blog.Tribulationperiod.com

April 6, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

North Korea has one major export to sustain its pitiful economy, namely its arsenal of death in its developing technology of producing and delivering nuclear warheads on its ICBM’s. Russia, China, and the U.S. will continue to block one another in the United Nations from doing anything about it, while the Middle East turns into a nuclear nightmare by North Korea sharing it’ s nuclear technology with any country willing to pay the price.

This was covered in a 2007 Blog we issued, and one can be sure the process will continue in the midst of dialog, dialog, dialog, dialog, and more dialog as we head for the beginning of the final war of this age, at some point in time between 2010 and 2015. Diplomatic Dialog with believers is the way to go, but to say Diplomatic Dialog with the Devil will work is madness

Begin October 14, 2007 Blog

Technology, Trickery, and Placation Lies for Sale to Any Bidder!

October 14, 2007

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Unfortunately, our recent agreement with North Korea is not a “Going Out of Business” Sale.

The governmental policies of North Korea led to a famine producing economy. In order to booster their economy they are willing to sell their WMD technology to any country willing to pour out the cash, while at the same time receiving payments from other countries not to do so.

North Korean official to visit Syria

The Associated Press

Updated Saturday, October 13, 2007, 11:30 AM

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) A high-level North Korean official left on Saturday for an overseas trip including a visit to Syria, the North’s state media reported, amid suspicions the two countries might be cooperating on a secret nuclear program.

Choe Thae Bok, speaker of the North’s rubber-stamp parliament, will also visit Italy during the trip, the North’s Korean Central News Agency said in a brief one-sentence dispatch that gave no further details.

The trip comes amid lingering suspicions that North Korea may be providing nuclear assistance to Syria.

North Korea provides missile technology to Syria, but has strongly denied accusations that it spreads its nuclear expertise beyond its borders.

index of reverse search

Syria also has denied receiving any North Korean nuclear help.

The two countries accused U.S. officials of spreading the allegations for political reasons.

Andrew Semmel, acting U.S. deputy assistant secretary for nuclear nonproliferation policy, said in September that North Korean personnel were in Syria, and that the Syrian government may have had contacts with “secret suppliers” to obtain nuclear equipment.

Last month, a high-level Syrian delegation visited Pyongyang.

North Korea, which conducted its first-ever nuclear test last October, has been compliant in international talks aimed at dismantling its nuclear program. In July, Pyongyang shut down its sole operating nuclear reactor and pledged earlier this month to disable it by year’s end.

Begin Article 2 from The Jerusalem Post

‘Syria raid targeted unfinished reactor’

JPost.com Staff, THE JERUSALEM POST

October 13, 2007

The IAF air strike in Syria last month targeted a partially constructed nuclear reactor which was modeled on a reactor used by North Korea, the New York Times reported on Saturday.

The Times report, which was attributed to American and foreign officials with intelligence access, also alleged that the Bush administration was divided over the decision to carry out an air strike. According to the officials, policymakers did not view the attack as urgent because it would have been years before the Syrians could have used the reac

tor to produce enough nuclear fuel to create bomb-grade plutonium.

Israel has kept the details of the air strike secret, refusing until last week to even confirm that such a mission had been carried out.

Reports said that the strike had been executed in tandem with a ground operation by IDF special forces, which reportedly confiscated weapons-related materials shortly before IAF planes attacked.

A recent article in The Washington Post claimed that the raid came after Israel and the US shared intelligence about possible nuclear weapons developments in Syria. According to some sources, North Korean weapons experts had been in Syria in the months before the raid.

While both Syria and North Korea have denied that they are cooperating on weapons development, representatives of the two nations met recently in North Korea to discuss “strengthening ties.”

End October 14, 2007 Blog

Begin Current Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

N. Korea satellite didn’t reach orbit’

April 5, 2009

Associated Press , THE JERUSALEM POST

The US on Sunday denied North Korea’s claims that it had successfully launched a satellite into space.

It came after the communist nation fired a rocket over Japan, defying Washington, Tokyo and others who suspect the launch was cover for a test of its long-range missile technology.

US President Barack Obama said the move threatens the security of nations “near and far.”

Liftoff took place at 11:30 a.m. (0230 GMT) from the coastal Musudan-ri launch pad in northeastern North Korea, the South Korean and US governments said. The multistage rocket hurtled toward the Pacific, reaching Japanese airspace within seven minutes, but no debris appeared to hit its territory, officials in Tokyo said.

Four hours after the launch, North Korea said an experimental communications satellite reached outer space in just over nine minutes and is orbiting Earth, the state-run Korean Central News Agency said from Pyongyang.

“The satellite is transmitting the melodies of the immortal revolutionary paeans ‘Song of Gen. Kim Il Sung’ and ‘Song of Gen. Kim Jong Il’ as well as measurement data back to Earth,” it said, referring to the country’s late founder and his son, its current leader.

But the US military said “no object entered orbit.” North American Aerospace Defense Command and US Northern Command officials said in a statement that the first stage of the rocket fell into the waters between Korea and Japan, while the two other stages, and its payload, landed in the Pacific Ocean.

The launch was a bold act of defiance against Obama, Japanese leader Taro Aso, Hu Jintao of China and others who pressed North Korea in the days leading up to liftoff to cancel a move they said would threaten peace and stability in Northeast Asia.

The UN Security Council approved an emergency session for Sunday afternoon in New York.

“North Korea has ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint and further isolated itself from the community of nations,” Obama said in Prague, urging the North to refrain from further “provocative” actions.

He s aid the move w

as a clear violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1718, which prohibits North Korea from conducting ballistic missile-related activities of any kind, and demands an international response.

“North Korea broke the rules once more by testing a rocket that could be used for a long range missile,” Obama said. “This provocation underscores the need for action – not just this afternoon at the UN Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons.”

In Tokyo, Aso said the launch was “an extremely provocative act that cannot be overlooked.”

China, North Korea’s biggest source of economic aid and diplomatic support, urged all sides to maintain calm and exercise restraint. It offered to play a “constructive role,” though some say it could use its veto power to block a unified response to the launch at the Security Council.

Russia, which shares a border with North Korea, also called for calm. “We urge all states concerned to show restraint in judgments and action in the current situation, and to be guided by objective data on the nature of North Korea’s launch,” a Foreign Ministry statement said.

North Korea says the launch of the “Kwangmyongsong-2” satellite was a peaceful bid to develop its space program.

But the US, South Korea, Japan and others suspect the launch was a guise for testing the regime’s long-range missile technology – a step toward eventually mounting a nuclear weapon on a missile capable of reaching Alaska and beyond.

They contend it violates Resolution 1718, part of efforts to force North Korea to shelve its nuclear program and halt long-range missile tests. The European Union also “strongly” condemned the launch.

Japan’s UN mission immediately requested a meeting of the 15-nation council, spokesman Yutaka Arima said. Mexico, which holds the 15-nation council’s presidency this month, set the meeting for 3 p.m. EDT (1900 GMT), spokesman Marco Morales said.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said he regretted North Korea’s move “against strong international appeal” at a time when nuclear disarmament talks involving six nations remain stalled.

amoxil + gonnorhea men

“Given the volatility in the region, as well as a stalemate in interaction among the concerned parties, such a launch is not conducive to efforts to promote dialogue, regional peace and stability,” Ban said in a statement from Paris.

At the United Nations, diplomats have begun discussing ways to affirm existing sanctions on North Korea.

can cut revatio tablet we

Envoys said permanent council members US, Britain and France are unlikely to secure agreement on new sanctions from veto holders Russia and China. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.

North Korea, which says its participation in a UN space treaty protects its right to send a satellite into orbit, took pains to alert international maritime and aviation authorities of the rocket’s flight path, in marked contrast to 2006, when it carried out a surprise launch.

“Even if a satellite was launched, we see this as a ballistic missile test,” Japan’s chief Cabinet spokesman Takeo Kawamura said.

Japan had threatened to shoot down any debris from the rocket if the launch went wrong, and positioned batteries of interceptor missiles on its coast and radar-equipped ships in its northern seas to monitor the liftoff. Russia also scrambled fighter jets to monitor the launch, while US and South Korea sent warships to nearby waters, reports said.

No attempt at interception was made because no debris fell onto its territory, Japan’s Defense Ministry said.

However, Japan threatened to add more bilateral sanctions onto those it imposed after the July 2006 launch of a similar Taepodong-2 long-range missile that fizzled 42 seconds after takeoff.

South Korea, which technically remains at war with the North because their three-year conflict ended in 1953 in a truce rather than a peace treaty, put its forces on heightened alert.

North Korea, one of the world’s poorest nations, is led with absolute authority by leader Kim Jong Il, who is poised to preside over the first session of the country’s new parliament on Thursday.

The appearance will be his first major public appearance since reportedly suffering a stroke last August.

Amid the controversy over the rocket launch, North Korea announced last week it would put two American reporters detained at the border with China on trial for allegedly entering the country illegally and engaging in “hostile acts.”

Laura Ling and Euna Lee, reporters for former US Vice President Al Gore’s Current TV media venture, were seized by North Korean soldiers on March 17.

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.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Closed

International Light of Barack Hussein Obama!

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

Golden Sunlight Era between U.S. & Arabs Rises

The International Light of Barack Hussein Obama,

Is the Middle East Sun now Dawning for the Arabs,

But it is the Middle East Sun Setting

2006 sept settlement zyprexa

for the Israelis,

As the American Eagle flies back to its western Nest!

April 5, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED AND TAUGHT THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IN OFFICE WHEN ISRAEL WAS ATTACKED WOULD SACRIFICE HER IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL INTEREST. THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA FULFILLS THE BILL TO DO SO. SPECIAL PROPHECY UNDATE NUMBER 71A, ISSUED SEVEN YEARS AGO, STATES WHAT I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THE U.S. WOULD DO WHEN ISRAEL WAS ATTACKED BY ISLAMIC HORDES.

SPECIAL PROPHECY UPDATE NUMBER 71A

June 8, 2002

WHEN ISRAEL IS SUDDENLY VISIOUSLY ATTACKED IN A SURPRISE LIGHTNING JIHAD BLITZKRIEG FROM ITS NORTH, WHY DOESN’T THE U.S. ATTACK THE ISLAMIC GROUP OF NATIONS THAT ARE ATTACKING HER?

This is a question I have been asked over and over again for a long time. I was asked again on e-mail recently, and this time, rather than answering the query privately, I decided to make it a prophecy update, so that that in future I could just attach this update to any new query and save myself repeating it again.

The one thing that I learned in the National Security Agency which has been, is, and always will be the motivating factor in any decision made by any country, including the United States, may be simply stated in two words: NATIONAL INTEREST. Many will cry out and say, not so, we did it for humanitarian reasons, we did it to secure justice, we did it out of compassion, we did it out of love, we did it because we love freedom, we did it because we are a great nation: and on and on shall come statements from every realm of society, from “bleeding” liberal hearts to the “hardened” hearts of the extreme right, all giving different reasons as to why this country did something. But the truth of the matter is that, in the end, we always did it for what amounted to NATIONAL INTEREST.

The United States has quick response attack naval and marine forces in position at all times to put down a banana republic type of minor conflict on short notice. But in order to conduct a successful operation again a Jihad the magnitude of the coming attack of many nations against Israel, we would require some time to get enough regular ground troops in place to have a real hope of victory.

It took us a very long time to get enough men and equipment into the Middle East to insure success in our victory against Iraq. The Scriptures indicate that 10 Islamic nations will be led by the Antichrist, and that they will quickly take Jerusalem and drive Israel into the Negev. When Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran come pouring southward on both sides of the Samarian mountains, and the Palestinians break out in all directions internally from within the enclosed buffer zone, chaos will reign supreme from Dan to Beersheva. There will be so much inner mingling of the attack forces of Israel and those of the enemy with the fleeing civilian population that air strikes would kill as many on one side as the other. Since the U.S. is fully aware of the Israel War Contingency Plan to evacuate as much of

the population as possible to the Negev if overrun from the north, it will set in shock and indecision until it is too late to do anything except help to evacuate some of the coastal population from Tel Aviv to Haifa into the Negev, and to air lift supplies into the Negev. The aircraft of the Islamic nations will be under orders not to fire on western power’s aircraft unless fired upon, because the one thing they will not want is for the U.S. to get actively engaged with them in an all out war. Once Israel has evacuated as much of its population into the Negev as possible, and the U.S. sees that the Arabs are not going past Beersheva, we will accept the status quo as best for all. Why? Because it will satisfy our NATIONAL INTEREST! How? Israel will be safe and we will still be able to receive Arab Oil shipments.

reverse search

Revelation 12:5,6 – And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all NATIONS with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God,

and to his throne. [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.

NATIONS in verse 5 is the precedent to THEY in verse 6. This is the beginning of the final 1260 days that lead up to the final battle of Armageddon, and at this time only 10 Arab nations are involved, so nations such as the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, and Canada will air lift all sorts of supplies into the Negev for Israel, and the Arab nations won’t do a thing to stop it because they will not want to be involved in a world war at this time.

Revelation 12:14 – And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

Seventy percent of the total Jewish population of Israel exists in the narrow coastal strip from Tel Aviv to Haifa. The western powers (symbolized as uncircumcised Philistines) will air lift many from this area into the Negev, flying first toward the west over the Mediterranean, then southeast over the Sinai into the Negev. After 1260 days Israel will storm north, northeast, and east out of the Negev, driving deep into Syria, and across all of Jordan to the Euphrates River, and will thus claim the Abrahamic Land Grant given to Abraham. (See Prophecy Update Number 67)

Isaiah 11:14 – But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them. (See Prophecy Update Number 71)

Micah 5:6 – And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.

(See Prophecy Update Number 67)

Down through the last 200 years we have built up a picture of an antichrist who rises slowly to power over a moderate period of time, then signs a peace treaty that lasts for 3 and ½ years, only to break it at that time to start the final 1260 days of the tribulation period. I agree that he attacks Israel to begin the final 1260 days of the tribulation period, but am persuaded what is pictured before the attack is largely manufactured on misinterpretation of Daniel 9:27, an error of early 1800. The rise of antichrist will be quick, as will be the events that follow his appearance. So I am saying that whenever he comes on the scene it will not be a long, drawn out affair from his appearance until his demise. In Prophecy Updates Numbers 55, 56, 57, and 58 I outlined the view that was held by most theologians before 1830, which is the belief I hold today.

In Chapter 38 of Ezekiel, in verses 2 through 6, it identifies the groupings of those peoples who will initially attack Israel from the north. But in verse 13 it identifies groupings of peoples that will not attack Israel at this time.

Ezekiel 38:13 – Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?

The closest thing to which I can relate their two questions in today’s modern vernacular is what we would identify as being a “diplomatic protest.”

You may check all reference sources available today as to the location of the descendants of Sheba and Dedan in 600 B.C., when this prophecy was written, and you will find they are almost unanimous that it represents modern day Saudi Arabia. I believe Saudi Arabia will be as surprised as the United States when Israel is attacked. I also believe Egypt, who is attacked by the antichrist after he drives Israel into the Negev, will also be shocked by his attack on Israel, and then on themselves.

Daniel 11:42 – He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.

The descendants of Tarshish were sea faring men. According to most historians they first established colonies along the coasts of the Mediterranean, then along the coasts of western and northern France, and finally along the coasts of Denmark and Sweden. As such they could represent what we call Europe, and all the western nations, which were established out of European nations, could be “the young lions thereof.”

So I expect the only part that the United States will play in this war will be to violently diplomatically protest, protest, protest, and then protest some more. I believe we will air lift many into the Negev to satisfy our NATIONAL INTEREST vested in our large Jewish population, and will continue to air lift all sorts of supplies into them for a long time. I believe we will not attack in order to prevent a massive outcry of American motherhood in a fantastic body bag count, which is not in the NATIONAL INTEREST, and the loss of Arab oil would most assuredly not be in our NATIONAL INTEREST.

One day, when I kept banishing around this term we identified as NATIONAL INTEREST in the agency, I was asked, would you define NATIONAL INTEREST. Now, this is not the agency definition, it is mine!

NATIONAL INTEREST IS WHAT WILL ALLOW A PARTY TO STAY IN OFFICE OR TO GET IN OFFICE. IT WAS NOT THAT WAY IN THE BEGINNING, BUT THAT’S THE WAY IT IS NOW, AND IT WILL STAY THAT WAY UNTIL JESUS RETURNS.

generic head strong

Begin Excerpt from Gulf News

Is this a new dawn for Arab unity?

03/30/2009 10:38 AM |

By Abdullah Alshayji

Special to Gulf News

Is the Arab geopolitical landscape – which was turned upside down by former US president George W. Bush’s adventures and occupation, and the grandiose project of the neo-conservative clique to re-shape the broader region in order to advance US interests – facing realignment? On the surface, it looks like it, but further probing is needed.

That realignment was pushed for in a region that lacks a balance of power, which the Bush administration unwittingly destroyed by toppling Saddam Hussain’s Baathist regime in Iraq and the Taliban government in Afghanistan.

This emboldened Iran, the region’s belligerent and dominant power, to advance its agenda through soft and hard power. It is now standing up to the bullying Americans, which makes Iran the darling of the Arab and Muslim masses.

Turkey is also emerging as a strong power. It is gaining support in a region the Ottomans used to occupy by just standing up to the Americans and the Israelis, as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan did at Davos.

He lambasted and lectured Israeli President Shimon Peres in front of a shocked and appreciative Arab audience, before walking out in disgust over Israel’s excessive use of force against unarmed civilians in Gaza.

With this, Turkey, the former master of the region, won the hearts and minds of the Arabs.

Then there is Israel, the pariah state in our midst and the cause of much instability and chaos in the region. It has a long reach, shaping and influencing all other conflicts in the region.

There is no doubt that after more than 60 years, the Arab-Israeli conflict – the responsibility for which must mainly lie with Israel and its backers and their belligerence – is pushing the region into a state of flux. Such an environment feeds the hardliners’ legitimacy and allows state and non-state actors, such as Iran, Al Qaida, Hamas and Hezbollah, to become the voice and conscience of the defeated and helpless Arab masses. This further erodes the credentials of the moderate Arab leaders who ally themselves with the West.

It undermines their credibility in the eyes of their peoples and marginalises them in the tug of war that has been exacerbated by the US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

To add insult to injury, the US trampled Arab dignity in Guantanamo and Abu Gharib prisons, dividing the Arabs into the ‘axis of moderates’ and ‘axis of hardliners’ and giving Israel a free hand to massacre Lebanese and Palestinians on live TV.

Add to this the targeting of certain Arab countries, in what can be described as one eyed-justice. The International Criminal Court decided to issue an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir, while letting the Israeli civilian and military leadership go free.

The catalogue of Arab miseries and grievances continues to chip away at Arab moderates, and allows forces such as Al Qaida and Iran – and their proxies from Afghanistan to Iraq and from Lebanon to Gaza – to project influence.

Their steadfastness in the showdown with the moderate, marginalized pro-Western Arabs in the region is a cause for celebration among the Arab masses. All this as the Americans keep repeating unflinchingly: “Why do they hate us?”

It was, therefore, refreshing to see Arab leaders led by the Saudis and Egyptians, along with the Syrians, who have been allying themselves with the Iranians, agree to bury the hatchet (hopefully) and revive the old Arab triangle to face the host of challenges from the non-Arab regional players.

The first move towards this rapprochement was orchestrated through a Kuwaiti initiative during the Arab Economic Summit in January in Kuwait.

The idea is to end the ‘Arab Cold War’, project an Arab consensus to deal effectively with the host of the challenges and to present a united front in dealing with the Obama administration.

This comes as the US adopts a new approach vis-à-vis allies and foes in the region, especially Iran and Syria. The looming grand bargain and opening up to Iran is worrying Arab moderates.

We are worried when we see the US and West clamouring for Iran’s good intentions and help in Iraq, Afghanistan and other flashpoints.

This will only embolden Iran and harden its position and serve Tehran’s interests by allowing it to flex its muscles and bully its weaker and more accommodating Gulf Arab neighbours in the Gulf Cooperation Council states.

This manifested itself lately through Iran’s provocative rhetoric. And America seems to be opening up

to Iran, rewarding it rather than containing it.

What jolted the Arabs to get their act together was the harsh assessment from Saudi King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz, who bluntly stated: “Our [Arab] political disputes led to our divisions and fragmentation, and helped the Israeli enemy and whoever wants to split the Arab ranks to advance their regional designs, which undermines our solidarity, dignity and our aspirations.”

He was referring to the non-Arab forces, namely Israel and Iran. That was followed by the opening up to Syria to take it away from Iran’s orbit, and a mini-Arab summit last week in Riyadh, which brought together the Egyptian and Syrian presidents along with the Kuwaiti Emir.

The goal was to cement this new Arab alignment, in preparation for the Arab summit at the end of the month in Doha.

acids in saw palmetto

Disunity and fragmentation have bedeviled the Arab political structure

and allowed non-Arab countries, such as Israel, Iran and even Turkey, to advance their interests, designs and agendas through soft and hard power at the expense of Arab national interests. What is more alarming is that it allowed Arab non-state actors to dictate terms.

Are we at the dawn of a new, lasting Arab alignment? Or is this just wishful thinking?

Dr Abdullah Al Shayji is professor of International Relations and the head of the American Studies Unit at Kuwait University.

Begin Excerpt from UK Guardian

A golden era for US-Turkey relations?

Turkey’s relationship with Iran, Syria and Hamas is crucial to the Obama camp’s efforts to secure peace in the Middle East.

Bulent Aras

guardian.co.uk

Saturday 4 April 2009 14.00 BST

After back-to-back visits to Turkey by US Middle East envoy George Mitchell and secretary of state Hillary Clinton, Ahmet Davutoglu, a top adviser to Turkey’s prime minister, predicted that Turkish-American relations were about to enter a golden era. This prediction was based on converging developments in Turkey and America’s approach to the Middle East in particular and foreign policy in general. President Obama’s visit to Turkey on the 6 April signals that this new golden era has indeed begun.

Several key developments in Turkish foreign policy occurred in the first few months of 2009. The accusatory tone adopted by Turkey towards Israel, condemning the latter’s assault on Gaza, was reaffirmed in the most recent World Economic Forum summit in Davos when its prime minister, Recep Tayipp Erdogan, stormed out of a panel discussion, lambasting the Israeli president, Shimon Peres, for his government’s actions. Meanwhile, Turkey constructed close ties with the Arab world and Iran – closer than at any previous moment in the history of the republic. Middle Eastern countries hosted more Turkish politicians in the last three months than in the last decade. Erdogan is now viewed favourably as a leader by the peoples of the Arab world. Turkey emerged in the Middle East as the sort of power with which international and regional actors were not familiar.

It can be inferred from Clinton’s remarks during her delegation’s stay in Turkey that the US regards Turkey as an effective negotiator in the region. Turkey’s relationship with Iran, Syria and Hamas is critical to the enactment of foreign policy through diplomacy approach of the Obama administration, as Turkey could act as a conduit through which America would communicate with these countries and actors. Despite outspoken critics in Washington, the Obama camp regards Turkey’s relationship of open dialogue with Iran, Syria and Hamas as positive.

Several issues are expected to mark the agenda during the Obama administration’s visit: the US military’s exit from Iraq; the establishment of security in Afghanistan; normalisation of relations with Iran and Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity; the Caucasus and Turkish-Armenian relations; east-west energy routes and energy security; Turkey’s bid for EU membership; and the settlement of the Cyprus problem. Regardless of whether military bases in Turkey are employed, America needs Turkey’s full logistical support during the eventual US withdrawal from Iraq.

There are more similarities between Turkish and American foreign policy visions today than ever before. Previously, during the Clinton presidency, American policy emphasised human rights and democracy while Turkish foreign policy was preoccupied with security.

As the US mended its global image, Turkey was taken hostage to troubled relations with its neighbours, Iran and Syria. Later, under the Bush administration, American foreign policy priorities became tied to security, while Turkey’s agenda was determined by its plea for full membership in the EU and the consequent political reform and democratisation process. America’s global image was toppled during this period while Turkey improved its relationship with its neighbours and became an influential actor in their affairs.

Today, America’s foreign policy vision converges with Turkey’s on democracy, human rights, peace, and international legitimacy. The Obama administration needs regional allies to implement its foreign policy through multilateral diplomacy. A review of the Obama delegation’s agenda for his visit to Turkey reveals that the president will present some proposals to address Turkey’s foreign policy problems, such as Iraqi Kurdistan and Turkish-Armenian relations.

US support for Turkey’s democratisation and EU membership will anchor Turkey on this path. This perception will contribute to the democratisation of the polity in Turkey. Turkey’s civilian elite is currently spending a great deal of energy to put an end to the cold war-style illegal apparatus deep rooted within the state (known popularly as Ergenekon).

The Obama administration’s efforts at engagement will not be in vain. The current Turkish administration promotes a domestic and foreign policy orientation that accommodates co-operation, demonstrated by Turkey’s recent peace brokering in the region. It is only a matter of time before we witness the positive effects that a possible Turkish-American relationship will have on the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world.

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Closed

Israel’s Conditional Legitimacy is Ending!

Saturday, April 4th, 2009

Perilous International Times are now ending Israel’s Conditional Legitimacy!

The Word of God advised that in the last days perilous times would Come.

Public leaders waxing worse and worse, deceiving, and being Deceived,

SO America Has Joined The EU Passive Diplomatic DIALOG Approach,

Which shall eventually lead to a false sense of Peace and Safety

IN The Volatile Middle East Land OF Islamic JIHAD Terrorism,

But it will be shattered by a war beginning prior to 2015,

Ending in the final battle of Armageddon 3 & ½ Years

After it is initially launched by Islam against Israel!

April 4, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

The G20 Summit is a perfect example of “evil men and seducers waxing worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.”

The G20 Summit and Obama’s succumbing to 19 of its Representatives will lead to Israel virtually standing alone against an International Goliath of Nations, with only her Messiah to deliver her which, after all, is the way it was prophesied to be. The U.S. will support Israel only with words, not with deeds.

II Timothy 3:1,13 – This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. [13] But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

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 Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

Column One: Ending Israel’s conditional legitimacy

April 3, 2009

Caroline Glick , THE JERUSALEM POST

In the chanceries of Europe, the die has apparently been cast. The time has come to launch an all-out diplomatic war against Israel.

buy chloramphenicol online

That is, the time has come to begin to unravel EU acceptance of Israel’s right to exist.

Last Friday, in anticipation of the swearing in of the new Netanyahu government, EU foreign ministers met in Prague and discussed how they would stick it to the Jews.

According to media reports, the assembled ministers and diplomats decided that they will freeze the process of upgrading EU relations with Israel until Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu explicitly commits his government to establishing a Palestinian state and accepts that the only legitimate policy an Israeli government can have is the so-called “two-state solution.”

Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, reportedly summed up the new approach saying, “There won’t be any progress in relations between Israel and the European Union until the Israeli government clarifies its stance on the creation of a Palestinian state.

”

On an operational level, the assembled ministers and diplomats decided to cancel the Israel-EU summit now scheduled for late May until Israel has bowed to Europe’s demand.

Europe’s decision to launch a preemptive strike against the Netanyahu government even before it was sworn into office on Tuesday came against the backdrop of its growing enthusiasm for opening formal ties with Hamas. As The Jerusalem Post reported on Thursday, Europe’s diplomatic courtship of the Iranian-sponsored genocidal terror group is being spearheaded by Sweden and Switzerland. But they are far from alone.

Britain’s Foreign Minister David Miliband has in recent weeks openly called for recognizing Hamas. France is reportedly using its involvement in the attempts to secure the release of Israeli hostage Gilad Schalit from his Hamas-controlled captors to advance its own bilateral ties to the jihadist group. At last Friday’s meeting, Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht reportedly also called for Europe to open ties with Hamas.

In its move to isolate Israel – and indeed to treat the only free country in the Middle East as if it is morally and politically inferior to Hamas – the EU reportedly believes that it is acting in concert with the Obama administration.

Since entering office, and increasingly in recent weeks, the Obama administration has been both directly and indirectly signaling that it will adopt a hostile stance toward Netanyahu and his government. Unnamed Democratic congressional and administration sources have been warning Israel through the media that the administration does not accept the Israeli voters’ right to set a new agenda for the incoming government that rejects the Olmert-Livni government’s subordination of Israel’s national interests to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The administration itself has stated through both White House and State Department spokesmen that it is completely committed to the swift establishment of a Palestinian state – regardless of Israel’s position on the issue.

Other global policy-shapers have also weighed in. Former British prime minister and current Quartet Middle East mediator Tony Blair has been making daily statements warning of a breach with Israel if the Netanyahu government doesn’t fall in line. On Wednesday, for instance, Blair threatened, ” There is no alternative to a two-state solution, except the one-state solution.

avodart ciales clomid diflucan dostinex glucophage

And if there is a one-state solution, there’s going to be a big fight.”

The Palestinians are enjoying the ride. Last Saturday, Fatah negotiator Saeb Erekat published an op-ed in The Washington Post where he portrayed Netanyahu as more radical than Hamas, and demanded that the US show that it is a true “honest broker” by treating Israel and Palestinian terrorists as moral, political and strategic equals.

Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas has also piled on, announcing that he will boycott the Netanyahu government until it falls into line.

Perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of the international hysteria over the Netanyahu government is its timing. The calls for Israel’s international isolation, the decision to treat Israel as a beyond-the-pale-pariah-nation far worse than Hamas, emerged even before the Netanyahu government was sworn in

to office. How did this foul state of affairs come about? Why is the Middle East’s only democracy being treated worse than North Korea, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Hamas and Hizbullah?

THE RESPONSIBILITY for this horrendous state of affairs belongs mainly with Netanyahu’s predecessors – former prime minister Ehud Olmert and opposition leader Tzipi Livni.

During their tenures in office, Olmert and Livni effectively embraced Israel’s enemies’ view that unlike the PLO and even Hamas, Israel has no independent right to exist. Indeed, not only did they accept that view, they turned it into the official policy of the government.

Around the time that prime minister Ariel Sharon was felled by a stroke in January 2006, Olmert and Livni began asserting that Israel’s very legitimacy is dependent on the rapid establishment of a Palestinian state. For instance, in her speech at the Herzliya conference in January 2006, Livni stated outright that until and unless a Palestinian state is carved out of land currently controlled by Israel, the Jewish state cannot expect for the world to accept its right to exist.

Olmert made this point explicitly in a series of media interviews in recent months.

Livni maintained her allegiance to the view that a Palestinian state is more legitimate than Israel when during coalition talks with Netanyahu she stipulated that like the EU and the PLO, she would only accept the legitimacy of the Netanyahu government, and so agree to serve in it, if it accepted the two-state paradigm.

To fully understand the significance of what Livni and Olmert have done, it is necessary to understand the source of the phrase “two-state solution.”

The term was created by the PLO. When the PLO discussed the issue, the question under debate was not whether or not to build a Palestinian state, but whether or not

to accept the existence of

a Jewish state. That is, the debate over whether to accept a “one-state solution” or a “two-state solution” did not revolve around the establishment of a Palestinian state – which would exist no matter what. At issue was whether to accept the existence of Israel.

can you take zyvox and levaquin together

For the Palestinians then, and for supporters of the two-state paradigm like Blair and his European and American cohorts, it is Israel’s existence, not the existence of the Palestinian state, that is conditional.

Israel embarked on the road toward accepting the PLO’s position when it accepted the legitimacy of the PLO with the launch of the Oslo peace process in 1993. The first time Israel explicitly and formally accepted the establishment of a Palestinian state, however, came only in 2004, with the Sharon government’s qualified acceptance of the Middle East Quartet’s so-called road map plan for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

That acceptance was not unconditional. As both the government’s reservations and Sharon’s repeated statements made clear, Israel would only accept the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state after the Palestinian Authority dismantled all terror groups operating in Palestinian society including its own Fatah terror groups. That is, for the Sharon government, it was the Palestinian state, not the Jewish state, whose legitimacy was contingent on its actions.

The innovation of the Olmert-Livni government was to discard this position. In November 2007, Olmert and Livni enthusiastically signed on to the Annapolis formula for Palestinian statehood, which itself was nothing more than a regurgitation of the PLO’s position. Then-US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice extolled the Annapolis formula specifically because it removed the requirement that the Palestinians dismantle all terror groups operating in their territory before receiving statehood. That is, she applauded the fact that at Annapolis, the goal of fostering peaceful coexistence between the Palestinians and Israel was supplanted by the establishment of a Palestinian state as the aim of the so-called peace process.

By adopting the so-called the Annapolis “two-state” platform then, the Olmert-Livni government accepted the PLO’s position that it is Israel, not the PLO and its sister terror groups, whose legitimacy is contingent on its behavior.

It is not the PLO that needs to quit the terror business in order to be acceptable. Israel needs to accept the PLO – and for that matter Hamas – regardless of their behavior if it wishes for anyone to even consider recognizing it.

DUE TO the Olmert-Livni government’s unconditional acceptance of the PLO’s position, today conditional Israeli acceptance of the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state, along the lines of the Sharon government’s conditional acceptance of the road map, is no longer sufficient. Now, as Europe, the US and regional actors are all making clear, Israel must accept that its own right to exist is contingent on the establishment of a Palestinian state – regardless of its character or the identity of the Palestinian leadership. That is, if Israel doesn’t accept the legitimacy of a Hamas or Fatah-ruled Palestinian terror state in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and Gaza, then it has no right to exist.

This reality, of course, was made clear by the outcry that Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s official denunciation of the Annapolis formula on Wednesday induced. Lieberman, after all, did not say anything particularly anti-Palestinian. Indeed, he made clear that t

phone number

he Netanyahu government remains committed to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

All Lieberman said was that the Netanyahu government will not accept a Palestinian terror state. That is, all he said was that Israel’s support for Palestinian statehood is contingent on Palestinian behavior. Additionally, Lieberman correctly pointed out that Israel’s own international position has been harmed rather than advanced by its willingness to compromise its positions and accept those of its Palestinian adversaries.

What the outcry at Lieberman’s remarks – from both Livni and her domestic supporters, and the international community – makes clear is that it will be exceedingly difficult for

the Netanyahu government to walk away from the anti-Israel positions adopted by its immediate predecessor.

But it also shows how urgently those positions need to be rejected.

For the past 16 years, from Israel’s first acceptance of the PLO as a legitimate actor to Israel’s acceptance of the PLO’s position that it is the Jewish state rather than the Palestinian state whose legitimacy is conditional, Israel’s international position has become ever more tenuous as prospects for peace have become ever more remote. The Netanyahu government was elected to put an end to this disastrous trend. It is heartening to see that straight out of the starting gate, it is working to accomplish this essential task.

For more detailed information go to:

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Closed

Christ’s Judgment Seat Faces All The Saved!

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

CHRIST’S Judgment Seat faces ALL the Saved,

And God WILL NOT STOP the Inevitable Final War,

Since His WORD INDICATES He will cause it to Occur!

Obama’s Passive Diplomatic Dialog makes a false Peace

Possible by turning the United States into a toothless Tiger.

Iran Will Use Our Timidity to Encourage The Islamic Jihad Mind,

And ten Arab nations will start the final war of the Age of Gentiles

In the Land of Israel at a Future Point in Time between 2010 & 2015!

God’s children do not have much time left to commit their lives to Christ!

It is time for the saved to commit their lives to Christ by becoming Disciples!

All The Saved Will Stand Before Christ’s Judgment Seat Judged For Discipleship!

It’s time to worship Jesus as the most important being in this present life you Live!

THE SAVED ARE ABOUT TO BE PUT THROUGH A PERILOUS TESTING OF THEIR FAITH. IT IS TIME FOR THE SAVED TO BECOME DISCIPLES OF JESUS IN WHOM THEY HAVE BEEN SAVED BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH!

Luke 14:25-27 – And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, [26] If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

[27] And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

John 4:23,24 – But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

[24] God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

I Timothy 3:14,15 –These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: [15] But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

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

Ephesians 3:21 – Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

II Timothy 3:1,12-14 – This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. [12] Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus sh

all suffer persecution. [13] But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. [14] But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

Ephesians 5:26,27 – That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, [27] That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

10 year old strattera

Hebrews 10:25 – Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

AN INTERTWINING OF DANIEL 7:25-27, REVELATION 17:12,17 & 19:19-21 TO SHOW THE INEVITABILITY OF THE SOON COMING WAR!

Revelation 17:12 – And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

Daniel 7:25 – And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Revelation 17:17 – For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

Daniel 7:26 – But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.

Revelation 19:19-21 – And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. [20] And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

map 2 of reverse search

[21] And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Daniel 7:27 – And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

April 3, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

PALESTINIANS UNHAPPY + BASHAR ASSAD UNHAPPY + NETANYAHU & LIEBERMAN IN POWER = WAR BEGINS BETWEEN 2010 AND 2015.

Begin Excerpt from DEBKAfile Special Report

Independent Norwegian poll: Palestinian majority opposes two states

DEBKAfile Special Report

April 3, 2009, 10:42 AM (GMT+02:00)

Amid the ping-pong between Washington and Jerusalem over the validity of a Palestinian state established alongside Israel as the end-product of peace negotiations, the Norwegian Fafo institute which sponsored the 1993 Oslo Framework accords decided to find out how the Palestinians felt about this solution. Its main discovery was that a majority, 53 percent, of Palestinians (like Israelis), is against two states.

This figure breaks down into 33 percent, who opt for the annihilation of the state of Israel, whether by political means or force of arms – to be replaced by a single Islamic republic on all parts of the country; and 20 percent, which favors a united Israeli-Palestinian state, to be eventually engulfed by the latter population.

When Hamas members are polled separately, support for two states drops to 21 percent.

Publication of these findings by the Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies, which is supported by Norwegian foreign ministry and respected by European Middle East policy-makers, indicates that its researchers have given up on the Oslo Accords and the two-state goal pursued by Washington.

However, DEBKAfile’s Washington sources expect extreme reluctance on the part of the Obama administration to abandon this goal because it is the only policy objective it has developed and is being used, furthermore, as a key to open the administration’s diplomatic door to the Muslim world, especially in the Afghanistan-Pakistan arena (now lumped together as the “Afpak” front).

The US president’s advisers are urging him to speed up Israel-Palestinian peacemaking for these ends – even if it means foisting the two-state objective on the Israelis.

Proof that the Palestinians too will have to be whipped into line brings the venture close to a mission impossible.

Begin Excerpt from Arutz Sheva

Assad Vows to Recapture the Golan Heights

Nisan 8, 5769, 02 April 09 04:13

By Hana Levi Julian

(IsraelNN.com) Syrian President Bashar Assad has vowed to recapture the Golan Heights one way or another, and reaffirmed his nation’s relationship with the Hizbullah terrorist organization.

In an interview published Thursday in the Kuwaiti newspaper a-Sharq, Assad promised to take the Golan from Israel. “There is no escaping the fact that the day will come when we will free the Golan, through peace or through war,” he was quoted as saying. “When a citizen loses hope, he will turn to the path of resistance in one form or the other.”

The comments followed the installation this week of the Netanyahu government. Included in the coalition are the Yisrael Beiteinu (Israel is Our Home), Jewish Home, United Torah Judaism (UTJ) and Sephardic religious Shas parties, all considered to be right-wing. The Labor party, which clinched the coalition, is considered at this point to be a centrist-to-leftist force.

The Syrian president said, however, that he is not concerned with the newest players in the government.

“All Israeli governments are the same: Ariel Sharon carried out a massacre in Palestine, and Barak aided the war in Gaza such that there is no difference between Right and Left in Israel,” he claimed.

Assad also expressed his support for the Lebanon-based Hizbullah terrorist group in the same interview, explaining that “Hizbullah has an issue with Israel, and we have the same issue. We therefore support the organization.”

The Syrian president noted that Hizbullah’s influence in Lebanon has grown and the group has developed into a political as well as terrorist entity, increasingly grasping control of the Lebanese government.

“We are speaking about a national organization with a religious agenda that acts in the framework of the Lebanese homeland,” Assad said. “We see here a national party.”

Begin Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

Diplomacy: In like a lion

April 2, 2009

Herb Keinon , THE JERUSALEM POST

Israeli politicians, it seems, have this thing for Frank Sinatra. Tommy Lapid reportedly asked that Sinatra’s hit “I did it my way,” be played at his funeral last year, and his good friend Ehud Olmert – sounding just a tad self-aggrandizing – used the same line to sum up his long political life in his farewell speech to the Knesset on Tuesday.

But the politician for whom Sinatra’s hit seemed most apt this week was none other than new Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who could have done worse than had that song played as musical accompaniment to his maiden address as the country’s top diplomat.

“I’ve been coming to these ceremonies for dozens of years,” one veteran Israeli diplomat said, “and I never witnessed anything like this.”

The diplomat was referring to the way Lieberman took a traditionally parve, staid, banal ceremony – in which an incumbent minister formally hands over authority to the one taking over – and turned it into his own version of J’accuse.

And the one whom he was accusing, his predecessor Tzipi Livni, sat on stage, listening poker-faced, but probably stunned, as her successor trashed the polices she has championed for the last eight years.

Very undiplomatic. Very Lieberman.

There were those in the Foreign Ministry who said Tuesday, before Lieberman took formal control of the ministry, that the office would mellow the man, and that within weeks of his taking the reins, there would be a line of foreign statesmen who, after meeting Lieberman, would say how pleasantly surprised they were by his “pragmatism.” Then Wednesday Lieberman addressed the Foreign Ministry, and those assumptions melted away. It was not necessarily what Lieberman said that was so startling, but rather the in-your-face, no-holes-bared, this-is-who-I-am-get-used-to-it manner that some in the hall found so refreshing, and that others found so troubling.

Afterwards, one western diplomat said he had found nothing really new in Lieberman’s words, and that by ditching the Annapolis process, the foreign minister was not really diverging much from the Obama administration, which also has not embraced Annapolis, and which is still in the process of formulating its policy on the matter.

Livni, after trashing her political opponents at a fiery Knesset speech on Tuesday (“ministers of nothing, deputy ministers of naught”), came to the Foreign Ministry the next day in a much more conciliatory mood, preceding Lieberman by saying that, despite their differences, they – and all governments – agreed on the fundamental premise of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people. She added that even as head of the opposition, she would stand at the service of the country and represent it abroad when called upon to do so.

And then – bam – Lieberman lowered the boom.

“I think that we have seen the cheapening of many concepts, first and foremost of the word ‘peace,'” he said, making it clear early on that his speech would not be vacuous niceties.

“The fact that we say the word ‘peace’ 20 times a day will not bring peace any closer. There have been two governments here that took far-reaching measures: the Sharon government and the Olmert government. They took dramatic steps and made far-reaching proposals. We have seen the disengagement and witnessed the Annapolis accord. I read in the newspaper about the far-reaching proposals made by the prime minister to the other side, which I do not think have ever been made, outside of Barak’s visit to Camp David.

“Israel Beiteinu was not then part of the coalition; Avigdor Lieberman was not the foreign minister. Even if we wanted to, we couldn’t have hampered bringing peace. But I do not see that it brought peace. To the contrary. It is precisely when we made all the concessions that I saw the Durban Conference, I saw two countries in the Arab world suddenly sever relations, recalling their ambassadors – Mauritania and Qatar. Qatar suddenly becoming extremist.

“We are also losing ground every day in public opinion. Does anyone think that concessions, and constantly saying ‘I am prepared to concede,’ and using the word ‘peace’ will lead to anything

? No, that will just invite pressure, and more and more wars. ‘Si vis pacem, para bellum’ – if you want peace, prepare for war, be strong. We certainly desire and want peace, but the other side also bears responsibility.”

ONE OF the elements that was so striking about Lieberman’s comments – comments he made knowing that the world would be watching and listening carefully – was how starkly they contrasted with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s remarks to the Knesset the day before.

Netanyahu’s words were conciliatory, about how Israel did not want to rule over any Palestinians, how peace was possible, and how he would pursue it. His speech represented baby steps on his long journey aimed at convincing the world he was not the peace obstacle they had made him out to be.

And then Lieberman took the stage and gave a completely different performance. By so doing, the new foreign minister was not only addressing the world, but also Netanyahu.

His message to the prime minister was clear: “I am foreign minister, and I will have a huge say in determining foreign policy.”

Indeed, with one 15-minute speech, he changed the country’s extant diplomatic policy, saying that Israel was no longer obligated by the Annapolis process. And he did so without consulting with the security cabinet, or with the regular cabinet, or with any governmental forum.

If, under Livni, large chunks were bitten out of the Foreign Ministry’s purview, with the Prime Minister’s Office – as is traditionally the case – handling policy with the Americans, and the Defense Ministry running interference with the Egyptians, and even making inroads in policy vis-a-vis the Europeans, Lieberman sent a message to Netanyahu: “I intend to be an active foreign minister; don’t even think about circumventing me.”

Lieberman’s words came a day after Jeffrey Goldberg, writing on the Atlantic’s Web site about an interview he conducted Tuesday with Netanyahu, wrote, “Netanyahu will manage Israel’s relationship with Washington personally – his foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, of the anti-Arab Israel Beiteinu party, is deeply unpopular in Washington.”

Lieberman’s clear reply Wednesday: “Not so fast.”

There were, in fact, a number of different messages in Lieberman’s speech, meant for different audiences, but which all gave the country a good indication of where the new foreign minister is headed.

HIS FIRST message was to his constituents, many of whom – like him – Russian-speaking immigrants. Sounding downright Obamaesque, and showing some signs of emotion, Lieberman started his speech by saying that he began his journey in Israel at Hebrew University’s Givat Ram campus, just down the road from the Foreign Ministry, as a student in the international relations department.

“When you go from being a student in international relations to the foreign minister, those are generally things that are only talked about, but also can turn out to be true.

Also, as a new immigrant, to then achieve the status of deputy vice prime minister, is another dream come true. This only shows that we are a land of opportunities, that everything is possible, even more so than in the US,” he said.

HIS SECOND message was to the Foreign Ministry employees.

aphex twin ventolin

Lieberman made clear that unlike Livni, who, according to numerous ministry employees, treated the ministry and its employees with barely hidden disdain, he intended to hug the ministry.

To applause, and also in marked contrast to what Livni did, Lieberman said he would appoint as director-general someone from inside the ministry: a small gesture, but one that boosts morale and gives workers a sense of their own worth.

He also said he would attend the weekly meetings of the ministry’s top echelon, something – according to a senior ministry official – Livni did only on a handful of occasions over the last three years.

dynacin minocin

This, too, adds to the workers’ sense that they are being taken seriously.

HIS THIRD message was to the Egyptians. Interestingly enough, outside of Somalia, which he held up as an example of a failed state, and Mauritania and Qatar, which he used to illustrate how concessions had not gained Israel any diplomatic benefits, the only other country he mentioned by name was Egypt.

In an obvious attempt to mend fences with Cairo, Lieberman praised the country for its stabilizing role in the region, stressing that he respected Egypt, and that he only expected that it respect Israel as well.

This was a far cry from his Knesset speech a few months back, in which he said that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak could “go to hell,” if he refused to visit Israel. It was also an indication that he had internalized former prime minister Ariel Sharon’s line that one sees things differently when sitting in positions of responsibility.

HIS FINAL message was to the world, and it – in quintessential Lieberman fashion – was extremely direct: “Let us have no illusion; what was has failed.”

And his answer was not necessarily to search for something new and improved, but rather to go back to what was essentially ditched – the road map.

The “performance-based road map to a permanent two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” accepted by Israel with 14 key reservations in 2003, is what Lieberman – sounding a lot like Sharon – wants now to return to: a set, spelled-out, phase-by-phase approach to peace-making that calls for the destruction of the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure, including in the Gaza Strip, and the establishment of effective Palestinian governing institutions before final-status negotiations are undertaken. Oh, and yes, it also calls for Israel to stop all settlement construction.

The Annapolis process tried to short circuit this process, positing instead that the sides should talk about the final-status agreement now, but only implement it later, when the situation on the ground was ripe.

Lieberman said no, that doesn’t work, Annapolis had failed.

Ironically, he is unlikely to find many inside the Obama administration who will argue with that, since the new administration has not as yet shown itself enamored of the process set into motion by former president George Bush, and embraced tightly by then secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.

But buried within Lieberman’s thundering “no” to Annapolis, was also a “yes” to the two-state solution, because that is where the road map – which Lieberman unequivocally said he accepted – ultimately leads.

And it is the new foreign minister’s acceptance of the two-state solution that the new government’s new spokespeople have already been grasping at as proof for the world that Lieberman, see, isn’t really all that bad; he accepts two states for two peoples. The thing they will now need to try to explain is that he just does things his own way.

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.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Closed

LAWS OF MANY COUNTRIES WILL BE CHANGED!

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

The laws of many countries will be Changed

By The Antichrist As They Submit To His Will,

Before, After, And During His Coming Attack

Against the Nation of Israel From the North

That I Believe Will Begin At A Point In Time

Lying Between The Years OF 2010 & 2015

Within Three Years After The Initial Attack,

He will have formed the largest Caliphate,

Under Shari’a Law In Man’s Long History,

FROM Morocco Eastward To New Guinea!

Judgment will come at Jesus 2nd Advent,

And the world will be under Christ’s Law

For a thousand years, after which Jesus

Creates never ending Heavens & Earth!

April 2, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod/

CALIPHATE NATIONS OF THE ANTICHRIST CALIPH

BEFORE Antichrist’s call for the nations to come and help him finish off Israel in the Negev at Armageddon, I believe MOST of the following countries will have rapidly join his 10 toed Caliphate AFTER he drives Israel into the Negev and conquers Egypt. The MOST likely candidates for the 10 toes when he attacks Israel are in ALL CAPS.

Afghanistan, Albania, ALGERIA, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bruner, Burkina Faso, Comoros, Chad, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Gambia, Guinea, Indonesia, IRAN, IRAQ, Jordan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, LEBANON, LIBYA, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, MOROCCO, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Somalia, SUDAN, SYRIA, Tajikistan, TUNISIA, TURKEY, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Western Saharia, and Yemen.

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE ANTICHRIST

Daniel 7:24-27 – And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. [25] And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. [26] But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.

[27] And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

ANTICHRIST’S DESTRUCTION AND CHRIST’S SECOND ADVENT

Malachi 4:1-3 – 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.

CHRIST’S MILLENNIAL REIGN FROM JERUSALEM

Zechariah 14:8,9 – And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be. [9] And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.

Ezekiel 39:21-29 – And I will set my glory among the heathen, and all the heathen shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid upon them. [22] So the house of Israel shall know that I am the Lord their God from that day and forward. [23] And the heathen shall know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity: because they trespassed against me, therefore hid I my face from them, and gave them into the hand of their enemies: so fell they all by the sword. [24] According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions have I done unto them, and hid my face from them. [25] Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Now will I bring again the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel, and will be jealous for my holy name; [26] After that they have borne their shame, and all their trespasses whereby they have trespassed against me, when they dwelt safely in their land, and none made them afraid. [27] When I have brought them again from the people, and gathered them out of their enemies’ lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations; [28] Then shall they know that I am the Lord their God, which caused them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I have gathered them unto their own land, and have left none of them any more there. [29] Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord God.

THE FINAL ETERNAL NEW HEAVEN AND EARTH

Revelation 21:1-7 – And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. [2] And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. [3] And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. [4] And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. [5] And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new.

1 buy mg propecia

And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. [6] And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. [7] He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

Begin Article Number 508 from Middle East Media Review Institute (MEMRI)

Article Number 508

April 1, 2009

Re-emerging Alliance between Pakistani Military and Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan

By: Tufail Ahmad

Article Number 508

April 1, 2009

Introduction

In the recent months, an old-new alliance has been re-emerging between the Taliban and Pakistan, aimed at countering the efforts of the U.S. and NATO troops against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Pakistani authorities recently signed two agreements with the Taliban – known as the “Shari’a for Peace deals” – which give the movement full authority to enforce the Shari’a law in the Swat Valley and broader Malakand region of the North West Frontier Province (NWFP). The Taliban’s part of the deal amounts to no more than an unwritten – and largely unfulfilled – promise to stop fighting the government forces in the area.

The deals come in the wake of three operations carried out by the Pakistani military against the Taliban in the last three years – operations in which the military conspicuously refrained from causing the movement significant harm or from killing its leaders.

The apparent capitulation of the Pakistani authorities to the demands of the Taliban is actually a part of a long-standing alliance between them. The Pakistani military – which actually formed the Taliban in the 1990s – has long been using this movement to control Afghanistan and as a tool in its confrontation with the West. The Taliban, for its part, uses the support and protection of Pakistan to consolidate its strength and gain control over increasingly large areas in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The Taliban Takeover of the Swat Valley

The Taliban’s enforcement of the Shari’a law in the Swat Valley district

did not begin with the signing of the Shari’a for Peace agreements.

As a matter of fact, the Taliban in the district, under the command of Maulana Fazlullah, has been consolidating its control and authority over the region for several years and gradually enforcing the Islamic law there. Using violence and intimidation, the movement has bombed girls’ schools, banned women from entering markets, forbidden barbers to shave men’ s beard

s, and enforced a ban on music

brand cialis name online order

and other forms of art and entertainment.

The Taliban’s most far-reaching move came on December 24, 2008, when it issued a complete ban on girls’ education in the Swat Valley district. Shah Dauran, the Taliban’s second-in-command in the Swat district, announced on the movement’s illegal radio station that, effective January 15, 2009, all government and private educational institutions would be forbidden to register girls. The decision meant that 84,000 girls enrolled in government schools and 40,000 girls enrolled in private schools would be prevented from continuing their education.

In response to criticism from circles inside and outside Pakistan – including some Islamists groups, which pronounced the decision over-extreme – Fazlullah moderated the prohibition slightly, permitting girls to attend school up to the fourth grade. Taliban spokesman Muslim Khan warned that schools that failed to comply with the new regulations would be bombed, and the threat was indeed carried out against several educational institutions.

Pakistani Military Operations against the Taliban in the Swat Valley District

The Taliban’s takeover of the Swat Valley district has met with some resistance on the part of the Pakistani military. In November 2007, the military launched an operation lasting several weeks against the Taliban militants in the region, and managed to recapture most of the territory, driving the

100mg doxycycline vibrox

Taliban into the mountains. However, with the retreat of the army, the Taliban quickly returned and renewed its violent activities. In 2008, over 200 girls’ schools were bombed and nearly 100 activists of the secular Awami National Party (ANP) were killed.

The second military operation, in October 2008, was even less successful, for the Taliban had the upper hand.

In the course of the confrontation, it recaptured territory it had previously lost and consolidated its control over the district.

The third operation was launched January 26, 2009 in response to the Taliban’s ban on female education, which caused
Pakistan to come under international pressure. According to press reports, a key tactic used by the military in this offensive was to announce its attacks in advance by loudspeaker – ostensibly in order to warn the civilian population – thus allowing the Taliban militants to escape. The operation ended abruptly on February 16, 2009, only three weeks after it began, when the NWFP government signed the first Shari’a for Peace deal with the Taliban.

The “Shari’a for Peace” Deals

The first Shari’a for Peace deal was signed February 16, 2009 between the Pakistani authorities and the Taliban “moderates” led by Maulana Fazlullah’s father-in-law, Sufi Muhammad. [6] The latter had been incarcerated in a Pakistani prison, but was released in April 2008 precisely for the purpose of facilitating a deal between the authorities and the Taliban.

The agreement abolishes all non-Shari’a laws in the Swat-Malakand region, and decrees that legal matters will henceforth be decided by a Shari’a court, as reflected in the following key passage:

“With regard to the court system in the Malakand Division… the provincial government has decided that, as of today, all non-Shari’a laws, i.e. those [laws] that contravene the Koran and hadith, are null and void…”

It should be noted that Pakistani President Asif Zardari has not yet ratified the agreement, but Sufi Muhammad has stressed that his consent is not necessary.

In intra-Taliban talks after the signing of the agreement, the movement formulated four more demands, to which the government agreed – namely that all Taliban prisoners be released and all outstanding cases against Taliban militants be closed, that the government compensate all those harmed in the course of the Pakistani operations against the Taliban, and that the Pakistani security forces withdraw from the Swat Valley district.

On March 5, 2009, the Pakistani authorities signed a second agreement with the Taliban, giving it even more power to regulate day-to-day life in the Swat Valley district. The second deal included the following clauses:

• Steps will be taken to end “obscenity” and “vulgarity.”

• Music centers and shops selling “obscene CDs” will be closed.

• Shops and markets will be closed during prayer times.

• A campaign will be launched to raise public awareness to “social evils.”

• Arrangements will be made for teaching Koran in prisons and for prison reforms.

As a further concession to the Taliban, the Pakistani military vacated Maulana Fazlullah’s headquarters, which they had occupied, and handed it over to Sufi Muhammad. Furthermore, the NWFP government has agreed to upgrade the Imam Dehri madrassa, supervised by Fazlullah, and turn it into an Islamic university equal in importance to Al-Azhar in Cairo. The university will be built at a cost of one billion Pakistani Rupees, and Sufi Muhammad will be its chancellor. It can be safely assumed that the Pakistani authorities will have no say in determining its curriculum.

It should be noted that the truce between the Taliban and the Pakistani authorities is not limited to the NWFP.

On February 23, 2009, the Taliban in Bajaur Agency – one of the seven federally-administered tribal areas (FATAs) along the Afghan border – suddenly declared a unilateral ceasefire with the government forces, [14] and the latter accepted the truce on the following day.

The Taliban’s Continued Violence against the Pakistani Forces in the Swat Valley District

It is noteworthy that both the February 16 agreement and the March 5 agreement are unilateral in that they specify what the Taliban gets in the deal (namely a free hand to impose Shari’a law in the Swat-Malakand region), but do not explicitly obligate this movement to maintain the peace. In return for the February 16 deal, the Taliban did no more than give an unwritten promise that “the Taliban [forces] in Swat will be disarmed within a week,” as Sufi Muhammad stated on February 17, 2009.
As a matter of fact, while the Pakistani army has been removing checkpoints in the Swat Valley in compliance with the Taliban demand, the Taliban itself has continued its violent activities against the government forces and officials in the region. On February 22, 2009, a few days after the signing of the February 16 deal, it kidnapped a top government official and his six body guards, who were subsequently released in exchange for two Taliban detainees.

Then, two days prior to the signing of the March 5 deal, the Taliban killed two Pakistani soldiers in the Swat Valley. The movement has also continued to attack army convoys carrying supplies to the Pakistani troops.

The NWFP government has been reduced to pleading with the Taliban militants to refrain from moving about with their weapons slung over their shoulders, in full view.

In explaining the Taliban’s continued violence, Maulana Fazlullah stated: “We have taken up arms to implement the Shari’a. Democracy is a system of the infidels.”

The Cooperation between the Taliban and the Pakistani Military

The apparent capitulation of the Pakistani authorities to the Taliban demands is due – at least partially – to a long-standing strategic alliance between the Taliban and the Pakistani military. This alliance benefits the Taliban by allowing it to gradually realize its goal of asserting its control and imposing the Shari’a law in expanding areas of Pakistan. This goal has often been articulated by Taliban leaders. Two weeks after his release from prison, Sufi Muhammad vowed that, after the enforcement of the Shari’a in the Swat-Malakand region, Shari’a law would be enforced throughout Pakistan. [19] On March 23, 2009, he repeated this assertion, saying, “If people help me, I will work to enforce the Islamic Shari’a in every part of [the country].” In fact, some Pakistani officials seem to share the Taliban’s goal. On February 24, 2009, Senate Chairman Mian Raza Rabbani proposed to extend the Islamic Shari’a law to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATAs) along the Afghan border.

Pakistan, for its part, regards the Taliban and other jihad organizations as a useful ally in establishing its influence in Afghanistan and in confronting its rivals, including not only the West but also India. An example of the cooperation between them is the recent dec

reverse directory

ision to launch a joint government-Taliban campaign against Indian intelligence agents in the Swat Valley. The daily Rozmana Jang reported February 17, 2009 that “The [NWFP] administration and Maulana Sufi Muhammad will immediately take steps to clear the [district] of elements and criminals belonging to the Research and Analysis Wing [i.e., India’s foreign intelligence agency], for the government has enough evidence of India’s involvement in the current lawlessness in Swat.”

Moreover, the cooperation of the Pakistani military is not only with the Pakistani Taliban, but with the Taliban as a whole, i.e., also with the Taliban in Afghanistan. This is evident from the recent interactions between the Taliban in Pakistan and Mullah Omar, leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan. In the beginning of 2009, three Taliban groups in Pakistan’s Waziristan district formed a joint organization called Shura Ittihad Al-Mujahideen, under the command of three key figures in Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, namely Baitullah Mehsud, Maulvi Nazir and Maulvi Hafiz Gul Bahadur (the latter two are considered “pro-government”). The significant point is that, upon its establishment, the group pledged its allegiance to Mullah Omar, stating: “We regard Mullah Omar as our Amir-ul-Mumineen [i.e., Leader of the Faithful].” This refutes the opinion, often expressed by political analysis, that Mullah Omar does not represent the Taliban in Pakistan. Moreover, in a recent letter to the leaders of the Taliban in Waziristan, Mullah Omar ordered them not to attack the Pakistani security forces, because fighting Muslims could not be considered jihad. He added that the attacks on the Pakistani military were harming the Taliban movement, and that, if the Taliban fighters wanted to wage jihad, they should come to Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, the Afghan website www.taand.com reports that the Taliban and its “supporters” – meaning the Pakistani authorities – have reorganized their forces and are intensifying their attacks in Afghanistan.

The interaction between Mullah Omar and the Taliban in Pakistan belies the distinction sometimes made between Taliban-Pakistan and Taliban-Afghanistan. It implies that they constitute a single movement led by Mullah Omar – a movement which is currently inclined to cooperate with the Pakistani authorities.

The re-emergence of the Pakistan-Taliban alliance at this time may be linked to the advent of the Obama administration and to the changing strategic situation in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. Realizing that Obama means to step up the U.S. campaign against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, the Pakistani military has recalibrated its strategic position and brought the Taliban into its fold, to serve as its proxy in a confrontation with the U.S. forces.

Indian and Afghan Reactions to the Shari’a-for-Peace Deals

India and Afghanistan have expressed considerable concern about the re-emerging Pakistan- Taliban alliance. Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee described the Taliban as a terrorist organization and the deal as danger to civilization, while his deputy, Anand Sharma, warned that the Swat Valley Shari’a-for-Peace deal could threaten India’s security.

In Afghanistan, Foreign Ministry spokesman Sultan Ahmad Baheen and political affairs expert Waheed Mazda described the deal as a threat to peace in the region, and the Afghani daily Kabul Times warned that, with the deal in place, the Pakistani Taliban would be a source of “new threats” to Afghanistan. An article in the weekly of the Afghani Shi’ite party Eqtedar-e-Melli stated: “The concern felt by Afghanistan [and] by the international community over the [Shari’a for Peace] deal is based on our past experience. In the past – and even in the last seven years, during which Pakistan has officially been supporting Afghanistan’s cause in the war against terrorism and the Taliban – [Pakistan’s] policy has remained ambiguous, unfriendly and pro-Taliban… Every time a domestic crisis has befallen it, Pakistan has sought to export [its] problems to Afghanistan.” Said Fazlullah Wahidi, governor of Afghanistan’s Konar province, which borders Pakistan’s Bajaur Agency, warned that the ceasefire in Bajaur would undermine the security of Afghanistan, where the Western forces are battling the Taliban.

Tufail Ahmad is the director of MEMRI’s Urdu-Pashtu Media Project.

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