blog.Tribulationperiod.com

Covert will soon become Overt,

When Middle East War Breaks Out!

Hizbullah-Hamas-Iran Covert Networks,

Will quickly become Overt as they crush Egypt,

When massive Islamic forces sweep SW across Suez,

During a point in time between the YEARS 2010 AND 2015!

April 12, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

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

The political, geophysical, and military positioning of Syria, Iran, and Iraq, from a prospective of having world influence, literally stinks. But the position of Egypt’s Suez Canal, and Cairo, her capital, is outstanding. The antichrist is supposed to be a man of genius in all areas. That being the case, he would be worse than a military academy dropout were he not to take the Suez Canal, and then make Cairo his empire’s capital.

Daniel 11:43 – But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

The three most “precious things” in Egypt are: the Suez Canal, the Nile River and its Delta, and Cairo, it’s capital. He will conquer the Suez Canal zone and all of Egypt. So just what is Egypt

? Many are inclined to establish it as the land bordered on the north by the Mediterranean Sea, on the west by Libya, on the south by Sudan, on the southeast by the Red Sea, and on the northeast by its Sinai border with Gaza and Israel’s Negev. And, geographically, that is quite correct. However, in reality, that is not Egypt. The real Egypt, where her people live, is much, much, smaller. Egypt is the land along her north and east coastlines up to about two miles inland, the Nile Delta, and the land along the Nile River extending about fifteen miles either side of its banks.

The antichrist will send messages to leaders of two of the original 10 nations confederated with him, namely Libya and Sudan, requesting them to mass their troops along the northern coastal border with Libya, and along the border where the Nile enters Egypt from Sudan. This will cause the diversion of some Egyptian troops away from Cairo and the Suez Canal in order to protect their western and southern borders.

And this will allow the antichrist to rapidly push across the Suez Canal into Cairo and along her western and eastern coastlines, then to quickly progress southward down the Nile with little resistance. I believe he will control Egypt within two weeks after he reaches the Suez Canal.

Once he has conquered Egypt, he will make an assessment of his geopolitical position. After having done so, he would be a military fool to return to his home country.

He will establish his capital at Cairo, and will remain there for more than three years. After three years he will receive news that causes him to quickly return to Jerusalem. If a military leader plans to put down his roots for a while, what would be one of his major concerns? The relationship he has with the rulers of the nations that are on his immediate borders. That is, how sure he is they will not pull a surprise attack on him. So, through the prestigious position he has gained in the eyes of the Islamic world by this time, it will allow him to use the terrorist groups, already in Sudan and Libya, to overthrow their leaders, and in their place to install two of his stooges, where they will remain in control for some three years. He will already have plucked up the ruler of Lebanon, and replaced him with a stooge. It will surprise me if Lebanon, Sudan, and Libya are not the countries from which his stooges will rule.

Daniel 7:8,24 – I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were THREE of the FIRST horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. [24] 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.

I believe the kings (rulers) of Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan will be among many national leaders of subdued countries personally plucked up by the roots out of their positions of leadership in their own countries, and replaced by puppet rulers who do exactly as the antichrist directs. I believe the leaders of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan will also be replaced by the antichrist.

Daniel 11:43 – But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

“At his steps” means “companionship” (Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance & Wilson’s O.T. Word Studies). This expression also appears in Judges 4:10, where it appears as “at his feet.”

Judges 4:10 – And Barak called Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh; and he went up with ten thousand men at his feet: and Deborah went up with him.

It represents an Old Testament word picture of a conquered leader or country laying yearly tribute payments before the king of the conquering country, who is setting on his throne, and the tribute is being placed at his feet on the steps leading up to his throne. So I believe the antichrist will place his puppet rulers on the thrones of Lebanon, Syria, and Sudan as those who are in “companionship” with him.

For more than three years, with the Suez Canal under his control, he will gain worldwide recognition and acclaim in his capital city of Cairo.

Israel will be trapped in the Negev for more than three years, and stability will have come to the troubled Middle East. He will supposedly have done what all nations say they are seeking, that is, brought stability to the Middle East. But, between the third and fourth year of his rule, something will cause him to quickly head for Jerusalem.

Begin Excerpt from DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

Washington Helps Curtail Iran’s Covert Suez Thrust

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

April 11, 2009, 8:26 PM (GMT+02:00)

From early 2006, Egyptian and Western security services and Israeli intelligence have been aware of Hizballah’s smuggling operations for Hamas on behalf of Tehran and Iran’s covert networks in Sinai and the Suez Canal cities of Port Said, Suez and Ismailia.

But last Wednesday, April 8, Cairo disclosed that Egyptian security forces had arrested 49 men, 41 Egyptians, seven Israeli Arabs, and one Lebanese citizen on charges of supporting Hamas and Hizballah. Iran was not mentioned. The arrests had begun last November and were continuing.

The disclosure sparked a slanging match between Cairo and Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Yet neither touched the real bone of contention. The latter admitted that the network’s head, Sami Shehab, belonged to Hizballah and had provided Hamas with money and logistical support, “for which we are not ashamed.”

He thus confirmed a long-held Israeli intelligence contention.

Nasrallah went on to accuse the Egyptian regime of working hand in glove with Israel and America to keep the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip under siege.

An Egyptian source shot back by calling Nasrallah an Iranian agent and accusing him of organizing subversion against the Cairo government to divert attention from Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

These allegations were a mutually agreed smoke screen, DEBKAfile’s intelligence sources report. It suited neither party to admit that the gang Cairo exposed led to a major undercover Iranian network operating in Egypt for three years.

While Hizballah contributes to Iran’s covert overseas operations from the time of the late Imad Mughniyeh, Nasrallah could hardly admit he was not privy to all the arrested men’s identities. Egypt, for its part, refrained from publicly accusing Tehran of its deep penetration, while the Iranians placed a Hizballah security operative at its head rather than a high-ranking Iranian agent to avoid being directly compromised in the operation.

DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources disclose that this group had a much larger strategic mission than terrorist attacks on Egyptian towns and Israeli targets in Sinai, as claimed by Egyptian and Israeli media: It was assigned with planting an Iranian logistical-intelligence infrastructure as stealthily and inconspicuously as possible along the shores of the Suez Canal. This chain was to eventually hook up with the clandestine Iranian cells operating out of Somalia and Sudan opposite the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean and provide Iran with an outer safety belt as a counterweight to the US naval presence in those waters.

In the event of an American or Israeli military strike against its nuclear facilities, Tehran would have resources in place for retaliating against Saudi and Western traffic passing through the Suez Canal, the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden and the waters off the Horn of Africa.

To this end, in 2006, the Iranian agents and their recruits started purchas

ing apartments on the upper floors of tall buildings near the Suez Canal coast and small walled-in houses right on the waterline. The 49 agents captured by the Egyptian police may well have been just the tip of the iceberg. Once they were in place in their forward positions, Iranian intelligence decided they would also be useful for smuggling arms to Gaza for Hamas.

On March 17, 2007 DEBKAfile wrote:

Iranian and Venezuelan assistance is funneled through a well-oiled smuggling network Iran’s Revolutionary Guards has thrown up across Egyptian Sinai up to and including the ports of the Suez Canal and Gulf of Suez as far south as Sudan and as far north as the Mediterranean…

Israel repeatedly warned Egypt that this multi-branched covert ring would undermine Egyptian security in Sinai and the Suez Canal before turning against Egypt proper.

The Iranian network came up in a conversation between the former US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and CIA chiefs with Egypt’s intelligence minister Gen. Omar Suleiman, when they met in the Jordanian capital of Amman on Feb.

20, 2007 (as revealed in DEBKA-Net-Weekly 290 on Feb. 23: Rice Chairs a Pivotal US-Arab Intelligence Summit in Amman).

On that occasion, Suleiman informed Rice that Egypt lacks the military, intelligence and financial resources to effectively cope with the strongholds Iran has planted along the Suez Canal. In his view, the United States must pitch in if Iran’s Suez presence and smuggling operations were to be curtailed.

In the last two years, meanwhile, Iranian arms smuggling operations for its Palestinian protégée in Gaza swelled.

It took Israel’s Operation Cast Lead against Hamas from Dec. 2008 to Jan. 2009 to persuade the Americans how necessary it was to heed the Egyptian minister’s advice.

The roundup of 49 Iranian-backed undercover agents, disclosed by Cairo last week, was in fact part of the intelligence and military operation backed by the US and Israel for rooting out the hostile Iranian infrastructure dug in deep from the Suez Canal shores in the north to Sudan and Eritrean in the south.

Six months ago, Cairo began rolling up the Iranian ring, but only after the US beefed up its naval strength in the Gulf of Suez and Red Sea and assured Cairo that more would be done.

Begin Excerpt from Arutz Sheva

Hizbullah Admits It Smuggles Weapons from Egypt to Gaza

Nisan 17, 5769, 11 April 09 11:05

By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu

(IsraelNN.com) Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah has admitted that Hizbullah agent Sami Hani Shehab was arrested in Egypt and was involved in a large weapons smuggling cell that was helping to arm Hamas in Gaza. An Egyptian prosecutor charged that Nasrallah ordered the cell to stage terrorist attacks in

Egypt.

Nasrallah stated, “If aiding the Palestinians is a crime, then I am guilty and proud of it,” but he denied that the terrorist network has a branch in Egypt or elsewhere. The London-based al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper on Saturday quoted an unnamed Cairo official that “Nasrallah wants to turn Egypt into a playground like Lebanon.” Nasrallah encouraged Egyptians last December to protest against their government and force it to open the border at Gaza.

The source added that Nasrallah’s admission indicates he is “satisfying the Iranian interest to occupy the world, as [Iran] develops its nuclear program.”

The Egyptian weekly al-Ahram revealed that several of the 49 suspects arrived in Egypt illegally from four different countries. It added that several of them infiltrated through tunnels from Gaza and that the real ringleader, Mohammed Kabalan, escaped the Egyptian roundup.

On Thursday, media reports said that Shehab was suspected of heading a Hezbollah unit responsible for neighboring states, and that Palestinian Authority Arabs and Sudanese were among those arrested. The Lebanese Al-Mustaqbal daily reported that several members of the cell admitted that they sent “detailed information” about the towns on the Egyptian-Palestinian borders to Hizbullah headquarters in Lebanon

The Egyptian public prosecutor’s office also charged that Hizbullah, closely allied with Iran, was trying to monitor the Suez Canal.

The charges that the terrorist ring was trying to monitor the Suez Canal prompted speculation that Nasrallah’s real aim was to bolder naval patrols in order to help Iran.

The DEBKA website, whose reports usually are published without named sources and often are speculation, stated that Nasrallah’s admission that a Hizbullah agent was involved in smuggling arms from Egypt to Gaza was a cover-up.

The website’s sources said the cell’s mission was to plant “an Iranian logistical-intelligence infrastructure as stealthily and inconspicuously as possible along the shores of the Suez Canal. This chain was to eventually hook up with the clandestine Iranian cells operating out of Somalia and Sudan opposite the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean and provide Iran with an outer safety belt as a counterweight to the U.S. naval presence in those waters.”

The arrests of Shehab in November and the rest of

the cell several weeks ago help explain the timing of the Israeli attack on a weapons convoy in Sudan that was headed for Gaza via Egypt with Iranian weapons for Hamas. American naval forces also reportedly intercepted Iranian ships last January with arms for Hamas.

Egypt in turn often has foiled smuggling by Hamas as a response to criticism of turnging a blind eye to the terrroist group’s activities. Cairo reported Saturday that its police forces last week arrested a man who was trying to smuggling $2 million in cash in to Gaza.

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.

All it takes for Evil to Succeed

Is for good men to do Nothing!

I Did Not Like Obama’s Ideology,

When He Ran His Long Campaign,

And I am Still Opposed to Socialism.

April 12, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Isaiah 5:20 – Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet

for bitter!

Begin Excerpt from Jerusalem Watchman

It’s not (really) up to Bibi

Posted on Tuesday 7 April 2009

By Stan Goodenough

A strange thing happened in America last year.

For months, as John McCain and Barack Obama battled it out on the campaign trail, increasingly anxious voices were heard from conservative leaders and rightist media personalities about the danger the Democratic candidate posed to the future of the United States.

Some journalists took hold, terrier-like, of Obama’s associations and friendships with America-hating clergy, terrorist-loving academics, and Israel-hating former presidents.

Influential Christian leaders and economic experts sounded the alarm louder and louder until, as November 4 approached, a crescendo of concern was reverberating through the land.

Obama would murder more babies both in the womb and out; Obama would throw in the towel in Iraq, making a mockery of the American lives sacrificed and massive effort spent to plant democracy there; Obama would appease Iran’s Hitler, enabling him to get a nuclear bomb; Obama would turn America into a socialist state; Obama would betray American values, apologize to the world for America’s behavior, and sell America’s birthright to curry favor around the globe.

The night before the election the tumult had become a torrent.

And then, on the morning after: silence. Obama had won, and except for a few dogged individuals, the race was quickly on to backtrack from all the horror tales and dire predictions, and swear allegiance to the man who was, after all, to be “our president.”

Nothing had changed, mind you. Obama still threatened to make all those nightmares reality for the US, and in fact is now well on the way to doing so. But the Republicans had fought him, and now they could retire to lick their wounds and regroup in order to fight the next elections when they arrive.

Fools and blind! If it was right to fight the man before he moved into the White House, surely it is even more important to fight him now that he is there.

Or are most those, until recently “desperately worried,” Americans resigned now to allowing Obama four years of freedom to ruin their country?

In America, citizens on the right should be fighting the ungodly policies of their president – doing everything in their power to hinder and delay him in his efforts to remake that country in his own image.

Back here in Israel, citizens on the right should be gathering around the prime minister they helped – directly or indirectly – to place in power.

By their encouragement and through

their activism, they can strengthen him to withstand the ungodly pressures and threats that are already rearing against their land.

In 1997, one of Netanyahu’s senior advisors complained about how the left wing members of that coalition were tying Bibi’s hands – blocking every attempt the prime minister made to slow down the “peace” process; threatening to cause the collapse of his government if he moved ahead.

Instead of empowering him to withstand the increasing American pressure and dislike, those who could have helped pulled back and disowned him – leaving him to stand alone.

He could’nt. He was not strong enough then. He is not strong enough now. No single man could be.

I believe it is less up to Netanyahu. If you are an Israeli, a Zionist, a loyal lover of your land, it’s more up to you.

Now that he is in the Prime Minister’s Office, resist the temptation to sit back and criticize. Rather, come forward and in droves give him the message he can clearly convey to Obama himself, when the president comes calling in May.

“My countrymen – citizens and government – insist that I withstand every effort to surrender more of our historic homeland for empty promises of peace.

As the leader of the greatest democracy in he world, you will agree with me, Mr. President, that my first responsibility is to them, and not to America.

If you, reader, are an American Christian or Jew, it is past time to begin your assault on the corridors of power in your land wherein wicked men are plotting the delivery of Israel to the Arabs.

As we all know: All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

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.

Jewish Eschatology is on Target,

Esau’s descendants won’t help Israel,

Because of the fear of Ishmael’s Offspring!

April 11, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt from Arutz Sheva

Germany, EU Cooling Relations with Israel

Nisan 13, 5769, 07 April 09 09:21

By Gil Ronen

(IsraelNN.com) Less than a week into the new government’s term, Germany and the European Union are ratcheting up diplomatic pressure on Israel to agree to a “two state” final-status solution in the Land of Israel west of the Jordan.

“In a series of diplomatic barbs,” German magazine Der Spiegel reported Monday, “the German government has expressed its displeasure at the new, right-leaning Israeli government.” Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel has put off a planned joint meeting of the cabinets of both countries, for “an undetermined amount of time.” The meeting was initially planned for June.

In a telephone conversation with Binyamin Netanyahu, Merkel assured the Prime Minister that that the meeting would take place, but said a date could not be set before the German government’s summer break. At the same time, she also pressed Netanyahu not to abandon the “two-state solution” which would create an Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Germany’s Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has also contributed to the cooling of Germany’s relations with Israel. In his letter of congratulations to, Avigdor Lieberman, Steinmeier did not set any date for

his first meeting with his Israeli counterpart, although this step is customary in such letters.

Steinmeier said Germany expects “constructive engagement” from both the Israeli government and the PA. “We urgently need progress on the path to peace and a fair two-state solution,” he told Neue Presse, a German newspaper.

Meanwhile, the European Union is also considering “diplomatic sanctions” against Israel, the German magazine reported. Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn has proposed canceling the planned participation of Israeli diplomats in a number of EU meetings. Asselborn said that “further diplomatic preferential treatment can not happen without conditions.” The new Israeli government, he explained, must “prove through its actions that it will accept a Palestinian state.”

Begin Excerpt from Haaretz

Key Dutch party: Sanctions against Israel if it thwarts peace

By Cnaan Liohshiz, Haaretz Correspondent

April 11, 2008

The Netherlands must impose economic sanctions against Israel if the new government in Jerusalem thwarts the peace process with the Palestinians, the Dutch Labor party said last week.

Members of Labor, which is a member of government as the country’s second largest party, said they intended to write a manifesto on the matter to the foreign minister, Maxime Verhagen, from the centrist ruling CDA party, who is largely seen as a staunch supporter of Israel.

In an interview for Radio 1, Labor’s Martijn van Dam said his party insisted that Verhagen and the European Union take “concrete” action that demands Israel accept Hamas as a partner for dialog. Van Dam also lamented the Netherlands and the European Union’s decision to blacklist Hamas.

Van Dam went on to call Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman “an extremist who is on the brink of racism,” adding: “This is not a government with much prospect for peace.”

Responding to calming statements attributed to Verhagen concerning Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government, van Dam said: “The only one who thinks that the positions of the [new] Israeli government will not have any consequences is Maxim Verhagen.”

Discussions on the matter between the cabinet and Labor’s representatives in parliament are expected to continue this week.

Related articles:

ANALYSIS / Obama saying Israel still bound to two-state solution

Begin Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

Think Again: Esau and Ishmael allied

April 8, 2009

Jonathan Rosenblum , THE JERUSALEM POST

Jewish eschatology contains numerous references to an alliance between Esau (Rome, the West) and his father-in-law Ishmael (Islam) against the Jewish people toward the end of history. Frankly, I’ve always had a hard time imaging such an alliance between clashing civilizations.

Perhaps my mistake lay in imagining a sort of updated Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

What we are witnessing instead today is Western appeasement and submission to Islam. In both the United States and Western Europe an effective double-standard has been carved out for Islam. Scorn for traditional religions and their adherents is fine, even praiseworthy, as long

as it is confined to Judaism or Christianity. But toward Islam, we must show respect.

The lesson that Europeans learned from the Danish cartoons episode was that it is not wise to rile Muslims. Noting Islam’s unlovely propensity for producing adherents eager to kill in its name inevitably triggers murderous riots that prove the point being protested.

Britain’ s recent refu

sal to permit Dutch parliamentarian Geerts Wilder into the country and the criminal prosecution against him in his own country provide a classic example of anticipatory compliance. The fear that showing of Wilder’s movie Fitna, consisting primarily of quotes from the Koran, to a group of British parliamentarians would trigger riots trumped traditional Anglo-Saxon support for freedom of thought and argument.

THE WEST’S astounding passivity in the face of Iran’s racing nuclear program is the most consequential form of appeasement. In three months in office, the Obama administration’s sole initiative on the Iranian front has been a video from President Barack Obama full of paeans to the great Persian culture, for which he received mostly spittle in return.

By contrast, the administration has been hyperactive on the Palestinian-Israeli front. The president’s first foreign policy initiative was to appoint a special Mideast envoy, who has already visited the region several times. The president and his secretary of state constantly stress the urgency of the “two-state solution” and the unsustainability of the status quo. The Arab-Israeli conflict, we keep hearing from Washington, holds the key to all Middle East conundrums.

That inversion of priorities makes no logical sense. The possession of nuclear weapons by an ideologically expansionist power sitting atop or adjacent to a large percentage of the world’s oil supply and serving as a patron of terrorist groups around the world would permanently change the world in ways too painful to contemplate. Sunni leaders know this and repeatedly told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Iran constitutes a far bigger threat to regional stability than Israel.

On the other hand, an imposed “two-state solution” would change little in the Middle East. Arab countries would continue to be plagued by high rates of illiteracy, second-class citizenship for women, lack of scientific or technological training, and the absence of civil liberties even in the unlikely event of peace with the Palestinians.

The only consequence of such a “solution,” particularly if it left Israel uninhabitable after a Hamas takeover of the West Bank, would be to strengthen the narrative of Islamic ascendancy and whet the jihadist appetite.

Few propositions are so easily refuted as the centrality of

the Arab-Israeli conflict to the multiple deformations in the Arab world. Not one of the major bloodlettings in the region is remotely attributable to Israel: the Iraq-Iran War, the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and its aftermath, civil wars in Lebanon, Iraq and Algeria, the slaughter of 20,000 Syrian citizens in Homa.

Finally, resolute Western action with respect to Iran might actually achieve something. Iran’s economy is highly vulnerable, particularly with oil prices low. Yet rather than exploit Iran’s economic weakness and lack of petroleum refining capacity, major European firms have signed billion dollar deals to lessen that vulnerability by helping Iran develop its refining capacity.

But there is scant hope of progress on the Palestinian front, particularly if peace, not just signed agreements, is the goal. “Moderate” Muhammad Dahlan, carefully cultivated by the United States for more than a decade, now admits that Fatah has never recognized Israel’s right to exist. Hamas, for its part, repeats over and over aga in that it will never recognize Israel

in any borders. The Palestinian Authority continues to honor as heroes perpetrators of massacres of Jewish civilians. Billions of dollars of international aid continues to go to maintaining multiple security forces and feathering the nests of Palestinian officials rather than building a decent society. And from an Israeli point of view, as long as rockets continue to fall from every area from which we withdraw, there is no chance of further withdrawals.

WESTERN SUBMISSION and passivity are only part of the story. Ever larger segments of elite and left-wing Western opinion have signed on to Hamas’s exterminationist agenda. Comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany are so commonplace in European discourse that they no longer even shock. Oliphant’s cartoon of a jackbooted Israel has now brought this obscenity to the mainstream American press.

Operation Cast Lead is said to have brought Israel’s international standing to a new nadir. Responding to their accusers, Israelis ask: What other country in the world would have tolerated three years of rockets shot from across the border at its civilian population? How would you have brought those missiles to a halt in a more “gentle” fashion than Israel has? Why are you obsessed with the deaths of 300 civilians in Gaza brought about by the policies of their duly elected leaders (think of the civilian population of Germany under Hitler), but so oblivious to the killings of hundreds of thousands of black Muslims in Sudan?

Very good questions to be sure, and not ones to which there are any answers.

But their effectiveness depends on the assumption that the one being asked accepts Israel’s right to exist at all. Europeans view our very presence in this place as the last vestige of Western colonialism.

On a tour of US college campuses, The Jerusalem Post’s Khaled Abu Toameh found more support for Hamas among non-Muslim professors and students than exists in Ramallah. “We should not be surprised,” he wrote, “if the next generation of jihadists comes… from university campuses across the United States.”

The noose, then, is tightening around Israel’s neck as a result of both Western submission and acquiescence to raging Islam. All this was predicted long ago.

What can we do? We have just experienced again the Seder night – leil shimurim.

One explanation of the language of shmira is to anticipate and look forward to something. On the Seder night, God not only guards us, He looks forward and anticipates His final redemption of the Jewish people from the clutches of Esau and Ishmael.

All He awaits is some sign from us of our own eager anticipation.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

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

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

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

Is Obama cowering down to Iran?

The answer to the question is ‘Yes,’

U.S. has its tail between its hind Legs,

Just like the Rest of Today’s Free World!

Islam sees Obama’s posture as Invitation,

To come against Israel Without Fear of U.S.!

Obama is indeed going to bring great Change,

But the change will be to no longer defend Israel!

Obama’s Passive Posture Will Bring WAR, Not Peace!

ApriL 11, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

Analysis: Is the US backing down on Iran’s uranium enrichment

?

April 9, 2009

jonathan spyer , THE JERUSALEM POST

US President Barack Obama’s speech to the Turkish parliament on Monday was greeted with enthusiasm throughout the Arab world.

The speech represented an attempt to mend fences, and was testimony to the administration’s belief in the healing power of words.

Obama ticked all the required boxes.

He stressed his intention to “actively pursue” the goal of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. He declared that the US “is not and will never be at war with Islam.”

He even spoke of the important role played by Islam in the development of the United States. (No doubt some junior member of staff is currently engaged in the unenviable task of finding some examples of this formerly little-remarked-upon phenomenon.)

The rhetoric was designed largely to change the atmospherics of the relationship between the US and the Arab states. The content of the administration’s regional policy – beyond a general desire for dialogue and “engagement” – has yet to be properly clarified.

However, as the empirical evidence accumulates, a picture is beginning to emerge on key issues.

The administration is serious regarding its project of engagement with Iran.

The Iranians, meanwhile, are equally serious about their project to develop a nuclear capability.

It therefore appears likely that both of these projects will be seriously and energetically pursued, with the former having little effect on the latter.

In his speeches in Turkey, Obama failed to reiterate the previous administration’s call for a complete cessation of uranium enrichment by Iran. Rather, the president said his message to Iran was “don’t develop a nuclear weapon.”

This could be interpreted as meaning that the administration may be prepared to tolerate Iran’s uranium enrichment program, on condition that it takes place under IAEA supervision, and does not seek to enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels.

US officials have been wary of committing themselves as to whether this is indeed the administration’s intention. When queried on the matter, State Department spokesman Robert Wood recommended waiting until

the policy review process is completed.

But should this prove to be the administration’s position, it would be seen in Iran as a major victory for the regime.

Iran has been at loggerheads for the last half-decade with the major western powers over its uranium enrichment program. A series of UN Security Council resolutions since 2006 have reiterated the international demand for an absolute and open-ended cessation of uranium enrichment by Teheran. This goal has been shared, at least declaratively, by the US, EU, Russia and China.

In the intervening period, Iran has defied international will.

Teheran has installed more than 5,500 centrifuges to enrich uranium in its plant at Natanz.

Iran now possesses a stockpile of more than 1,000 kg. of low-enriched uranium.

A US acceptance of this situation as a fait accompli would send a strong signal to the regime in Iran and to its allies that this is an administration that accepts the establishment of facts on the ground – at least by its enemies.

It appears that the administration realizes this, which is why it will prefer to wait until after the Iranian presidential elections in June, in the hope that it can offer any concessions to someone other than President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.

But whether it is Ahmedinejad or Mirhossein Moussavi who holds the Iranian presidency after June, if the intention of the Obama administration is to accept ongoing Iranian uranium enrichment as a starting point from which to request Iranian cooperation, this would represent the rewarding of defiance. The result of this will be to invite more defiance.

The administration has now announced that it will take part in direct talks with the Iranians, alongside the UK, France, Germany, China and Russia.

This latest development represents a further abandonment of the previous administration’s policy regarding uranium enrichment.

Bush had made the cessation of enrichment a condition for talks between Iran and the US. A new round of talks is currently being prepared, and is expected to take place within four to six weeks.

Ahmedinejad has gracefully accepted Obama’s offer of friendship, on condition that it is based on “honesty, justice and respect.” In the coming days, meanwhile, Iran is expected to announce the latest advance in its nuclear program – the perfection of techniques for the manufacture of uranium fuel.

Of course, the possibility of increased sanctions will be held out, should Iran refuse to cooperate with the latest diplomatic charm offensive. Nevertheless, the overall picture is not encouraging.

Behind the smiles and the bowing and the rhetoric, the various regional players are currently assessing their room for maneuver in the climate being created by the Obama administration. The Iranians will note the softening of the US stance on uranium enrichment, the offer of direct talks, and the declarations of friendship and respect for Iran’s ancient culture.

They are likely to conclude that all this adds up to increased space and increased time in which to pursue their ambitions.

The writer is a senior researcher at the Global Research in International Affairs Center, IDC, Herzliya.

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.

Man Won’t FACE REALITY,

Obama’s Passive Peace Plan:

Give enemy all he claims as His,

British WW-2 Blunder Rides Again,

Shades of Neville Chamberlain in 1938!

U.S. Repents of Its Many Sins against Islam,

To join the cowardly Lion of the European Union,

Along with our two cold war enemies China and Russia,

Engaging in a maize of diplomatic dialog prior to Armageddon,

The diplomatic dialog circus of 1932 to 1939 is about to be Repeated,

As the U.S., Great Britain, France and Germany Talk – Iran

GROWS Stronger,

And the Strength and Will of the West against Islam grows Weaker and Weaker!

April 10, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

The vast majority of the populations of the West have a quite natural fear of going to war and, having lived through three of them, I am among them.

It is the nature of moral men and women not to desire to become involved in a war that may take their lives and the lives of their children and grandchildren. Out of this desire grows an unfounded belief that somehow war can be postponed by dialog with those pushing the international community toward what moral citizens cling to as a possibility, namely that war might be delayed indefinitely.

Knowing what I know about Islam, Russia, and China, I cannot see the remotest possibility of a Middle East war being delayed indefinitely. In fact, I will be amazed if it is delayed past 2015.

Any truce or agreement reached in the Middle East can never be anything other than temporary until Christ returns.

Begin Excerpt from Haaretz

‘Jerusalem should be capital for the Palestinians and Israel’

By DPA

April 9, 2009

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Thursday expressed his country’s opposition to the demolition of Palestinian houses in Jerusalem, saying the city should be the capital of both Israel and the future Palestinian state.

“We view with real concern the proposed demolitions in East Jerusalem,” Miliband told a press conference he jointly addressed with his Jordanian counterpart Nasser Judeh.

“Jerusalem should be the capital of the Palestinians and Israel,” he said.

Miliband was responding to plans by Israel to demolish scores of houses in a Jerusalem suburb that would make about 1,500 Palestinians homeless.

The Israeli authorities alleged that the building of the houses was illegal in East Jerusalem, which Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day war and annexed, saying the city would remain the “eternal, undivided capital” of the Jewish state.

The United Nations considers East Jerusalem occupied territory and both Jordan and the Palestinians insist that there would be no peace in the region before Israel quits East Jerusalem, allowing it to become the capital of an independent Palestinian state.

The issue

of East Jerusalem, particularly the planned building of more settlements there by the new right-wing Israeli government, is expected to top Miliband’s talks with Jordan’s King Abdullah II and Prime Minister Nader Dahabi later in the day, officials said.

In addition, talks will also cover ways of reinvigorating peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, they said.

The British foreign secretary arrived in Amman earlier Thursday for his first visit to Jordan.

Related articles:

Jerusalem freezes plan for Jewish homes in Arab area

U.S. furious over Israel’s demolition of East Jerusalem homes

Begin Excerpt from Jerusalem Post

US to participate directly in group talks with Iran

April 8, 2009

Associated Press , THE JERUSALEM POST

The Obama administration said Wednesday it will participate directly in group talks with Iran over its suspect nuclear program, marking another significant shift from former President George W. Bush’s policy toward a nation he labeled a member of the “Axis of Evil.”

The State Department said the United States would be at the table “from now on” when senior diplomats from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany meet with Iranian

officials to discuss the nuclear issue.

The Bush administration had generally shunned such meetings, although it attended one last year.

“We believe that pursuing very careful engagement on a range of issues that affect our interests and the interests of the world with Iran makes sense,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters. “There is nothing more important than trying to convince Iran to cease its efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon.”

State Department spokesman Robert Wood said the decision was conveyed to representatives of Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia by the third-ranking U.S. diplomat William Burns at a Wednesday meeting in London. That group, known as the “P5+1,” announced earlier that it would invite Iran to attend a new session aimed at breaking a deadlock in the talks.

“The U.S. remains committed to the P5+1 process; what is different is that the US will join P5+1 discussions with Iran from now on,” Wood said, adding that Washington was hopeful Iran would attend.

“If Iran accepts, we hope this will be the occasion to seriously engage Iran on how to break the logjam of recent years and work in a cooperative manner to resolve the outstanding international concerns about its nuclear program,” he said. “Any breakthrough will be the result of the collective efforts of all the parties, including Iran.”

Wood said the administration wants a diplomatic resolution to the nuclear issue and believes that requires “a willingness to engage directly with each other on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interests.”

“We hope that the government of Iran chooses to reciprocate,” he added.

The invitation is to be sent to the Iranians by European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana. In a statement the group said it welcomed the “new direction” of U.S. policy toward Iran. No time frame was given for a date of the meeting.

Prior to word from State, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s hard-line president, said that his country welcomes talks with the United States should it prove to be “honest” in extending its hand toward Iran, one of the strongest signals yet that Teheran welcomes Obama’s calls for dialogue.

“The Iranian nation welcomes a hand extended to it should it really and truly be based on honesty, justice and respect,” Ahmadinejad said in a speech broadcast live on state television.

The United States and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking to build a nuclear weapon, a claim that Iran denies. Tehran insists it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to develop reactor fuel using enrichment for civilian energy purposes.

Through the negotiations, the P5+1 group has offered Iran a package of incentives to stop enriching and reprocessing uranium.

Teheran has thus far rebuffed the offer despite the fact that its refusal has led to the imposition of three rounds of economic, trade and financial sanctions by the UN Security Council.

Individual countries, led by the United States and members of the European Union, have also imposed their own sanctions on Iran.

The United States and Iran have not had diplomatic relations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and subsequent hostage taking at the US Embassy in Teheran and official exchanges between the two nations have largely been limited to talks over security in Iraq and the situation in Afghanistan.

The Bush administration had pursued a policy of isolating Iran and not attending the P5+1 group’s meetings with Iranian officials on the nuclear issue. In a brief break with that, however, the administration sent Burns, a career diplomat to one such meeting in Geneva last July.

After that, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Iran had not been serious at the meeting and such contact ceased.

As a presidential candidate Obama signaled a willingness to open direct talks with Iran and Wednesday’s step is the latest in a series of moves that the administration has taken to reach out to Iran.

These initiatives have included inviting Tehran to an international meeting on Afghanistan late last month, at which US officials in another break from Bush-era policy delivered a written message to Iranian diplomats politely asking for information about detained and missing Americans in the country.

Also last month, President Barack Obama recorded a video addressed to the Iranian people, in which he said the US is prepared to end years of strained relations if Tehran tones down its bellicose rhetoric.

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.