blog.Tribulationperiod.com

Obama WILL DUMP Israel FOR Muslims,

Obama PLANS To APPEASE Syria And Iran,

But considers ISRAEL an Irreverent Obstacle,

As he befriends Israel’s two worst Adversaries,

Who are listed as two state sponsors of Terrorism,

But Obama shall See That Listing for Syria is changed,

And Eventually it Will be Changed for Peace Loving Iran,

And For Its Jolly Peace Seeking SLAVES Hamas & Hizbullah!

Messiah Obama Does Work In Strange And Mysterious Ways!

May 1, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

The Excerpt which follows may be inflated, but the heading of this Blog is not based on this report, but what I have observed as I watch the actions directed by Obama through his “talking head” emissaries he has dispatched into the Middle East in his first 100 days in office.

His actions are the

actions I would expect from a man raised as a Muslim in his youth under the influence of Muslim fatherhood, then converted to a believer in Christ, then setting under black liberation preaching as an adult. I can understand why he has compassion for the Muslims from his youth, for Jews from his conversion, and for poor blacks and whites from black liberation theology, and I respect him for his efforts to help all three groups. BUT I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE WAY HE IS OBVIOUSLY PLANNING TO DO IT! THE WAY HE IS ATTEMPTING TO DO IT LOOKS GREAT TO BLEEDING HEARTS, BUT IT IS LEADING TOWARD A TIME OF MIDDLE EAST WAR THAT WILL FINALLY TERMINATE AT ARMAGEDDION.

Daniel 12:1 – And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written IN THE BOOK.

IT IS TIME FOR GOD’S CHILDREN TO SPEAK OFTEN ONE TO ANOTHER OF THE THINGS PERTAINING TO THEIR SAVIOR. IT IS TIME FOR OUR THOUGHTS AND HEARTS TO TURN TO THE LORD.

Malachi 3:16 to 4:3 – Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another: and the Lord hearkened, and heard it, and A BOOK OF REMEMBRANCE WAS WRITTEN BEFORE HIM FOR THEM THAT FEARED THE LORD, AND THAT THOUGHT upon his NAME. [17] And they shall be mine, saith the Lord of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.

[18] Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not. [1] For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. [2] But unto you that FEAR MY NAME shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. [3] And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts.

Begin Excerpt from Arutz Sheva

Report: Intelligence Warns Israel is now an ‘Obstacle to Obama’

yar 5, 5769, 29 April 09 09:48

By Gil Ronen

(IsraelNN.com) According to a classified intelligence assessment handed to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, U.S. President Barack Obama and his senior advisors wish to “incrementally diminish U.S. strategic cooperation with Israel.”

A report in World Tribune quoted an Israeli source familiar with the intelligence assessment who said that “Obama wants to make friends with our worst enemies and [those who were] until now the worst enemies of the United States. Under this policy,” the source added, “we are more than irrelevant. We have become an obstacle.”

According to the report, which has not been corroborated by news sources other than World Tribune, Israeli sources said the U.S. Administration would reject Israel’s intelligence opinions on Iran and Syria while advancing the Obama plan to reconcile with the two states, although both were listed as state sponsors of terrorism by the U.S. State Department.

The Israeli intelligence document reportedly predicted that Obama would maintain his policy of appeasing Iran and Syria through 2010. It determined that Obama is convinced that appeasing Iran and Syria would make a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan possible.

Pressure on Israel

“Obama will want to show Iran, Syria and radical Muslims that the United States could pressure Israel on a strategic level,” the source said. “The pressure has already begun and will intensify throughout the next year or two.”

At the same time, the intelligence officials estimated that Obama would restrict U.S. arms exports to Israel in an effort to deny it systems that it could use in a raid on Iran or Syria. The intelligence sources said this policy was begun during the last year of the Bush administration and predicted that it would intensify under Obama.

Carter: US and Syria Close to Full Relations

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said on Tuesday that the U.S. and Syria are close to restoring full diplomatic ties.

“Syrian President Bashar Assad is very eager to restore full ties with Washington,” Carter told Haaretz. “I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens this year,” he added, speaking on the phone from Quito, Ecuador, at the start of a four-nation South American trip.

Carter plans to meet Assad in Syria in early June.

Meanwhile, Syrian President Bashar Assad said Tuesday that Obama would face “a serious crisis in the Middle East” if he does not fix the mistakes made by his predecessor George W.

Bush, within a year’s time.

On a visit to Vienna after meeting Austrian leaders and intellectuals, Assad called on the U.S. to rapidly withdraw its troops from Iraq.

This, he claimed, would resolve “50 per cent of the problem,” Austrian news agency APA reported.

However, by appeasing Iran and Syria the U.S. is risking alienating Egypt.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak warned Egypt’s rivals in the Middle East Wednesday that he would not tolerate what he called their “tampering with security and stability” in his country, a reference to Iran and the Hizbullah terror militia that it supports.

Mubarak’s comments were his the most strongly worded ones since Egypt accused the Hizbullah of plotting attacks in the country. They were also meant to send a strong message to the group’ s backer

s in Iran.

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.

Antichrist’s Islamic Caliphate is Just around the Corner

April 30, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

I am of the opinion the appearance of the Antichrist will occur at some point in time between 2010 and 2015, and it will become apparent when he leads Islamic forces against Israel. I do not believe he will be Ahmadinejad, but I do believe he is more likely to be Shiite than Sunni. I also believe he is more likely to come out of Syria that any other Islamic country.

The current Iranian President is a “died in the wool” religious Islamic fanatic from the top of his head to the tip of his toes.

The Apostle Paul was a “Hebrew of the Hebrews,” and President Ahmadinjad is truly a “Shiite of the Shiites.” He is locked in combat with the old conservative heads. They have run Iran since the revolution that overthrew the Shah of Iran. He is trying to slip new leaders and departments into his new government. He is trying to get younger key members of the extremists from his Revolutionary Guard into top positions of power, putting out the old leaders who have held power for so long over all governmental decisions. It appears he has another revolution in mind, one in which he has absolute power to form a very radical Islamic Republic to replace the current conservative one. I truly believe the religious extremism in the fanatical Shiite beliefs among their literal interpreters is going to unveil the antichrist among them. Both the Sunni and Shiite sects of the Muslim faith believe in a coming Al-Mahdi, which we would relate to by our looking forward to the return of our Messiah Jesus Christ. The Shiites believe he has been hiding in a cave for some 1,100 years, but will soon come out to rule all Islam as the 12th Imam.

Many Imams across Iran and Iraq are preaching his coming is very soon, and a fever for his arrival is growing. I do not believe the President of Iran is the one known as Antichrist, but I know he believes the 12th Imam is coming soon.

The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is a Shiite religious literalist, who believes in the imminent return of

the 12th Imam. His segment of the Shiite faith believes the 12th Imam went into hiding in the 9th century. The Sunni sect of Islam believes the Al-Mahdi, who is to arise

and lead Islam to rule the world and establish a one-world Islamic religion, will be an ordinary man, born to an ordinary woman, and will live an ordinary life with the people of his time. But the Shiites under the same persuasion of their current President, believe that soon the 12th Imam, who disappeared mysteriously in the 9th century, will suddenly appear to lead the Shiites to victory over all enemies starting with the hypocrite mullahs and ending with the Jews. In the Shiite theology, belief in Imams is the cornerstone of their faith.

They believe the 12th Imam has been living in a cave for more than ten centuries, and that he will suddenly surface from his hiding place as the Mahdi, their Messiah, and will meet Jesus, the Son of Mary. They believe Jesus, the Prophet of Allah, will be second in command in that he will pray behind Al-Mahdi. They believe Allah will give Al-Mahdi the ability to rule all the Muslim nations with righteousness in the span of a night.

In the Shiite theology of the religious followers of the current President of Iran, the 12th Imam is still the sole source of legitimate power on the earth. I suspect a man will suddenly arise in Islam claiming to be the 12th Imam. He will declare himself to have returned with the power of Allah but in reality, he will be the antichrist. Islamic writers indicate the signs in the next paragraph will precede the 12th Imam.

There are many signs that will precede him, a very important sign is that he will come at a time when there is great confutation, intense disputing, and violent deaths – when people are experiencing great fear. Calamities will fall upon people, so much that a man shall not find a shelter to shelter him self from oppression. There will be battles and conflicts before his appearance. The people will be troubled to such an extent that they will long for death.

It is then that Imam will arise. T he messenger of Allah said

he will be sent at a time of intense disputes and differences among people amidst widespread earthquakes.

It may well be that Paul’s man of sin, the antichrist, is the coming Islamic Al Mahdi.

Begin Excerpt from MEMRI

Middle East Media Review Institute (MEMRI)

The Dawn of an Islamic Revolution is Around the Corner

Article 2331

April 28, 2009

Qazi Hussain Ahmad, Former Emir of Pakistan’s Jamaat-e-Islami: ‘The Dawn of an Islamic Revolution is Around the Corner; This is the Era of a Global Muslim Renaissance – As Slavery’s Shackles Are Breaking and the Enemies of Islam Are On the Retreat’

Qazi Hussain Ahmad, until recently the Emir of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, a religious-political party in Pakistan, recently wrote an article that was published by the Pakistani daily The News. In it, he argued that since Pakistan’s creation in 1947, the majority of Pakistanis have wanted an Islamic system of government in the country.

Following are excerpts from the article: [1]

“The Complete Islamization of Pakistan Has Been the Genuine and Long-Standing Demand of the Overwhelming Majority of Pakistanis”

“The complete Islamization of Pakistan has been the genuine and long-standing demand of

the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis.

“This demand surfaced as soon as the inception of the country [in 1947], since the driving force behind

the Pakistan movement was the need for a separate country for Muslims where they could protect and practice their Islamic ideology.

“Consequently, the mounting public pressure led the Constituent Assembly to pass the Objectives Resolution, making a sacred covenant with the people of Pakistan that the Koran and Sunnah will be the guiding principles of the constitution, legislation and policy-making of this land of the pure.

“The British-trained establishment, including the civil and military bureaucracy, were, however, averse to the idea of Islamization and wanted to faithfully preserve the British system and the Anglo-Saxon system of government, besides the laws formulated by the colonial masters for subjects. Those people considered themselves the legitimate successors of the British colonial rulers, and aspired to step into their masters’ shoes to enjoy the same powers and privileges exclusively reserved for the privileged class of British officers colonizing the subcontinent for over 200 years.

“The ensuing tug-of-war between the small minority of feudal [lords] and capitalists led by the colonial bureaucracy trying to replace colonists, and the vast majority of people yearning to materialize the dream of Pakistan into reality, led the country toward the state of affairs it is presently beset with. This confrontation has not only caused serious damage to the country, including the progressive erosion of nationhood, decline in unity, solidarity and integrity among the federating units, and putting the country on the verge of collapse, but has also led to its dismemberment. For the common people, the independence of Pakistan from the British colonists was nothing but mere change of masters….”

“The Pakistan movement leaders, such as Quaid-e-Azam [Muhammad Ali Jinnah] and Liaquat Ali Khan, were soon replaced by civil and military bureaucrats…. In their quest for absolute power, these people destroyed democratic institutions and undermined the ideology of Pakistan for the sake of promoting the British culture and values, and the English language.”

“The Irrational Resistance to the Genuine Public Demand for Islamization Emanates from the Imperialistic Mentality Adopted by Our Ruling Elite”

“The irrational resistance to the genuine public demand for Islamization emanates from the imperialistic mentality adopted by our ruling elite. It stems from the mentality that drove the medieval master-slave struggle, and exposes the ruling classes’ state of mind….”

“It was the right of the Romans to think and decide about the welfare of the slaves. The same ideology was adopted by the European colonists, who declared that it was the right of the white masters to decide about the affairs of the colored subjects. The basic idea behind that view was that the colored races were of inferior capabilities and… incapable of running their own affairs and solving their problems….”

“The Entire Debate that Islam Should Not Be the System of Governance in the Country Was the Thinking Paradigm of Those Who are Mental Slaves to Western Culture and Averse to the Islamic Ideology”
“The entire debate that Islam should not be the system of governance in the country was the thinking paradigm of those who are mental slaves to Western culture and averse to the Islamic ideology. It is an undeniable fact that Muslims from the length and breadth of the subcontinent strove for the creation of Pakistan, and rendered sacrifices that are matchless in human history. The proponents of the baseless argument that not Islam but economic reasons were the basis of the Pakistan movement have no answer as to why the Muslims of [Indian states such as] UP, CP, Calcutta, Madras and Bombay, etc., endeavored for Pakistan despite knowing that their areas would not be part of Pakistan.

“Evidently, they were striving for the realization of the dream of a separate homeland for Muslims, to enable them practice Islam freely under the system governed by the Koran and Sunnah.

” Unfortunately, the state of Pakistan created after a historic struggle of Muslims was taken over by the agents of British colonists quite early.

They kept weaving a web of conspiracies to consolidate their grip over the country and with the passage of time their clutches became so strong that now even the talk of Pakistan’s Islamic ideology hurts their ears.”

“Pakistan is not Just Any State Based on Geographical Entities – It Is the Embodiment of a Definite Ideology and Religion; As the Father of the Nation, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Put It: Pakistan Came into Being the Very Day the First Muslim Set Foot on the Subcontinent”

“Pakistan is not just any state based on geographical entities. It is the embodiment of a definite ideology

and religion. As the Father of the Nation, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, put it: Pakistan came into being the very day the first Muslim set foot on the subcontinent. Pakistan is a result of the Two-Nation Theory [i.e. that Muslims and Hindus cannot live together] that clearly spells out that the life of Muslims is governed by the Islamic system based on the Koran and Sunnah. Until we harmonize our lives, economy, society, Constitution and legal system with Islam, our society will continue to suffer from internal strife and friction.

“Those who believe that Pakistan can be secularized by separating the Islamic system from its state are suffering from a serious fallacy.

What they conveniently ignore in their bias against Islamic codes is that Islamization of the country is not just the demand of what

they call some extremists but is the strong desire of an overwhelming majority of the people, millions of whom are ready to sacrifice their lives to achieve this objective, like those who laid down their lives in the Pakistan Movement.

“Though this majority is under the strong shackles of a tiny minority of Western slaves, the dawn of an Islamic revolution is round the corner. This is the era of a global Muslim renaissance as slavery’s shackles are breaking and the enemies of Islam are on the retreat after the huge fortresses of their military and economic might are coming down under the pure resistance and sacrifices of the believers.”

“Regarding the Argument That Promoting Islam Would Enrage Washington And the West, We Would Become Isolated, and Be Dubbed as Fundamentalists… It Must Be Kept in Mind That Alienating Islam will Negate Our Existence and Disintegrate the Country”

“Regarding the argument that promoting Islam would enrage Washington and the West, we would become isolated, and be dubbed as fundamentalists, etc., it must be kept in mind that alienating Islam will negate our existence and disintegrate the country. Islam is the basis of Pakistan, since it was created for Islam and not on the basis of some homeland.”

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.

Obama Welcome Wagon knocks on Iran’s Door,

Nothing like a little Bypass Help from Friends,

For The Sake of Dialogue And Cooperation,

Which Will Lead to Israelis Being done In,

By Our New DIALOGING Persian

Friends,

Since Iran Plans TO ANNIHILATE Them!

April 29, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt 1 from DEBKAfile

Talks on Iranian corridor for US troops, supplies to Afghanistan on fast track

From DEBKA-Net-Weekly updated by DEBKAfile

April 28, 2009, 3:45 PM (GMT+02:00)

On March 27, DEBKA-Net-Weekly 390 revealed exclusively Barack Obama’s plans “to transform the Khomeinist Islamic Republic’s clenched fist against America into a helping hand by formally asking Tehran to permit the passage to Afghanistan of fresh US troops, weapons and supplies across Iranian territory.”

In its follow-up of April 3, our military sources reported that US defense secretary Robert Gates, Chief of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and transport command chief Gen. Duncan J. McNabb, have laid before the president a detailed plan, which had been cleared in back-door meetings between US and Iranian officers.

DEBKAfile’s sources ask how much leverage against Iran’s drive for a nuclear bomb will be left to Washington when the US becomes dependent on Tehran for its war supplies to Afghanistan.

Tuesday, April 28, US envoy Dennis Ross set out on an extensive tour for pouring oil on troubled waters in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Bahrain and Qatar. He is accompanied by the deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, Lt. Gen. John R. Allen, and National Security Council official Puneet Talwar.

Like secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who promised in Beirut this week that the US was not selling Lebanon out by dealing with Syria, Ross will try and reassure America’s Arab friends that Washington’s new ties of friendship and strategic cooperation with Tehran will not be at their expense.

According to DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s April 3 report, the US Air Base at Al Udeid in Qatar would be the main hub for the air corridor taking US transport planes over the Persian Gulf, crossing the Iranian border and flying over southern and central Iran up to their destination, the US airbase near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan.

The sea route would hinge on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ main naval base at Chah-Bahar, which is situated on the Arabian Sea near Iran’ s border with Paki

stan.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Iranian sources note that Chah-Bahar has two sections, a small, run-down civilian harbor for small craft arriving from India and Pakistan, and a spanking new, modern military facility, home to Iran’s main submarine force.

The US planners rated this section of Chah-Bahar an ideal port of call for US provisions to reach Afghanistan by a predominantly sea route. From this Arabian Sea port, consignments would head north through Iran’s Sistan-va-Baluchistan up to the Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan border intersection and then turn east by convoy to their destination at Kandahar.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly will continue to track the progress of US-Iran deals in future exclusive reporting and analysis.

Begin Excerpt 2 from DEBKAfile

Washington to cut Iran in on Nabucco pipeline

DEBKA-Net-Weekly Exclusive

April 28, 2009, 11:26 AM (GMT+02:00)

Iran is about to become a major fuel supplier to the West, DEBKA-Net-Weekly reports.

For the sake of dialogue and cooperation, Washington is ceding Tehran the chance to feed its natural gas into the 3,000 kilometer-long Nabucco pipeline project (from the Caspian to the EU via Turkey).

Begin Excerpt from Asian Times

A new order emerges in Lebanon

By Sami Moubayed

DAMASCUS – Last week, one of America’s top allies in Lebanon, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, caused a row when he made remarks – off the record – criticizing his allies in the pro-Western March 14 Coalition.

Among other things, Jumblatt scoffed at his patron Saad al-Hariri, the head of the largest bloc in the Lebanese parliament, for having tried – and failed – to combat Hezbollah on the streets of Beirut last May.

[…….]

Jumblatt is a political animal, however, who knows how to get off a ship before it sinks. The US is simply no longer interested in battle, either with Damascus or with Hezbollah. On the contrary, it is trying to find common ground with the Syrians to solve a basket of problems in the region, like Iran’s nuclear file, Palestinian reconciliation and the future of Hezbollah.

If March 14 continues to challenge Syria, it should not except much support from the Barack Obama administration. That is why, according to some observers, Jumblatt might be toying with the idea of a u-turn – which from where the Syrians see it, is close to impossible, given the aggressive stance he took against Damascus during the difficult years in Syrian-American relations.

Why would the US continue to support March 14 if it is cooperating fully with the Syrians? March 14 was useful, after all, during the war against Syria in 2005-2008 – mainly to punish the Syrians for having worked against US interests in Iraq.

Jumblatt realizes that for all practical purposes, its only a matter of time until the United States begins dialogue with two arch-enemies of the former Bush White House – Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah. Delaying his own rapprochement with Hezbollah would harm nobody but him.

During the recent Summit of the Americas, Obama said that he would respect the “legitimacy” of all democratically elected governments, even if the US “might not be happy” with the results of any elections. He added that the US “condemns any efforts at a violent overthrow of democratically elected governments, wherever it happens in the hemisphere”. Talks with Hamas have already begun in Europe and it is only a matter of time until they are expanded to include Hezbollah.

Earlier this year, Britain announced that it would commence political dialogue with Hezbollah, much to the displeasure of March 14. In early April, British parliamentarians came to Damascus and met with Hamas political chief Khaled Meshaal.

Certain American political figures, like former president Jimmy Carter, also met with the Hamas chief in Syria last December.

According to a January 9 article in The Guardian, “sources close to the [Obama] transition team” will change course via Hamas, and “initiate low-level clandestine approaches”. For that to be done, not only would there be a need for a change in US mentality – both in the media level, on the street and in American officialdom – but it would also require changing a 2006 Congressional law banning any kind of assistance to the Islamic group.

Recently, however, P aul Volker,

a senior economic advisor to Obama, was among those who authored a letter calling for a more rational approach to dealing with Hamas. Martin Indyk, the former US ambassador to Israel, who is close to Clinton, recently wrote that any peace deal without Hamas was destined to fail.

Additionally, former British prime minister Tony Blair in his capacity as international envoy for the Middle East warned of the dangers of continuing to ignore the Gaza Strip, which effectively is under the command of Hamas. He was quoted saying, “I think it is important to find a way to engage Hamas in dialogue.”

Richard Hass, a diplomat under both president George H W Bush and George W Bush, who was earmarked to become Obama’s Middle East envoy, also supports low-level contacts with Hamas. James A Baker, former secretary of state now based at the Baker Institute at Rice University in Houston, was quoted

in Newsweek as saying that Obama must involve Hamas in any peace process in the Middle East.

Baker said, “You cannot negotiate peace with only half the Palestinian polity at the table.”

Richard W Murphy, a veteran American diplomat and former ambassador to Syria, added, “I don’t think it will happen quickly but I think it is inevitable.

Hamas is, in my opinion, a legitimate representative of part of the Palestinian community.”

Taking all of that into account, many raised questions about Clinton’s weekend visit to Beirut ahead of parliamentary elections in June, which are expected to bring about a smashing victory for Hezbollah. Already, France has said that it will not boycott any Lebanese government, even if it is packed with members of the Islamic group.

With loud voices coming out of Washington calling for engagement with Hezbollah, Obama promising to respect any election, Britain taking the lead in dialogue with non-state players, and the Syrians back in the international arena, times are not good for leftovers of the Bush era in the Middle East.

Decision-makers around the world have reasoned that not talking to Hezbollah or Hamas will not make them disappear. On the contrary, it will only lead them to radicalize.

Looking back at the Hamas tenure in government, everybody realizes that the Bush administration missed a golden opportunity when the Palestinian group said that it was willing to accept a long-term truce with Israel, and abide by the borders of 1967. Israel couldn’ t ge

t them to disarm by force, clearly demonstrated by the results of the December 2008 war on Gaza.

The United Nations couldn’t disarm them, nor could Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or the United States. The same applies to Hezbollah, which emerged victorious from the war of 2006. Obama, a practical leader by all accounts, realizes that if these groups are voted into power, it would be sheer hypocrisy not to deal with them and repeat what was committed by Bush.

Walid Jumblatt – and anti-Hamas figures in Palestine like President Mahmud Abbas – is among the first to fully grasp this new attitude in Washington.

Sami Moubayed is editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine in Syria.

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.

Obama policy is firmly grounded in La La Land!

Strait Skinny on the Middle East Situation!

A MASTERFUL Article by Caroline Glick!

George Bernard Shaw was Right!

Youth is wasted on Children!

‘Sittin’ in the Grandstand,

‘SPITTIN’ in A TIN CAN,

WHO CAN, WE CAN,

NOBODY Else CAN,

Yeaaaaaa, Israel!

Arab’s NEW Yell!

Right On, Glick!

April 29, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com

Begin Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

Israel’s Arab cheerleaders

April 27, 2009

Caroline Glick , THE JERUSALEM POST

It is a strange situation when Egypt and Jordan feel it necessary to defend Israel against American criticism. But this is the situation in which we find ourselves today.

Last Friday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee that Arab support for Israel’s bid to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is contingent on its agreeing to support the rapid establishment of a Palestinian state. In her words, “For Israel to get the kind of strong support it’s looking for vis-a-vis Iran, it can’t stay on the sidelines with respect to the Palestinians

and the peace efforts.” As far as Clinton is concerned, the two, “go hand-in-hand.”

But just around the time that Clinton was making this statement, Jordan’s King Abdullah II was telling The Washington Post that he is satisfied with the Netanyahu government’s position on the Palestinians. In his words, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has “sent a message that he’s committed to peace with the Arabs. All the words I heard were the right words.”

As for Egypt, in spite of the media’s hysteria that Egypt won’t deal with the Netanyahu government and the Obama administration’s warning that Israel can only expect Egypt to support its position that Iran must be denied nuclear weapons if it gives Jerusalem to the PLO, last week’s visit by Egypt’s intelligence chief Omar Suleiman clearly dem onstrated that Egypt wishes to work with the government

on a whole host of issues. Coming as it did on the heels of Egypt’s revelation that Iranian-controlled Hizbullah agents were arrested for planning strategic attacks against it, Suleiman’s visit was a clear sign that Egypt is as keen as Israel to neutralize Iranian power in the region by preventing it from acquiring nuclear weapons.

And Egypt and Jordan are not alone in supporting Israel’s commitment to preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power. American and other Western sources who have visited the Persian Gulf in recent months report that leaders of the Gulf states from Bahrain – which Iran refers to as its 14th province – to Saudi Arabia to Kuwait and, of course, to Iraq – are praying for Israel to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities and only complain that it has waited so long to attack them.

As one American who recently met with Persian Gulf leaders explained last week, “As far as the Gulf leaders are concerned, Israel cannot attack Iran fast enough. They understand what the stakes are.”

UNFORTUNATELY, THE nature of those stakes has clearly eluded the Obama administration. As the Arabs line up behind Israel, the Obama administration is operating under the delusion that the Iranians will be convinced to give up their nuclear program if Israel destroys its communities in Judea and Samaria.

According to reports published last week in Yediot Aharonot and Haaretz, President Barack Obama’s in-house post-Zionist, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, told an American Jewish leader that for Israel to receive the administration’s support for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it must not only say that it supports establishing a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and Gaza, it must begin expelling its citizens from their homes and communities in Judea and Samaria to prove its good faith.

With just months separating Iran from either joining the nuclear club or from being barred entry to the clubhouse, the Obama administration’s apparent obsession with Judea and Samaria tells us that unlike Israel and the Arab world, its Middle East policies are based on a willful denial of reality.

The cold hard facts are that the Middle East will be a very different place if Iran becomes a nuclear power. Today American policy-makers and other opponents of using military force to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons compare the current situation to what the region could look like in the aftermath of an Israeli campaign against Iran’s nuclear installations.

They warn that Hizbullah and Hamas may launch massive retaliatory missile attacks against Israel, Egypt, Jordan and other states, and that US military personnel and installations in the region will likely be similarly attacked by Iranian and Syrian proxies.

Indeed, proponents and opponents of an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear installations alike warn that Iran’s deployment of terror proxies from Beirut to Bolivia, from Managua to Marseilles, and from Gaza to Giza means that things could get very ugly worldwide in the aftermath of an Israeli attack.

But all of that ugliness, all of that instability and death will look like a walk in the park compared to how the region – and indeed how the world – will look if Iran becomes a nuclear power.

This is something that the Arabs understand. And this is why they support and pray for an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear installations.

IF IRAN acquires nuclear weapons, the Obama administration can throw its hopes for Middle East peace out the window. Today, even without nuclear weapons, Iran is the major force behind

the continued Palestinian war against Israel. Iran exerts complete control over Hamas and Islamic Jihad and partial control over Fatah.

In and of itself, Iran’s current control over Palestinian terror groups suffices to expose the Obama administration’s plan to force Israel to destroy its communities in Judea and Samaria as misguided in the extreme. With Iran calling the shots for the Palestinians, it is clear that any land Israel vacates will fall under Iranian control. That is, every concession the US forces Israel to make will redound directly to Iran’s benefit. This is why Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s claim that it will be impossible to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians without first neutralizing Iran rings so true.

If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the situation will become even more destructive.

A nuclear-armed Iran means that any chance of marginalizing these Iranian-controlled forces in Palestinian society will disappear. For Israel, the best case scenario in the age of a nuclear-armed mullocracy would involve continuous war with Iranian proxies – sort of expanded versions of the Second Lebanon War and Operation Cast Lead – in which it has little option for victory because the terror armies would fight under Iran’s nuclear umbrella.

Regionally, a nuclear-armed Iran would in short order compel both Egypt and Jordan to abrogate their peace treaties with Israel. The exposure of the Iranian sabotage ring in Egypt last week makes clear that Iran seeks to either overthrow or dominate the Arab world with its nuclear arsenal. If Iran becomes a nuclear power, roundups of Iranian agents like the one in Egypt will be inconceivable. Iranian agents will be given free reign both regionally and worldwide.

For Israel, the abrogation of its peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan would raise the danger

of regional war to an all-time high. Goaded by Iran, and operating with Iran’s US- and Turkish-armed Lebanese proxy and Teheran’s Syrian slave, Egypt and Jordan may well be made to decide that the time has come to invade Israel again.

These scenarios, of course, are likely because they compare favorably to the worst case scenarios in which a nuclear-armed Iran decides to simply detonate its nuclear bombs over Israel, either in the form of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack or in the form of a direct nuclear strike.

An EMP attack would not immediately kill anyone, but would destroy the country’s electricity grid and permanently paralyze its military and civilian infrastructures, rendering the population defenseless not merely from its neighbors, but from disease and starvation. If successful, a direct nuclear strike would likely kill between 50,000 and several million Israelis, depending on how many warheads reached their targets.

GLOBALLY OF COURSE, a nuclear-armed Iran would be well positioned to take over the world’s oil markets. With Saudi Arabia’s main oil installations located in the predominantly Shi’ite eastern provinces, it would be able to credibly threaten to destroy Saudi oil installations and so assert control over them. With Iran’s strategic alliance with Venezuela, once it controls Saudi oil fields, it hard to see how it would not become the undisputed ruler of the oil economy.

Certainly Europe would put up no resistance. Today, with much of Europe already within range of Iran’s ballistic missiles, with Iranian-controlled terror cells fanned out throughout the continent and with Europe dependent on Persian Gulf oil, there is little doubt of the direction its foreign policy would take in the event that Iran becomes a nuclear power. Obviously any thought of economic sanctions would disappear as European energy giants lined up to develop Iranian gas fields, and European banks clamored to finance the projects.

Finally, there is America. With Israel either barely surviving or destroyed, with the Arab world and Europe bowing before the mullahs, with much of Central and South America fully integrated into the Iranian axis, America would arguably find itself at greater risk of economic destruction and catastrophic attack than at any time in its history since the War of 1812. An EMP attack that could potentially send the US back to the pre-industrial age would become a real possibility. An Iranian controlled oil economy, financed by euros, would threaten to displace the dollar and the US economy as the backbone of the global economy.

The US’s military options – particularly given Obama’s stated intention to all but end US missile defense programs and scrap much of its already aging nuclear arsenal – would be more apparent than real.

Yet what Clinton’s statements before Congress, Emmanuel’s statements to that American Jewish leader and Obama’s unremitting pandering to Teheran and its Syrian and Turkish allies all make clear is that none of these reasonable scenarios has made a dent in the administration’s thinking. As far as the Obama White House is concerned, Iran will be talked out of its plans for regional and global domination the minute that Israel agrees to give its land to the Palestinians. The fact that no evidence exists that could possibly support this assertion is irrelevant.

On Sunday, Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland claimed that Obama will not publish his administration’s policy on Iran until after he meets with Netanyahu at the White House on May 18. It will be during that meeting, Hoagland wrote, that Obama will seek to convince Netanyahu that there is no reason to attack Iran.

The fact that Obama could even raise such an argument, when by Israel’s calculations Iran will either become a nuclear power or be denied nuclear weapons within the next 180 days, shows that his arguments are based on a denial of the danger a nuclear Iran poses to Israel and to global security as a whole.

It is true that you can’t help but get a funny feeling when you see the Arabs defending Israel from American criticism. But with the Obama administration’s Middle East policy firmly grounded in La La Land, what choice do they have? They understand that today all that stands between them and enslavement to the mullahs is the Israel Air Force and Binyamin Netanyahu’s courage.

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.

Obama’s Welcome Wagon knocks on Iran’s Door,

Nothing like a Little Bypass Help from Friends,

For the sake of dialogue and Cooperation,

Which will lead to Israelis being done In,

By Our New Dialoging Persian Friends,

Since Iran plans to annihilate Them!

April 28, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt 1 from DEBKAfile

Talks on Iranian corridor for US troops, supplies to Afghanistan on fast track

From DEBKA-Net-Weekly updated by DEBKAfile

April 28, 2009, 3:45 PM (GMT+02:00)

On March 27, DEBKA-Net-Weekly 390 revealed exclusively Barack Obama’s plans “to transform the Khomeinist Islamic Republic’s clenched fist against America into a helping hand by formally asking Tehran to permit the passage to Afghanistan of fresh US troops, weapons and supplies across Iranian territory.”

In its follow-up of April 3, our military sources reported that US defense secretary Robert Gates, Chief of Staff Adm.

Mike Mullen and transport command chief Gen.

Duncan J. McNabb, have laid before the president a detailed plan, which had been cleared in back-door meetings between US and Iranian officers.

DEBKAfile’s sources ask how much leverage against Iran’s drive for a nuclear bomb will be left to Washington when the US becomes dependent on Tehran for its war supplies to Afghanistan.

Tuesday, April 28, US envoy Dennis Ross set out on an extensive tour for pouring oil on troubled waters in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Bahrain and Qatar. He is accompanied by the deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, Lt. Gen. John R. Allen, and National Security Council official Puneet Talwar.

Like secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who promised in Beirut this week that the US was not selling Lebanon out by dealing with Syria, Ross will try and reassure America’s Arab friends that Washington’s new ties of friendship and strategic cooperation with Tehran will not be at their expense.

According to DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s April 3 report, the US Air Base at Al Udeid in Qatar would be the main hub for the air corridor taking US transport planes over the Persian Gulf, crossing the Iranian border and flying over southern and central Iran up to their destination, the US airbase near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan.

The sea route would hinge on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ main naval base at Chah-Bahar, which is situated on the Arabian Sea near Iran’s border with Pakistan.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Iranian sources note that Chah-Bahar has two sections, a small, run-down civilian harbor for small craft arriving from India and Pakistan, and a spanking new, modern military facility, home to Iran’s main submarine force.

The US planners rated this section of Chah-Bahar an ideal port of call for US provisions to reach Afghanistan by a predominantly sea route. From this Arabian Sea port, consignments would head north through Iran’s Sistan-va-Baluchistan up to the Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan border intersection and then turn east by convoy

to their destination at Kandahar.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly will continue to track the progress of US-Iran deals in future exclusive reporting and analysis.

Begin Excerpt 2 from DEBKAfile

Washington to cut Iran in on Nabucco pipeline

DEBKA-Net-Weekly Exclusive

April 28, 2009, 11:26 AM (GMT+02:00)

Iran is about to become a major fuel supplier

to the West, DEBKA-Net-Weekly reports.

For the sake of dialogue and cooperation, Washington is ceding Tehran the chance to feed its natural gas into the 3,000 kilometer-long Nabucco pipeline project (from the Caspian to the EU via Turkey).

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.