, h ave

never failed to be a bitter and sweet taste, like the taste of a dish called “sweet and sour pork. If I were not a believer that one day soon the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, was going to suddenly return, I do indeed confess my “taste” of individual events would, in most cases, be either bitter, sweet, or bland. As I read the terrible things that will be happening to the Jewish population during the last three and one-half years of the tribulation period, it creates a sweet thought in my mind, because it means the coming of the Messiah is on our doorstep, but as I consider the horror it will create on both young and old, it generates a very bitter taste in my stomach. The Bible translations at times render a certain word as “bowels,” which really means a feeling in the stomach usually associated with anger, anxiety or compassion. On more than one occasion I have been advised by some of my Jewish friends that I am “getting in their stomach.” It is usually at this point that I change the conversation as it relates to Jesus being the Messiah of both Jew and Gentile.

The Annapolis Peace Conference is a bitter and sweet affair for me. I know that IF a Middle East peace actually comes out of it, it must be a false peace. Seeing a false peace actually come out of it would generate a sudden surge of mixed emotions within me. It would be very sweet news to me, because I have been waiting for years for it to occur

with the awareness its arrival would mean Messiah’s coming was so close I could taste it.

But at the same time I would be acutely aware it also meant God’s judgment and wrath was about to be poured out on this earth. I have a sweet taste because false peace means the long awaited millennial reign of Jesus is near, but a bitter feeling of sadness because I know the descendents of Jacob are being led down a garden path to a quicksand mire at the end of the trail. Whatever God does, whether it involves his love or wrath is a sweet taste to me, and I feel absolutely no bitterness toward him, because he is good, gracious, merciful, and just. The bitter taste I feel is toward myself, and my fellow man, for making his judgment necessary by our conduct toward him.

An exposition of Revelation 10:7 with 11:15,18 may be found after the Jerusalem Post Article, which perhaps would shed light on the bitter and sweet feelings John experienced from the time he tasted it until he digested it.

Begin Jerusalem Post Article

Civil Fights: Ehud Olmert’s misplaced trust

Evelyn Gordon, THE JERUSALEM POST

November 14, 2007

It is too soon to know the full extent of Ehud Olmert’s pre-Annapolis concessions. But already, according to press reports that his office has not denied, he has made one concession devastating to Israel’s security: accepting Washington as the arbiter of whether the Palestinians have fulfilled their counterterrorism commitments under the road map.

The road map states that as the Palestinians progress on counterterrorism (arresting terrorists, confiscating weapons, reforming their security services, etc.), Israel must dismantle its own counterterrorism measures: For instance, it must remove checkpoints and withdraw the IDF to

the September 28, 2000 lines. Clearly, taking these steps before the Palestinian Authority is both willing and able to prevent attacks would leave Israel vulnerable to the same relentless terrorism that characterized the first years of the intifada, before these measures were in place. Thus a premature determination that the PA is in fact willing and able to take over is a recipe for renewed suicide bombings in Israel’s heartland.

The crucial question, therefore, is whether the US can be trusted to make this determination in Israel’s stead. Since America has long been Israel’s staunchest ally, entrusting it with this task might seem unobjectionable. However, there are two reasons why the US cannot be trusted to protect Israel’s security needs in this case: Keith Dayton and Condoleezza Rice.

LIEUTENANT General Dayton is the official US security coordinator for the “peace process.” His mission includes helping the PA reform its security services and monitoring Palestinian progress on counterterrorism. As Washington’s point man for security-related issues, he would naturally be the one to decide whether the PA had in fact fulfilled its counterterrorism responsibilities sufficiently to mandate reciprocal Israeli measures.

Unfortunately, Dayton has proven himself an utterly incompetent judge. This past June, when Hamas launched its takeover of the Gaza Strip, it crushed Fatah’s forces in a mere five days. Yet during weeks of preliminary skirmishes, Dayton – virtually alone among journalistic and diplomatic observers – had insisted that Fatah was fighting much better than anyone gave it credit for and would win a decisive clash if one came.

Why Washington did not recall him after this fiasco remains a mystery. What is certain, however, is that a man who so badly overestimated Fatah’s will and ability to fight Hamas in Gaza cannot be trusted to correctly estimate its will and ability to fight Hamas in the West Bank. Yet that is precisely what Olmert is trusting him to do: By accepting the US as an arbitrator, Olmert has effectively pledged to withdraw the IDF from much of the West Bank the moment Dayton declares the PA both willing and able to fight terror – even if his judgment is as delusional as it was last summer.

THE SECOND problem is Dayton’s boss, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Since she will be responsible for making Israel obey Dayton’s decisions, Israel could theoretically appeal to her should it consider these decisions flawed. In practice, however, there is no chance of her accepting such an appeal – because if there is one thing Rice has proved definitively over the past two years, it is that she has no interest whatsoever in Israel’s security concerns.

If that assessment seems harsh, consider her behavior over the Agreement on Movement and Access, which she brokered following the August 2005 disengagement.

The agreement was meant to ensure the free flow of goods and people to and from Gaza, including between Gaza and the West Bank. Israel’s consent, however, was predicated on the assumption that Fatah, then in sole control of the PA, would work to suppress Gaza-based terror. Instead, rocket fire on southern Israel from Gaza not only continued, but intensified: In 2006, the first full year post-disengagement, the number of rockets launched from Gaza at Israel more than tripled compared to 2004, the last full year pre-disengagement.

And Fatah forces made no effort whatsoever to stop this fire.

Israel thus refused to allow regular convoys between Gaza and the West Bank unless and until the PA, which would be responsible for security on these convoys, took serious action against the rocket threat. That was an obviously vital security measure: Because the West Bank, unlike Gaza, is in rocket range of all of Israel’s major cities, rocket technology must be kept out; yet with the PA demonstrably unwilling or unable to fight the rocket plague in Gaza, it clearly could not be trusted

to ensure that Gaza-West Bank convoys were not used to transfer this technology.

Rice, however, did not see it that way: She demanded that Israel honor its commitments regardless of whether the Palestinians were honoring theirs. Indeed, she continued pushing this issue up until Hamas kicked Fatah out of Gaza in June. As late as May, she was still promoting Dayton’s “benchmark” plan, which called for starting Gaza-West Bank convoys on July 1, even though it required the PA to deploy a revamped security service in Gaza – i.e. one willing and able to fight Gaza-based terror – only by the end of 2007.

In other words, Rice thought Israel should enable convoys to the West Bank six months before PA forces were even in position to keep them from transporting rocket technology, much less demonstrably doing so.

The message could not have been clearer: She considered rocket fire on Tel Aviv an acceptable price to pay for Palestinian freedom of movement.

TO HIS credit, Olmert resisted her on this issue. But now, in his desperation to demonstrate “progress” at Annapolis, he has pledged to dismantle Israel’s entire security network in the West Bank merely on Dayton’s and Rice’s say-so. He has thereby created an impossible trap: Either Israel will indeed have to dismantle its security measures prematurely, leaving the country vulnerable to a new wave of suicide bombings, or it will have to mortally insult its closest ally by refusing to accept its decisions even after having promised to do so.

If that is the measure of Olmert’s judgment in the pre-Annapolis talks, none of us should be sleeping well at night.

End Jerusalem Post Article

Begin Exposition to explain the events which caused John to have a sweet taste in his mouth which turned to a bitter taste in his stomach after he swallowed the little book of Revelation 10.

Words That Are Laid Out To Describe An End Time Mystery!

I Corinthians 15:51,52 – Behold, I SHEW (LEGO) you a MYSTERY; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, [52] In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the LAST (HESCHATOS) trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

SHEW – LEGO – This is the only place in the Bible that LEGO is translated as SHEW. LEGO means “to lay out before.” In this context it would mean “to lay out before the listener in words.”

LAST – HESCHATOS – In reference to time, it means the last thing that completes an action or event. The use of the word, in this context, means that other trumpets had sounded before it, probably in a lengthy series, for if there had only been say one, two, or three, then saying the second or third would have been the normal pattern exhibited in scripture, such as the second or third woe in Revelation.

Paul was “laying out with words” the events of a MYSTERY that would be FULFILLED when the LAST TRUMP sounded.

More than 20 years after Paul’s death, John described the FINISH of the MYSTERY that Paul had previously LAID OUT WITH WORDS, which described some of the events associated with it.

Revelation 10:7 – But in the days of the VOICE of the SEVENTH angel, when he shall BEGIN to sound, the MYSTERY of God should be FINISHED, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

When the LAST TRUMP, in a series of seven trumpets, BEGINS to sound, the MYSTERY of God will be the action that COMPLETES the gathering of all the saved into a place we call heaven. For the first time all the saved will be in heaven, gathered from the earth, both the dead and the living.

Revelation 11:15 – And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

Christ will descend with the VOICE of the archangel, which I believe to the highest angel in the seven trumpet series, whose sounding begins the final action Paul LAID OUT IN WORDS, and then John announced its TIME OF COMPLETION when the SEVENTH TRUMPET SOUNDS.

I Thessalonians 4:16,17 – For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the VOICE of the archangel, and with the TRUMP of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: [17] Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

The completion of the MYSTERY will place all of the saved of all the ages before the judgment seat of Christ in heaven, while the ones who morally corrupted the earth feel the wrath of the seven vials poured out on the earth.

Revelation 11:18 – And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which DESTROY the earth.

The very fact that the saved will not suffer the wrath of God’s seven vials is a very comforting thought.

I Thessalonians 4:18 – Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

I Thessalonians 5:9 – For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

Now consider the last phrase found in Revelation 11:18, “Them with DESTROY (DIAPHTHEIRO) the earth” – The Greek word translated “destroy” is “diaphtheiro,” which literally means “to make rotten to the core.” At one time I thought this meant they had, and were, in the process of physically destroying the earth because that is the common usage of the English word “destroy,” so I did not even bother to examine the Greek meaning for the word “diaphtheiro.” Since doing so I have changed my mind. I now believe it means they have been, and still are, “morally” corrupting the earth as lost men and women, and that God’s wrath will be poured on them as the consequence of rejecting his Son, while all of the saved are being judged in heaven.

DESTROY – DIAPHTHEIRO – to corrupt throughout, to bring to a worst state of depravity, to make rotten to the core.

The word can be used to mean a physical destruction of the earth or a moral destruction of the earth, so one does have a choice, and I have chosen to interpret a double use of the same word in Revelation 11:18 to be the physical destruction of those morally destroying the earth by the one who created the earth. The same word is translated as “corrupt” in other Scriptures in the New Testament, inferring moral or spiritual adultery – One by Paul, inferring spiritual adultery for false teaching concerning the proper way to worship God, is found in I Timothy 6:5 – Perverse disputings of men of CORRUPT minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

The following Scriptures show when the saved are going to be caught out in proximity to Revelation events, but no one at the present time knows when the sounding of the seventh trump will occur. When it does occur, all the saved will be taken up to heaven to be judged for the works done in their bodies for rewards, or the lack of them. For the first time since God created man, all the believers of God’s kingdom will be in heaven in body, soul, and spirit, and all the lost will be in, and on, this present earth.

Revelation 11:15,18 – And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. [18] And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

“And the nations were angry” – But Armageddon is five chapters away – Revelation 16:16 – And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

“And thy wrath is come” – God’s wrath does not come until the saved have been caught out – I Thessalonians 5:9 – For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

“And the time of the dead” – The saved dead experience resurrection and living saved are instantly changed – I Corinthians 15:51 – Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

I Thessalonians 4:16,17 – For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: [17] Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

“That they should be judged” – The saved of all the ages are judged by the PROMISED SEED in heaven – Genesis 3:15 – And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her SEED; IT shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise HIS heel.

“And that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great” – The saved are judged by Christ for the works they performed in their bodies, whether they were wrought by and in Christ, or by the old fleshly nature – II Corinthians 5:10 – For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Galatians 6:7 – Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Revelation 22:12,14 – And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. [14] Blessed are they that DO his commandments, that they may HAVE RIGHT to the tree of life, and may ENTER IN through the gates into the city.

Revelation 21:7 – He that overcometh shall inherit ALL things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

The real question that a believer needs to consider, after becoming the child of God through faith in his Son Jesus, is simply this: How much am I going to subm it myself to the indwelling Spir

it of Christ, to let him continue what he has started, once again overcoming the world, but this time he overcomes it in me. The degree to which you allow him to again overcome in you determines two things: (1) Whether you receive ALL of the reward he has waiting for you at his Son’s judgment seat, and (2) How close a relationship you will have with him in heaven, that is to say, where you abide in heaven in proximity to where he positions himself. All the saved remain forever in heaven, and all will be happy in glorified bodies, but those who served him after salvation will be happier than all the many that did not. Salvation is by grace through faith, and once it is received it is eternal, and does not need works to maintain it, but make no mistake, our salvation is a workmanship of the Spirit of God, and he created us for the purpose of being able to perform his works of his Spirit, and if we do not, we will be judged by Christ for not having done so.

Ephesians 2:8-10 – For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] Not of works, lest any man should boast. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that WE SHOULD WALK IN THEM.

Ephesians 3:21 to 4:4 – Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen. [4] I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that YE WALK WORTHY of the vocation wherewith ye are called, [2] With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; [3] Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [4] There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

Ephesians 2:22 – In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Revelation 3:4 – Thou hast a FEW names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall WALK WITH ME in white: for they ARE WORTHY.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.

We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

IS SYRIA READY FOR PEACE?

November 15, 2007

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

The Annapolis Peace Conference, set to begin on November 27, should be very interesting and reveal a lot of ulterior individual motivations for better or for worse, hidden by political smoke and mirrors. Survival, future political assignments, and national public voting popularity with additional votes will be among the motivations driving individuals at the conference tables.

The dilemma President Bashar Assad has faced, since he inherited the Syrian Government from his father, has been one which basically can be described quite adequately with a question – How do I hold all this mess together and SURVIVE? If he thinks the acquisition of the Golan Heights his father lost in the 1967 war will enhance his chances

of being able to stay in power, and he can stay in the good graces of his Islamic cronies by making some concessions to Israel while doing so, then he will go for peace.

But of one thing I am certain – whatever sort of peace agreement he would make with Israel, would be phonier than a twenty-one dollar bill, and shorter in duration than an isolated afternoon rain shower in the desert in late afternoon.

I cannot remember as much behind the scenes maneuvering, personal success political motivation, cross purposing confusion, and downright guile spilling out of a peace pot, since the Clinton administration’s final efforts to produce a propped up peace agreement between the PA and Israel.

Whatever comes out of the Annapolis Conference, this final generation is now heading for the eventual last roundup of the Church Age in the Middle East.

Begin Article 1 from Jerusalem Post

Syria reportedly agrees to attend upcoming Mideast summit

Jerusalem Post Staff, THE JERUSALEM POST

November 15, 2007

Syria will be attending the upcoming US-sponsored Mideast summit in Annapolis, the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram reported on Thursday.

Quoting a Palestinian source based in Damascus, the report claimed that Syria came to their decision after they received assurances that the United States would openly extend to them a formal invitation to the parley, rather than using discreet channels through the Arab League.

Meanwhile, opposition from Palestinian leaders to Prime Min ister

Ehud Olmert’s demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the “state of the Jews” intensified on Wednesday, threatening to derail the planned post-Annapolis attempt to renew substantive peace negotiations.

Nonetheless, Olmert – who reiterated on Wednesday that there could be no such talks without explicit Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish state

– is confident that the Annapolis joint statement of principles, which is still being negotiated between the two sides, will satisfactorily resolve the issue, The Jerusalem Post was told.

Veteran Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said Wednesday that the Palestinians would never formally recognize Israel as the Jewish state.

“Israel can define itself however it sees fit; and if it wishes to call itself a Jewish state, so be it,” he said in an interview with the satellite station Al-Arabiya. “But the Palestinians will never acknowledge Israel’s Jewish identity.”

In similar vein, Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad was quoted by Israel Radio as rejecting Olmert’s demand as unacceptable.

On Tuesday, PLO Executive Committee member Yasser Abed Rabbo also dismissed the demand, stating: “It is only a Zionist party that deals with Israel as a Jewish state, and we did not request to be a member of the international Zionism movement.”

Olmert has stressed repeatedly in recent days that there can be no negotiations whatsoever between Israel and the Palestinians until they acknowledge that Israel is the state of the Jewish people, and that he has made this clear to both the Palestinians and the Americans in the run-up to the Annapolis summit scheduled for the end of the month.

According to a statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office on Wednesday, following Olmert’s meeting with visiting European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, Olmert “referred to Israel’s insistence that the foundation for the post-Annapolis negotiations with the Palestinians be recognition of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people.”

Olmert, the statement went on, “made it clear that from Israel’s point of view, this issue is not subject to either negotiations or discussion.”

Earlier this week, Olmert declared that “Israel is a state of the Jewish people. Whoever does not accept this cannot hold any negotiations with me.”

Despite the apparently irreconcilable positions on this issue, the Post was told by well-placed sources on Wednesday night that Olmert believed the Annapolis joint statement would address the matter satisfactorily, enabling negotiations to proceed.

Israel, the sources pointed out, came into being in the wake of the UN General Assembly’s approval 60 years ago of the partition of Palestine “into Jewish and Arab states.” The entire basis of the two-state solution, they added, revolved around the notion of the Jewish state, Israel, alongside the Arab state sought by the Palestinians, Palestine.

“We are not the Israeli nation,” the sources said. “We’re the Jewish state.”

A lot of negative rhetoric was being heard from Palestinian officials

, the sources acknowledged, saying, “They’re going to have to resolve some of those contradictions.”

Begin Article 2 by Ron Ben-Yishai from Internet Sources

IDF believes in Assad

Bush, Olmert may disagree, but army believes Syria ready for peace, Palestinians aren’t

Ron Ben-Yishai

November 13, 2007

The recent cooling off in the relationship between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak is merely the tip of the iceberg; the one that enjoys wide coverage but is less important.

The mutual public insults they have traded, just like the disagreement over the procedural aspects of their meetings with top security officials, reflect not only the preparations they are making ahead of the competition for the premiership. They also attest to a deep and fundamental strategic disagreement over the question of the track Israel should be focusing its diplomatic efforts on in the coming year.

Olmert, with the support of the Mossad, National security Council, and also the American Administration, prefers to focus on an attempt to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. The prime minister is willing to put out feelers on the Syrian track, but he is unwilling to enter substantial and binding negotiations.

On the other hand, Barak, who enjoys the firm support of the IDF General Staff and assistance from the Shin Bet internal security service, believes that the gist of the diplomatic effort must be directed to the Syrian track, while the Palestinian channel should be handled cautiously and be kept on the backburner.

According to the security establishment’s assessment, at this time there is a good chance and substantial need to reach a binding peace agreement with Bashar Assad. According to this approach, the latter would be able to deliver the goods in exchange for the territorial and other concessions he’ll be receiving from Israel. On the other hand, according to Military Intelligence and the Shin Bet, even if Mahmoud Abbas signs an agreement, he would not be able to provide Israel with the level of security it requires. Any fundamental Israeli concessions in an agreement signed with him will constitute an opening position for the next round of negotiations – and a source for more international pressure.

“In the 60th year of its existence, the State of Israel finally has to produce permanent borders that come with a clear return address that we can reach understandings with and finalize binding agreements with,” says a very senior security official. “We can reach this state of affairs with Syria at this time; with the Palestinians, not yet.” According to the same source, a peace agreement with Syria will indirectly affect the Israeli-Palestinian arena as well, because it will disconnect Damascus from Iran, Hizbullah, and Hamas.

“If we don’t at least try to reach an agreement with Syria, we’ll be doing ourselves a disservice,” the security official warned. “All of us know what Syria wants and what previous Israeli governments agreed to give it. It’s clear to me that if we have another war today, we’ll win. But this war will cause terrible destruction and victims on both sides, and when it’s over we’ll sit down at the negotiation table with the Syrians and reach an agreement. So why should we join this march of folly?” he wondered, while alluding to Barbara Tuchman’s well-known book, which among other things addresses bloody wars that could have been prevented.

“Why don’t we try to enter negotiations at this point already in order to reach the same result we would be achieving after the war? In my estimate, today Syria is ready for such talks,” the security official said.

Lessons from the bombing

This approach, which as noted contradicts the views of the prime minister, was formulated in the IDF for many months, but received a boost mostly after the aerial assault in Syria.

Early this year, Military Intelligence already estimated that Assad means what he says. The question that remained open was whether the Syrian president wanted peace talks with Israel in order to reach a binding peace deal, or whether his only intention was to embark on talks for the sake of talks.

The Mossad, for example, argued that Bashar is interested in dialogue in order to end his isolation and so that the international community ease the pressure on him over matters such as the flow of terrorists from Syria to Iraq and the assassination of former Lebanese PM Hariri. The Mossad estimated that Assad is not ready for genuine peace moves in exchange for an Israeli willingness to withdraw from the Golan Heights. He only wants to talk. However, officials in the IDF’s intelligence branch recently reached the conclusion that Bashar is ready and willing to deliver the goods.

This was a result of information that points to the following trends:

1. Syria is uncomfortable with the Iranian bear hug, which manifests itself in all areas of life, including security and economics. Assad is unhappy to serve as a pawn on Tehran’s chessboard on its way to a nuclear bomb.

2. Assad wants to see continued economic development in his country. This growth, which constitutes the main motive for the popular support for his regime vis-à-vis Islamic radicals, has been based to a large extent on revenues from oil fields in northeastern Syria. However, output is declining.

Assad needs European and American investments in order to survive economically and politically – and he will only be seeing this should he disengage from the “axis of evil.” Peace with Israel may also grant him the Golan, and also free him from the status of a pariah state that is dangerous to invest in and maintain ties with.

3. The successful bombing of the Syrian nuclear site, according to foreign reports at least, made it clear to Assad that his attempts to acquire such weapons in the aims of reaching strategic equality with Israel are doomed for failure. The bombing also exposed Syria to additional criticism on the part of the international community and further deepened its isolation. Military intelligence officials estimate that this could lead Bashar to follow in the footsteps of Libyan leader Gaddafi. The latter, in a complete turnaround, abandoned his nuclear program upon its exposure and embarked on moves of reconciliation that brought Libya back into the family of nations.

The senior security official referred to this by saying: “We must treat Bashar in a manner that would turn him into a repenting Gaddafi, or alternately, present him as a pariah and a danger to regional peace just like Saddam Hussein. In any case, we’ll gain from such move.”

4. The bombing of the site made it clear to the Syrian regime that a confrontation with Israel could be destructive. The regime realized how transparent Syria is to the Israeli intelligence establishment, and how vulnerable its national infrastructure and missile arsenals can be in the face of the Israeli Air Force. At this time Bashar understands that despite the arms deals and military preparations, he is still far from the day where he would be able to force Israel, through missile and rocket barrages, to withdraw from the Golan. On the other hand, a harsh Israeli response could cause him and the Alawite sect to lose their grip on power. Military intelligence officials believe that Bashar has recently sobered up from the belligerent enthusiasm that overcame him in the wake of the Second Lebanon War. At this time he re alizes th

at Syria as a state, as opposed to Hizbullah, cannot afford to get entangled in an all-out confrontation with Israel.

Containment in Gaza, peace with Assad

As a result of these assessments, the security establishment has formulated a strategy that argues for “containment in the Palestinian arena and diplomatic initiative on the Syrian track.” The practical implication of such “containment” is a continued military effort aimed at curbing Palestinian terrorism, alongside economic and diplomatic moves aimed at boosting Mahmoud Abbas’ status. Should sanctions and military activities in Gaza fail to curb the Qassam fire, the IDF will embark on a wide-scale operation in the Strip aimed at destroying terror infrastructure and achieving intelligence supremacy. However, as a condition to such operation, the IDF demands large forces to be used for a lengthy period of time. Otherwise, according to estimates by top military officials, it would be impossible to achieve substantial accomplishments.

Barak and the defense establishment understand that Israel cannot afford to stay away from the Annapolis conference. However, they demand that Israel insist on implementation of the Road Map initiative in all matters pertaining to the dismantling of Palestinian terror infrastructure as a pre-requisite to any diplomatic progress. They also demand that understandings reached at the conference be general and non-binding. The time for a deal with the Palestinians will come after Israel will possess a reliable system for intercepting rockets and missiles, after Hamastan will cease to exist in Gaza, and when Abbas enjoys effective control on the ground.

But before all that, based on the same school of thought, Israel must embark on negotiations with the Syrians. Initially this should be done surreptitiously, through mediators (such as Turkey, for example,) and later openly.

Following the Annapolis summit, say those who back talks with Syria, it might be worthwhile to convene a special international summit that would be dedicated to this track.

This will provide the international framework and Arab legitimacy for a possible peace agreement between Jerusalem and Damascus.

According to foreign media reports, initial contacts are already underway, in preparation for convening such conference in Moscow. For the time being, this approach is getting the cold shoulder from the prime minister and US Administration.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

WILL NORTH KOREA CROSS THE RED LINE?

November 15, 2007

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

It is interesting to read the November 13, 2007 Article which follows, and then to compare it with the November 23, 2005 Blog which appears after it.

BEGIN DAILY YOMIURI ONLINE + ASSOCIATED PRESS

NORTH KOREA’S NUCLEAR THREAT

DPRK aid to Syria could start fire in Middle East

The Yomiuri Shimbun

November 13, 2007

More than a year has passed since North Korea’s nuclear test. Work to disable some of the country’s nuclear facilities has finally begun, but it is unclear whether North Korea will abandon all of its nuclear development programs. Starting today, part five of our “North Korea’s Nuclear Threat” series will focus on threats facing Japan and future tasks for the nation’s security policy.

Before dawn on Sept. 6, Israeli Air Force the F-15 fighters secretly flew over the Syrian desert about 145 kilometers from the border with Iraq.

Following coordinates from a guidance system set up on the ground by an Israeli commando unit known as Shaldag that had infiltrated the area, missiles from F-15s locked onto and destroyed a building east of the Euphrates River.

The covert mission was reported by U.S. and British media.

Though Israel has not disclosed details of the raid, the destroyed 47-meter by 47-meter building likely was a nuclear facility built with cooperation from North Korea.

According to the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), a private U.S. institution, the facility possibly accommodated a 20,000-kilowatt to 25,000-kilowatt nuclear reactor capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium.

During a recent interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun, M

aj. Gen. Aharon Zeevi Farkash, former chief of the Israeli Military Intelligence, pointed to a satellite photo of the building taken before the raid that was released by ISIS in October.

The building closely resembled a nuclear facility in Yongbyong, North Korea, he said.

Although North Korea and Syria have dismissed reports they might be cooperating on a nuclear facility, suspicions that they might have some “nuclear connection” are growing.

In October, Workers’ Party of Korea Secretary Choe Thae Bok, visited Syria to meet with President Bashar Assad. The meeting, at which they discussed cooperation on nuclear programs, suggests ties between Pyongyang and Damascus have become cozy in recent times.

Israel has not officially confirmed that it possesses nuclear weapons, but the country is the sole nuclear power in the Middle East and is believed to have 100 to 200 nuclear warheads. Moves by other countries in the region to acquire nuclear programs can be a life-or-death matter for Israel.

Zeevi Farkash said North Korea sold missiles to Egypt, Libya and Syria. He quoted Israeli military intelligence reports saying some North Korean engineers sent to Syria since 2000 had engaged in nuclear-related work.

He also revealed that Israel had been keeping a watchful eye on North Korea’s transference of nuclear development technologies to the Middle East for more than 10 years.

U.S. President George W.

Bush’s administration has taken a more reconciliatory approach toward North Korea in recent times.

But unease about the reclusive state’s possible nuclear aid to Syria has stirred distrust of the U.S. administration among members of the Congress and media, who previously had given scant attention to policies toward Pyongyang.

On Oct. 25, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill appeared before a joint hearing of subcommittees of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee to testify about the six-nation talks on North Korea’s nuclear programs. But the top U.S. negotiator in the talks was bombarded with questions not just about North Korea, but about Syria’s suspected nuclear development.

One lawmaker asked whether North Korea had offered to help Syria’s nuclear ambitions. Another asked whether the U.S. government was providing massive energy aid and other help to North Korea even though Pyongyang possibly had provided nuclear technology to Damascus.

The repercussions of Syria’s moves could have a major bearing on how the United States proceeds with its efforts to promote the Middle East peace process. If North Korea assisted Syria’s nuclear development, Washington’s policy toward Pyongyang would become a key component of the war on terrorism.

Washington officials have insisted North Korea must not cross the “red line” of exporting nuclear weapons or technologies. As such, U.S. lawmakers have every right to take a keen interest in the suspicion swirling around Syria.

However, in his testimony, Hill only repeated that he was not in a questions about issues of intelligence agencies. The U.S. government has shifted its stance to one of dialogue with North Korea.

Even if Pyongyang steps over the red line and evidence proves it provided nuclear technology to Syria, Washington will be reluctant to return to a policy that favors putting the squeeze on North Korea.

Begin Blog Archive Article from November 23, 2005

THE EVIL AXIS ASSESSMENT HAS PROVEN TO BE TRUE!

Supplement to Archive Prophecy Update 137E

November 23, 2005

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

When President Bush first identified and announced, what he labeled as “The Evil Axis,” which he identified as Syria, Iran, and North Korea, he was ridiculed across Europe for having created a null hypotheses, a “straw man,” that did not exist. However, his analysis has proven to be correct. I believe North Korea will fade into the background, only to be replaced by Iraq after American troops are pulled out. In less than a year after they pull out, most of Iraq will be transformed into a type of Islamic republic government. The following ABC article came from the Daily Alert Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

BEGIN JERUSALEM CENTER DAILY ALERT ARTICLE

Iran Is Building Nukes in Underground Locations

North Korea Lending Iran a Hand to Develop Nuclear Missiles: Iranian Consultant

By LUIZ MARTINEZ and JACQUELINE SHIRE

November 22, 2005

Iran has built, with the help of North Korea, dozens of underground tunnels and facilities for the construction of nuclear-capable missiles, according to Alireza Jafardazeh, a Washington D.C.-based consultant and former spokesman for the National Council of the Resistance of Iran, an Iranian opposition group.

Speaking this morning at the National Press Club, Jafarzadeh described an “extensive large-scale operation” for the development of nuclear-capable missiles “in the most sophisticated, hidden way” in tunnels in a mountain range east of Tehran. Jafarzadeh named several Iranian entities involved in Iran’s missile program, overseen by the Hemmat Industries Group. He said that eyewitnesses describe the facilities, begun in 1989, as an “underground township.” Jafarzadeh added that, in addition to work on the Shahab family of missiles, Hemmat is overseeing work on a new long-range missile, Ghadar, which is still in development and has a projected range of 1,300 to 1,900 miles.

Reports of North Korean cooperation with Iran on its nuclear and missile programs have surfaced previously. In July 2005, Reuters cited a three-page intelligence report charging that North Koreans were teaching secret graduate-level courses at Tehran’s Polytechnic University in nuclear technology. The UK’s Telegraph reported in June 2005 that North Korean specialists in underground construction had arrived in Tehran to help design their facilities that would better shield Iran’s nuclear program from international scrutiny.

Jafarzadeh’s allegations come on the heels of the latest report on Iran from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which reveals that Iran received a document from the A.Q. Khan network in 1987 describing the “casting and machining” uranium into “hemispherical forms,” a process directly relevant to the design of a nuclear warhead.

A State Department official contacted by ABC News about Jafarzadeh’s charges was unable to corroborate them but did confirm that the Hemmat Industries Group was sanctioned in May 2003 as the unlawful recipient of missile technology from Moldova. The Shahab-3 was flight-tested by Iran in 2004.

It is known to be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and has a range of 1,500 kilometers.

Experts do not know how many such missiles Iran has produced or deployed.

END JERUSALEM CENTER DAILY ALERT ARTICLE

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by

the copyright owner.

We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

EASY FOR RICE TO SAY!

BUT SHE DOES NOT LIVE AMONG THE PA FATAH, AL-AKSA MARTYRS BRIGADES, AL QAEDA, AND ISLAMIC JIHAD, WITH HAMAS TO THE SW, HIZBULLAH TO THE NNW, AND SYRIA TO THE NNE.

SUPPLEMENT TO PREVIOUS GIVING AWAY STORE BLOG!

November 14, 2007

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

I love the statement of US Secretary of State Rice given as the title for the DEBKAfile Article which follows our heading: “Israelis must be prepared for ‘difficult and painful sacrifices’ now that they have a negotiating partner in President Abbas.”

The more ‘difficult and painful sacrifices’ the Israelis make to a man with as little authority and power among terrorists as a sand flea among dinosaurs, the more vulnerable Israel makes herself before a vast sea of religious fanatics who want to remove her from the face of this planet forever.

The Prophet Muhammad’s life, wars, and writings give ample evidence that to make concessions to enemies, particularly infidels, is a sign of weakness, but a truce is allowed, if the intent is to destroy them later, once you have gained sufficient strength to do so.

I have bartered among the followers of Allah and can say without doubt – The more concessions you make to them, the more they think they can get out of you, which leads to a never ending process.

It is th

is sort of scenario that will lead to the fulfillment of the next three Scriptures.

I Thessalonians 5:3,4 – 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.

[4] But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

Zechariah 13:8 – And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left

therein.

Revelation 12:6 – And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

Begin DEBKAfile Article

Rice: Israelis must be prepared for “difficult and painful sacrifices” now that they have a negotiating partner in President Abbas

November 14, 2007, 3:19 AM (GMT+02:00)

In an address to the United Jewish Communities meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, Tuesday, Nov.

13, the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Israelis must sacrifice some of their “longest held aspirations” in talks with Palestinian leaders. A strong Palestinian state was more urgent than ever, she insisted, as a bulwark against threats from violent extremists, Hamas, Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas and to Iran.

DEBKAfile’s sources reveal: Rice confirmed what Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert and foreign minister Tzipi Livni are holding back from the Israeli public: Their acceptance of deep withdrawals from the West Bank in favor of a Palestinian state,

the uprooting of 100,000 Israelis living there, and additional broad concessions ahead of the Annapolis peace conference.

The audience applauded Rice when she reassured them of Washington’s commitment to protect longtime ally against threats from Tehran, fight anti-Semitism and confront Hamas and Iran. But the crowd was silent when she called Abbas “a true partner for peace” and said Israel now had “responsible leadership” with which to deal.

The concessions exacted from Israel, DEBKAfile has learned, include the ceding of West Bank natural resources to Palestinian control, including shared sources

of water. Talks have already begun for a US-Israeli Palestinian mechanism to supervise water sources, possibly including Jordan.

Olmert has further consented to start negotiations with Syria on Israel’s withdrawal from the Golan. The talks will kick off at the follow-up to the Annapolis conference, which will take place in Moscow.

He agreed to attend when he met Putin in the Kremlin Oct. 18.

The Annapolis conference, according to DEBKAfile’s sources, is not just an event lasting a few hours, as Olmert downplays it, but part of a broad cooperative US-Russian initiative aimed at bringing the Russian president aboard Washington’s push for tough sanctions against Iran. Israel’s willingness to negotiate the Golan’s return was offered by Washington as bait to draw the Syrian president away from his pact with Tehran and stop meddling in Lebanon. The success of this ploy will be tested before the Annapolis conference, on Nov.

21, when Damascus must keep its hands off Lebanon’s presidential election.

At some point, the Israeli prime minister and foreign minister will have some hard explaining to do for relinquishing the fundamental demand for secure and defensible borders, and overriding the country’s majority objections to the sweeping concessions to the Palestinians, which he is laying at the Bush administration’s feet.

Olmert will no doubt try and explain that these concessions were mandatory for the sake of achieving US-Russian cooperation for the imposition of sanctions against Iran. The fact that this cooperation will have relieved Tehran of the military threat hanging over its head for continuing to develop a nuclear weapon will not figure in Olmert’s arguments to the nation.

In her Nashville speech, the US secretary of state presented the “difficult and painful sacrifices” Israel must make to meet the most excessive Palestinian demands as a diktat: Failure of the Israeli-Palestinian talks is not an option. She justified it by determining: “What is at stake is nothing less than the future of the Middle East.”

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.

We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site.

However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

“Fred” Olmert May Give Away the Store for a False Peace?

November 14, 2007

Introductory Heading By: http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Of course, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert’s first name is Ehud, not Fred, but Middle East and international journalists have been issuing articles over the last year indicating he may be prepared to give quite a number of concessions to the Palestinians. The major problem with the Arab mind is that the more concessions you offer them, the more they think that can get, and there is never an end to the process.

The current wave of a massive effort for a peaceful settlement in the Middle East, about to break on our eastern shores at Annapolis, really began with an attitude swing by Israeli Prime Minister last Christmas, and was reported in a Jerusalem Post article on December 28, 2006, which follows our Archive Prophecy Update 12 from 2001 after our Introductory Heading.

Current news articles, like the one from “American Thinker,” which follows the aforementioned Jerusalem Post Article of Christmas 2006, and various intelligence reports out of the Middle East, are making me wonder if Israel, like the famous American store owner Fred, is about to “give away the store” as stated in the well known advertisement.

Secretary of State Rice is putting the squeeze on Prime Minister Olmert to make a variety of unreasonable concessions to the Palestinians to get some sort of peace agreement at the Annapolis Conference, which starts on November 27.

I cannot honestly be sure if it is her desire to leave her stay in office known as the woman who brought peace to the Middle East, or if the State Department is establishing a scenario of “well, we tried,” as a partial justification of a future air strike on Iranian nuclear facilities by US and/or Israeli aircraft. I think by now it has become quite clear, even to most peaceniks that the Middle East situation is one of genuine hopelessness, and only a great war is going to settle the issue, and consequently bring peace to that part of the world. So any chance of

anything better that a false peace arrangement coming out of the great Annapolis Conference is an opium pipe dream.

The current situation in the Middle East is in the most confusing state I have ever witnessed. The statements coming out of Israel shift from one day to the next, and there seems to be more diversity of opinion among government leaders than I have witnessed in many years. The Islamic nations are shifting allegiances like wrestlers in a thirty man match in a gigantic ring, hoping to end up as part of the ten who survive to wrestle in five later matches.

The question in the minds of many, who believe the prophecies in God’s word, has never been IF Israel would begin to develop a mindset in which she finally had a feeling of some sort of “Peace and safety,” but HOW such a thing would come to pass. I have operated on the premise it MUST come to pass according to Scripture for more than fifty years, and have watched Middle East events since my first tour there in 1952 and 1953. Believe it or not, out of this maze of conflicting reports and shifting policies of both Israel and the Islamic nations, Israel is going to finally reach a mindset where she thinks that at least a brief period of “Peace and Safety” has been achieved for her people, regardless of how it comes to pass. The mindset has to be developed on the belief she can successfully defend herself and win the victory over all foes in any war. Once the maze of confusing smoke and mirrors begins to clear up as the security barrier is finally completed by 2010, and some sort of hudna or false peace comes into place, I do believe Israel will have the mindset of I Thessalonians 5:3.

I guesstimate the attack against Israel by ten Islamic nations is most likely to occur at some point in time between 2010 and the end of 2014.

I Thessalonians 5:3,4 – 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.

[4] But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

Begin Archive Prophecy Update 12

PROPHECY UPDATE 12

April, 2001

The Apostle Paul had a deep spiritual burden for his own people, the nation of Israel. His born again heart longed for them to forsake their unbelief by turning to Jesus as their Messiah. He expresses this desire in Romans 10:1 as he states: “Brethren, my hearts desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be saved.” There is no question that Paul saw Israel as being in unbelief. But he knew that some future day they would believe, and consequently be grafted back into God’s olive tree, from which they had been broken off because of their unbelief. He stated this principle in Romans 11:20, as he wrote: “Well, because of unbelief they were broken off.” But he goes on in verse 23 to indicate they will one day believe, and thereby restored to being part of God’s olive tree. He writes, “And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.” I said all this to explain the words “they” and “them” in I Thessalonians 5:3, where Paul states: “For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh on them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.” Paul, in his use of “they” and “them,” is referring to the nation of Israel in unbelief. However, it would also in part apply to all unbelievers in the last days. So why have I given this discourse? The word translated as “safety” is “asphaleia,” which means “the security one experiences when standing on something that is firmly fixed. It gives the one standing on it a sense of “not falling.” The last four leaders of Israel have worn out the following expression: “We must have a peace with security.” We have heard it used hundreds of times on the media, and it has been printed over and over again in countless articles. Why is this importan

t? God indicates a time will come when Israel actually believes she has “a peace with security.” Why is it so important that we understand th

is prediction? Because we can know that the final war, involving Israel’s Islamic neighbors, will not occur until it is fulfilled! Israel must be lulled into a false sense of security before any united Islamic attack against her can be successful. Until this happens, and it will, I merely wa

it for it to come to pass. Then, when peace and security for Israel does appear to arrive in the Middle East, you can know that the final war of this age is about to occur. Don’t believe all these terrorist attacks will suddenly cause the final war of this age to begin.

It is only when they cease that you can know the last war, which finally produces Armageddon some 3 and ½ years after it begins, is imminent.

End Archive Prophecy Update 12

Begin 2006 Jerusalem Post Article

Olmert ready to respond to ‘any murmur of peace’

Associated Press, THE JERUSALEM POST

December 28, 2006

In a gesture to Syria, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Thursday said that he was open to “any murmur of peace” from Israel’s enemies.

Syria has recently signaled that it would like to reopen peace talks with Israel, which broke down seven years ago. Olmert has rejected the offers, citing Syria’s support for Hizbullah and Palestinian terror groups.

In a speech to graduates of an air force pilot’s course, Olmert indicated he was softening his opposition.

“The state of Israel is open to any murmur of peace from our neighbors and across our borders,” he said.

“If our enemies genuinely want peace, they will find in us a fair partner, determined to establish relations of peace, friendship and reciprocity,” he added.

Olmert’s spokeswoman, Miri Eisin, played down the comments.

“He has constantly said that if we see anything different, a glimpse of change, then that would be interesting and could make a difference,” she said.

However, Syria continues to support Israel’s staunchest enemies – including the Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hizbullah, she added.

There was no immediate reaction from Syria, where government offices were closed at the beginning of an eight-day holiday.

In recent weeks, Syrian President Bashar Assad has offered to restart peace talks with Israel.

The offers came in different forms, including news interviews.

The recent report for the White House by the Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, urged Israel to reopen talks with Syria to help reduce tensions in the Middle East.

Israel has rejected the report’s conclusions.

In peace talks that broke down in 2000, Israel offered a return of all of the captured Golan Heights, but the negotiations foundered on Syrian demands for a foothold on the shore of the Sea of Galilee – a major source of Israeli drinking water – and conditions for peace it would give Israel.

End Jerusalem Post Article of 2006

Begin American Thinker Article of November 13, 2007

American Thinker

November 13, 2007

Auctioning Jerusalem Foretells Israeli PM’s Demise

By Jonathan Schanzer and Asaf Romirowsky

“Peace is achieved through concessions. We all know that,” said embattled Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to crowd of businessmen last week, implying that parts of Jerusalem could be offered to the Palestinians in exchange for peace.

This is not the first time Olmert indicated that he was willing to split up Israel’s capital. Last month, he publicly pondered whether it was really “necessary to also add the Shuafat refugee camp, Sawakra, Walaje and other villages and define them as part of Jerusalem.”

Drawing from the history of other desperate Israeli prime ministers who have put Israel up on the auction block, Olmert’s time in office is probably near its end.

The prime minister’s recent statements can be seen only as a last gasp effort to revive his flatlining premiership. After demonstrating an utter lack of leadership during Israel’s confrontation with Hizbullah last summer in Lebanon, few Israelis have any confidence in their prime minister. Indeed, he has miserably low approval ratings (as low as 2% in recent polls), with political challengers circling for the right moment to pounce.

Olmert is now chasing peace with the Palestinians at all costs, in a desperate attempt to secure his place in world history, knowing full well that future Israeli history books will not be kind. This fits a sad but familiar trend of other sputtering Israeli prime ministers in recent history.

Take Israel’s current Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

Under pressure from the Clinton administration during the July 2000 Camp David talks, he became the first Israeli Prime Minister to officially consider re-dividing Jerusalem.

Despite the fact that this infuriated a majority of the Israeli public, as demonstrated in popularity polls, the embattled Barak forged ahead. When the talks ultimately failed, thanks to Yasir Arafat’s intransigence, the Palestinians launched the al-Aqsa intifada. Barak was blamed for the violence, leading to an even steeper drop in his popularity. Ariel Sharon went on to win the 2001 elections by a landslide 63 percent.

Barak’s plummeting popularity even before the intifada was inextricably linked to the former Israeli commando’s willingness to violate Israel’s longstanding red lines: no division of Jerusalem, no return to the 1949 borders, no return of Arab refugees, and no foreign army west of the Jordan River. But, faced with a legacy of failure, Barak clung to the notion that a peace deal ceding parts of Jerusalem might ultimately secure his place in history.

In the end, it only ensured his defeat.

One can also argue that Shimon Peres, who became prime Minister by default in 1995 after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, also ensured his own demise

by dangling Jerusalem as a concession to the Palestinians. An architect of the Oslo process, Peres pushed tenaciously forward toward peace, even when Israel was bloodied by a brutal campaign of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad suicide bombings. Despite the fact that the PA never reigned in Hamas, Peres never stopped pushing for peace. And he never took the question of Jerusalem off the table. Instead, he allowed the Palestinians to hold elections in Jerusalem in 1996, which was largely viewed as a gesture of possible future concessions.

Thus, when Benjamin Netanyahu challenged Peres in the next election, he hammered Peres’ blind commitment to a failing peace process, and charged that Peres would even surrender control of Jerusalem. This, alone, may have cost Peres the election.

When Olmert, Barak, and Peres raised the specter of Jerusalem, their political shelf lives had all but expired. Indeed, when Israeli politicians discuss the fate of Jerusalem to please the U.S. State Department or Palestinian negotiators, they are indicating to the Israeli public that they have given up on popular support. Instead, they make a last ditch effort to secure their own place in history.

Olmert’s recent talk of dividing Jerusalem is a sign that new Israeli elections are almost assuredly around the corner. Refusing to go quietly, he is endangering the unity of Israel’s capital just as his moment in history comes to an end.

Jonathan Schanzer is director of policy at the Jewish Policy Center, and editor of inFocus Quarterly.

Asaf Romirowsky is an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum and Manager of Israel & Middle East Affairs for the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia.

Page Printed from:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/auctioning_jerusalem_foretells.html at November 13, 2007 – 10:53:00 PM EST

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.