blog.Tribulationperiod.com

Man With A PLAN!

Change the World!

Cash Redistributed!

ALL men and Women

Given 900,000 Dollars,

Made financially EQUAL,

In less than five Months,

Poor-Middle-Rich Classes,

Would Exist IN All Society!

Pie in the Sky for Everyone,

By redistributing the Wealth,

A human socialist pipe Dream!

That increases man’s Problems,

Rather than offering man a Cure

For his opium pipe dream of ‘PTL’

In a secular world, “Pass the Loot”!

Caroline Glick is 1 of 3 best Writers,

Among Israeli Analyst Post Writers!

Her Excerpt which follows is GREAT!

September 26, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Column One: An enfeebled Obama

September 24, 2009

Caroline Glick , THE JERUSALEM POST

If Zbigniew Brzezinski had his way, the US would go to war against Israel to defend Iran’s nuclear installations.

In an interview with the Daily Beast Web site last weekend, the man who served as former US president Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser said, “They [IAF fighter jets] have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch? We have to be serious about denying them that right. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not.”

Brzezinski has long distinguished himself as one of the most outspoken Israel-haters in polite circles in Washington. Under normal circumstances, his remarks could be laughed off as the ravings of a garden variety anti-Semite. But these are not normal circumstances.

Brzezinski served as a senior foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign, and his views are not terribly out of place among Obama’s senior advisers in the White House. In an interview in 2002, Samantha Powers, who serves as a senior member of Obama’s national security council, effectively called for the US to invade Israel in support of the Palestinians.

The fact of the matter is that Brzezinski’s view is in line with the general disposition of Obama’ s foreign policy.

Since entering office, Obama has struck a hard-line position against Israel while adopting a soft, even apologetic line toward Iran and its allies.

For eight months, Obama has sought to force Israel to the wall. He has loudly and repeatedly ordered the Netanyahu government to prevent all private and public construction for Jews in Israel’s capital city and its heartland in order to facilitate the eventual mass expulsion of Jews from both areas, which he believes ought to become part of a Jew-free Palestinian state.

Until this week, Obama conditioned the resumption of negotiations toward peace between Israel and the Palestinians on such a prohibition

of Jewish building and so encouraged Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas to further radicalize his positions toward Israel. Until Obama came around, Abbas had no problem negotiating with Israeli leaders while Jews were building homes and schools and other structures in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. But with Obama requiring a freeze of all such construction, Abbas made clear in an interview with The Washington Post in May that he couldn’t talk to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu without looking like a sellout.

Obama made no equivalent demands of the Palestinians. He did not precondition talks on freezing illegal Arab construction in Jerusalem, or on dismantling the Aksa Martyrs Brigades terrorist group, or even simply on setting aside the Palestinian demand that Israel release convicted terrorists from its prisons. To the contrary, he has energetically supported the establishment of a Palestinian unity government between Fatah and Hamas – which the US State Department has since 1995 designated as a foreign terrorist organization to which US citizens, including the US president, are required by law to give no quarter.

As for Iran, during his meeting with Netanyahu in May, Obama gave the clear impression that the Iranian regime had until September to accept his offer to negotiate the disposition of its nuclear installations. But it is now September, and in its belated response to Obama’s generous offer of engagement, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s regime rejected the terms of Obama’s engagement out of hand. Obama did not retaliate by taking his offer to negotiate off the table or – perish the thought – working to implement the sanctions he had pledged would follow an Iranian rejection of his open hand.

Instead, Obama announced that he is sending a senior US official to meet with the Iranians on October 1. And with that announcement, any residual doubt that Obama is willing to live in a world in which Iran is armed with nuclear weaponry dissipated completely.

In the meantime, in his address to the UN General Assembly on Wednesday and in his remarks at his meeting with Netanyahu and Abbas on Tuesday, Obama made clear that, in the words of former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton, he has “put Israel on the chopping block.” He referred to Israeli communities located beyond the 1949 armistice lines as “illegitimate.”

Moreover, Obama explained that Israel can no longer expect US support for its security if it doesn’t bow to his demand that it surrender all of the land it has controlled since 1967.

Apparently it is immaterial to the US leader that if Israel fulfilled his demand, the Jewish state would render itself defenseless against enemy attack and so embolden its neighbors to invade. That is, it matters not to Obama that were Israel to fulfill his demand, the prospect of an Arab war against Israel would rise steeply. The fact that Obama made these deeply antagonistic statements about Israel at the UN in itself exposes his hostility toward the country. The UN’s institutional hostility toward Israel is surpassed only by that of the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

So given Obama’s positions toward Israel on the one hand and Iran and its allies on the other, it seems clear enough that the logical endpoint of Obama’s policies would look something like Brzezinski’s recommended course of action. Moreover, Obama’s foreign policy as a whole makes it fairly easy to imagine him ordering the US military to open hostilities against a US ally to defend a US adversary – even as that adversary goes out of its way to humiliate Obama personally and the US in general.

Since Obama took office, he has been abandoning one US ally after another while seeking

to curry favor with one US adversary after another. At every turn, America’s allies – from Israel to Honduras, to Columbia, South Korea and Japan, to Poland and the Czech Republic – have reacted with disbelief and horror to his treachery.

And at every turn, America’s adversaries – from Iran to Venezuela to North Korea and Russia – have responded with derision and contempt to his seemingly obsessive attempts to appease them.

The horror Obama has instilled in America’s friends and the contempt he has evoked from its enemies have not caused him to change course. The fact that his policies throughout the world have already failed to bring a change in the so-called international community’s treatment of the US has not led him to reconsider those policies.

As many Western Europeans have begun to openly acknowledge, the man they once likened to the messiah is nothing but a politician – and a weak, bungling one at that. Even Britain’s Economist is laughing at him.

But Obama is unmoved by any of this, and as his speech at the UN General Assembly made clear, he is moving full speed ahead in his plans to subordinate US foreign policy to the UN.

His stubborn insistence on advancing his feckless foreign policy in the face of its already apparent colossal failure is of a piece with his unswerving commitment to his domestic agenda in spite of its apparent colossal failure. Obama’s economic stimulus package failed to stimulate the US economy and increased the US’s economic deficit to heights undreamed of by his predecessors. His nationalization of major US corporations like General Motors, his cash-for-clunkers program to stimulate the US auto industry and his massive encroachments on the banking and financial industries have done nothing to increase economic growth in the US and indeed, unemployment has reached generational highs.

And yet, rather than reconsider his belief in vastly expanding the size of the federal government’s control over the private sector, Obama has insistently pushed for further governmental control over the US economy – most notably in his drive to transform the US health care industry.

Both Obama’s supporters and his opponents have claimed that his presidency may well stand or fall on his ability to pass a health care reform law in the coming months. But the fact of the matter is that if he succeeds in passing such a law, his success will be a Pyrrhic victory because Obama has promised that his plan will do the impossible, and therefore it will unquestionably fail.

He has promised that the health care plan he supports will increase access to health services and improve

their quality, but simultaneously will not increase the size of the federal deficit or be funded with tax hikes – and this is impossible. Obama’s health care plan will fail either to pass into law, or if it becomes law, it will fail to live up to his promises.

Obama’s failures in both foreign and domestic policy have weakened him politically. His response to this newfound weakness has been to put himself into the public eye seemingly around the clock. Apparently the thinking behind the move is that while Obama’s policies are unpopular, Obama’s personal popularity remains high, so if he personalizes his policies, it will become more difficult for his opponents to argue against them.

But alas, this policy too has failed. The more Obama exposes himself, the less he is able to leverage his personal celebrity into political power.

The question for the US’s spurned allies in general – and for Israel

in particular – is whether we are better off with a politically strong Obama or a politically weak Obama. Given that the general thrust of his foreign policy is detrimental to our interests, America’s allies are best served by a weak Obama. Already this week Israel benefitted from his weakness.

It was Obama’s weakness that dictated his need to stage a photo-op with Netanyahu and Abbas at the UN. And it was this need – to be seen as doing something productive – that outweighed Obama’s desire to put the screws on Israel by preconditioning talks with a freeze on Jewish construction. So Obama was forced to relent at least temporarily and Netanyahu won his first round against Obama.

During a television interview this week, Sen. John McCain was asked for his opinion of Brzezinski’s recommendation that the US shoot down IAF jets en route to Iran in a hypothetical Israeli air strike against Iran’s nuclear installations. He responded with derisive laughter. And indeed, the notion that the US would go to war against Israel to protect Iran’s nuclear installations is laughably absurd.

The weaker Obama becomes politically, the more readily Democrats and liberal reporters alike will acknowledge that attacking US allies while scraping and bowing before US foes is a ridiculous strategy for foreign affairs. Certainly no self-proclaimed realist can defend a policy based on denuding the US of its power and forsaking a US-based international system for one dictated by its foes.

It is true that a weakened Obama will seek to win cheap points by putting the squeeze on Israel.

But it is also true that the weaker Obama becomes, the less capable he will be of carrying through on his bullying threats against Israel and against fellow democracies around the world.

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.

One Day the Spring will be Sprung to fill all the Miqves!

An Interesting archeological discovery by Israeli Ministry,

A MIQVE for Immersion Cleansing Before Temple Worship,

Lying in line about 20 meters from the western Temple Wall,

Interesting location in regard to Temple Priest’s water Source,

And writings of Joel, Ezekiel, & Zechariah about a water Source,

Revealed on Temple Mount when God Lifts Fault Geba to Rimmon!

September 25, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Tectonic Chaos – Chapter 8 – A Spring Is Sprung

Zechariah 14:10 – All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s winepresses.

See Archive Birth Pang Figures 39 to 42 to be able to understand the paragraph you are beginning to read. Geba was located to the north-northeast of Jerusalem, while Rimmon lay toward the distant south-southwest of the Holy City. If a line is drawn from ancient Geba to Rimmon, it will run through the Tyropoeon Valley that separates the lower section of Old Jerusalem from its upper section. A normal fault exists in the limestone substrata between the lower and uplifted sections of the Old City. It runs north-south at the base of the bluff of the uplifted section, and thereby divides Jerusalem into a fallen eastern and an uplifted western section. Great earthquakes in the Jordan River Valley, between the opening of the sixth seal and the pouring of the last vial in Revelation 6:12 and 16:18, will cause several faults in the Jerusalem environs to shift up, down, and apart to fulfill the prophecies concerning the fantastic geological transformations that will be occurring during these earthquakes. The center section of the Mount of Olives will drop down to form a graben rift valley between two normal faults. Those sections of Jerusalem east of the Tyropoeon Valley fault scarp will fall slightly, and those west of it will be lifted up, which is what usually occurs when major earthquakes occur near normal faults. The locations mentioned in Zechariah 14:10 were all located along, and to the west of, the Tyropoeon Valley fault, and, during this period of great earthquakes, all the land west of the line from Geba to Rimmon, including western Jerusalem, will be lifted up to into a geological feature known as a fault-block mountain chain with a plateau like top.

All of these actions will divide the Holy City of Old Jerusalem environs into three parts.

(1) An uplifted section to the west of the north-south Tyropoeon Valley normal fault.

(2) A slightly lower section to the east of the Tyropoeon Valley fault.

(3) A rift valley formed by a collapse of the mount of Olives between two normal east-west faults, one passing through the northern part of the mountain, while the other penetrates the southern part of the mountain.

The results of the actions of (1), (2), and (3) may be seen on Figure 48 in our Birth Pang Archives. These actions by God will create the spring which comes out of the Holy City during the Millennium, the spring reported by Zechariah 14:8, Joel 3:18, and Ezekiel 47:1-5.

Ezekiel 47:1 – Afterward he brought me again unto the door of the house; and, behold, waters issued out from under the threshold of the house eastward: for the forefront of the house stood toward the east, and the waters came down from under from the right side of the house, at the south side of the altar.

See Archives Birth Pang Figures 42 to 48 to be able to understand the rest of this chapter.

When the western half of Jerusalem is lifted up the eastern half will subside slightly to form the structure of Birth Pang Figure 42. The substrata rocks of the Old City are made up primarily of thick layer after layer of limestone, occasionally separated by impermeable rock layers. When this type of formation is exposed to rain, it permeates down through the limestone, producing carbonic acid deterioration of the limestone. This effect produces what is known as a karst landscape.

A karst topography is characterized by underground caverns, springs, and subterranean steams. When the western half of Jerusalem is lifted up, hydrologically collected ground water from the central Judean water shed, that has been collected from the sloping limestone layers above the impermeable rock layer, will surface as a natural spring on the sunken eastern section where the temple mount is located. After the return of Messiah, Israel will build the Millennial Temple such that the limestone spring issues from under the “right side of the altar.” (See Archive Birth Pang Figures 44 to 46).

Ezekiel 47:2-5 –Then brought he me out of the way of the gate northward, and led me about the way without unto the utter gate by the way that looketh eastward; and, behold, there ran out waters on the right side. [3] And when the man that had the line in his hand went forth eastward, he measured a thousand cubits, and he brought me through the waters; the waters were to

the ancles. [4] Again he measured a thousand, and brought me through the waters; the waters were to the knees. Again he measured a thousand, and brought me through; the waters were to the loins. [5] Afterward he measured a thousand; and it was a river that I could not pass over: for the w aters were risen, w

aters to swim in, a river that could not be passed over.

As is typical of springs that surface from topography of the karst variety, when one proceeds eastward from the spring source he or she notes that it becomes wider and wider. Like many other springs that surface from karst topography, as the water flows away from its source it cuts a “V” shaped valley through the limestone strata, and it will eventually be fed by side springs from the limestone water table along the lower sections of the “V.” This feeding by subterranean springs from the water table will eventually cause the millennial stream to become wider and wider, and deeper and deeper, as one progresses eastward from its temple spring source.

The spring that eventually develops into a creek is the surface feature that will divide the sunken eastern part of Jerusalem into two parts, one north of the stream, and one south of it. This completes the Revelation 16:19 tribulation period division of Jerusalem into three parts – a lifted western part, and two sunken eastern parts separated by a stream (See Archive Birth Pang Figure 48).

Revelation 16:19 – And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.

First, the city of Jerusalem is divided into three parts, then the ripple effect along the worldwide tectonic plate boundaries affects the other cities (plural) and the other nations (plural) of the world, and among them will be the great city of false worship, ecclesiastical Babylon.

We know, from Ezekiel 47:5, that a sudden change occurs at the end of a 4,000 cubit walk – the stream, or creek, suddenly becomes a great river. We also know from Zechariah 14:8 that part of the river will flow into the Mediterranean Sea (Hinder Sea), and part of it will flow into the Dead Sea (Former Sea). And the prophet Joel advises the part going into the Dead Sea will enter at the northwestern corner, which was called the Vale of Shittim (See Archive Birth Pang Figure 47).

Zechariah 14:8 – 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.

Joel 3:18 – And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the Lord, and shall water the valley of Shittim.

Begin Excerpt from Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs Report

Large 2,000 year old miqve exposed in Western Wall Tunnels.

The large and impressive miqve was uncovered in excavations of one of the most magnificent structures from the Second Temple period ever to be uncovered.

September 23, 2009

(Communicated by the Israel Antiquities Authority Spokesperson)

A large and impressive ritual bath (miqve) from the end of the Second Temple period was recently uncovered in archaeological excavations the Israel Antiquities Authority is carrying out in the Western Wall tunnels, in cooperation with the Western Wall Heritage Foundation.

The miqve was dis covered inside the western hall of a splendid stru

cture that is located just c. 20 meters from the Western Wall.

Parts of the building were discovered in the past and the Israel Antiquities Authority is currently exposing another one of the three halls inside it. It is one of the most magnificent structures from the Second Temple period ever to be uncovered.

The edifice is built of very delicately dressed ashlar stones and the architectural decoration in it is of the highest quality. From an architectural and artistic standpoint there are similarities between this structure and the three magnificent compounds that King Herod built on the Temple Mount, in the Cave of the Patriarchs and at Allonei Mamre, and from which we can conclude the great significance that this building had in the Second Temple period.

In his book The War of the Jews, Josephus Flavius writes

there was a government administrative center that was situated at the foot of the Temple. Among the buildings he points out in this region were the council house and the “Xistus”- the ashlar bureau.

According to the Talmud it was in this bureau that the Sanhedrin – the Jewish high court at the time of the Second Temple – would convene. It may be that the superb structure the Israel Antiquities Authority is presently uncovering belonged to one of these two buildings.

According to archaeologist Alexander Onn, director of the excavation on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, “It is interesting to see that in the middle of the first century CE they began making changes in this magnificent structure – at that time it was no longer used as a government administrative building and a large miqve was installed inside its western hall where there were c. 11 steps that descend to the immersion pool.

It seems that the city of Jerusalem grew in this period and it became necessary to provide for the increased ritual bathing needs of the pilgrims who came to the Temple in large numbers, especially during the three pilgrimage festivals (Shlosha Regalim). Immersing oneself in the miqve and maintaining ritual purity were an inseparable part of the Jewish way of life in this period, and miqve’ot were absolutely essential, especially in the region of the Temple.”

The Western Wall Heritage Foundation acts to uncover the Jewish people’s past at the Western Wall, and the miqve is further evidence of the deep ties the Jewish people have with Jerusalem and the Temple.

Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz, the rabbi in charge of the Western Wall and the holy places, pointed out the cooperation between the Western Wall Heritage Foundation and the Israel Antiquities Authority which have joined together in order to discover the rich history of Jerusalem there, while strictly ensuring that no excavations approach the Temple Mount compound, contact with which is forbidden by Halachic law.

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

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

You may use material originated by this site.

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

Obama’s Middle East Engagement Policy is WORTHLESS!

Syria, Iran, Hizbullah, and Hamas yield to Force and Fear,

In the Middle East force has long been the rule of the Day,

And fear rather than empathy or love has given the Victory,

Engagement by apologizing to the tyrants of Islamic Nations,

Is a sign of weakness to our foes telling them we’ll back Down

From defending Israel when Islam attacks Israel from the North!

September 25, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin an Excerpt from BESA (Begin-Sadat) Center Perspectives via Independent Media Review Analysis (IMRA)

Obama and the Middle East, by Prof. Efraim Inbar

Obama and the Middle East

Efraim Inbar

BESA Center Perspectives No 91

Thursday, September 24, 2009

BESA Center Perspectives Papers No.

91,

www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/perspectives91.html

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: US President Barack Obama has adopted an activist foreign policy, attempting to engage the Muslim world and signaling his expectation that an end the Israel-Palestinian conflict can be negotiated within two years. This ambitious agenda has so far produced meager results.

Many regional players are primarily concerned about Iran’ s que

st for nuclear weapons, and are not easily amenable to American overtures.

US President Barack Obama’s summit meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas in New York this week was a good thing, but it amounted to little more than a photo opportunity. The impatient Obama demanded that the parties seriously discuss peace now. Obama appeared to be on the verge of enunciating his own peace plan in order to restart peace negotiations and to eventually end the protracted Israeli-Palestinian conflict – all within two years!

It is worth reminding the president that the many past US peace plans for the Middle East failed to bring the anticipated results.

Moreover, the recent meeting in New York only reinforces the evaluation that after eight months in office, the record of Obama’s policy toward the Middle East is far from impressive.

Obama’s much heralded speech to the Muslim world in Cairo failed to make a dent in Middle Eastern realities and attitudes. His belief in the power of words to change people is naive when it comes to well-rooted attitudes or entrenched interests of nations.

In instances where the US sided with Muslims when in conflict with non-Muslims, such as in Pakistan, Bosnia and Kosovo, there was little impact on Muslim dispositions. The anti-American rage among Muslims, primarily Arabs, is a result of a concatenation of factors: frustration originating from past grandeur, current poverty, backwardness, and a dark future; a cultural difficulty to accept responsibility; and a preference to blame others for failures to modernize and democratize. While words have great importance in Muslim culture, even the best of speeches cannot change the tide of history. Obama’s words are unlikely to have long-term positive effects for the US, which in final analysis is seen as foreign and domineering.

The “soft power” that this administration extols has its limitations, particular in a region where the use of force is part and parcel of the rules of the game and fear is a better political currency than empathy or love.

So far the “engagement” policy toward Iran, which is part of the new approach to the Muslim world, has produced no results.

The nuclear program of Iran continues, and its new proposal to the West did not provide any opening for negotiations on the nuclear issue.

Similarly, the engagement of radical Syria hardly changed Syrian policies.

Damascus still supports Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza; allows insurgents to infiltrate Iraq in order to destabilize the current regime; refuses to enter peace negotiations with Israel without preconditions; and above all continues its alliance with Iran. Why should Assad change Syrian foreign policy if he fears no American wrath? As a matter of fact, Iran, Syria, as well as the rest of the Middle East, see “engagement” primarily as an American weakness.

Obama’s Washington does not get anywhere even with its friends. The leaders in all Arab countries know that the American “engagement” of Iran is hopeless in stopping the nuclearization of Iran. During his August trip to Washington, Mubarak of Egypt tried to inject sense into the young American president. Moreover, Mubarak rejected Obama’s offer for a nuclear umbrella. So did other pro-American Arab states.

American promises to defend them are simply not credible if the US is reluctant to use military force to stop the Iranian nuclearthreat.

The impending American withdrawal from Iraq and the difficulties in “fixing”

Afghanistan contribute to the general sense of a decline in American influence in the Middle East. Indeed, as regional politics take their toll, a Pax Americana in the Middle E

ast is no longer seen as a viable option for providing progress and prosperity. It is not only the Palestinians that have failed to develop a capacity to govern, with institutions that respond to the needs of the people. The political malaise of the Palestinians is not unique. We see several additional failed states in the Arab world: Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and even Iraq. Pakistan, a Muslim state, is in danger of collapsing. Even American conquests, such as in Iraq and in Afghanistan, coupled with generous international aid, are not enough to transform these countries. Neither American speeches, nor American “soft power” are able to reform societies deep in crisis. Only a modernizing local leadership can do the trick.

Ignoring the harsh realities of Palestinian domestic politics, Obama is now trying to restart the bogged-down Israel-Palestinian peace track. Yet the Arabs have rejected American demands for gestures toward Israel in order to facilitate a settlement freeze (the latter curiously seen as a panacea for peace between Israelis and Palestinians). Moreover, Washington fails to understand that as long as the Palestinians are deeply divided and Gaza is controlled by Hamas, an Islamistorganization dedicated to the destruction of the state of Israel, there is no available partner for peace talks. Nevertheless, Obama is committed to push forward on the peace process.

Unfortunately, the gap between Israelis and Palestinians is too large to bridge, while the two societies still have enormous amounts of energy to fight for what is important to them. This situation requires conflict management, rather than ambitious and misguided peace plans.

What is missing in Washington is healthy skepticism and a realistic foreign policy based upon the premises that not all problems are soluble and that foreigners have limited capacity to induce change. Finally, Obama’s Washington seems unaware of the fact that the regional parties have great obstructive power. Only when they are ready there will be peace.

Efraim Inbar is professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies.

BESA Perspectives is published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family.

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.

Cinderella American Discovers PRINCE Charming

Seeking friendship with evil sisters Syria and Iran,

And as a novice prince with many interior problems,

As well as gigantic problems in Iraq and Afghanistan,

Now sees loyal far left liberal subjects of U.S. Kingdom

Losing confidence in his effort to destroy Conservatives,

Such That Liberal U.S. Cinderella May Not get lost Slipper,

Which May Not be made of Glass but rather of Clay & Iron,

Covering toes of the Isl am

ic confederation attacking Israel!

September 24, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

There are many different worldwide versions of the Cinderella story, including a very old similar story in the Islamic Culture.

Obama was elected by many who saw him as a new dynamic prince with a charming personality and a marvelous oratory ability matching that of William Jennings Bryant.

I saw him as a young novice who was highly educated in liberal institutions

who was strongly influenced by liberal professors and surrounded by far left liberal friends. I could not see even a trace of conservative thinking in his speeches or daily dialog. My not voting for him was not because he was black or had an Islamic childhood background. I would have loved to see a black conservative elected. I am not racially prejudice. I did not vote for him because I concluded his strong far left liberal position was a fact, not a theory, and I voted against his political far left liberal policies, not his childhood theology, his father’s religion, or the color of his skin.

I voted against him for two reasons: (1) He is a FAR LEFT liberal, and (2) He is a NOVICE. The one thing this country did not, and does not need, in the White House is a far left liberal novice with a gigantic liberal democratic congressional majority. However, believe it or not, I do believe all this has a part in God’s plan to end this Age of the Gentiles, and I accept Obama and the far left liberal radicals as part of it. As for myself, I am a conservative who loves Israel and will support her for better or for worse.

Romans 8:28 – And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Romans 11:25,26 – For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. [26] And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

DAYS OF CINDERELLA’S 2 EVIL SISTERS & 8 FRIENDS WILL END WHEN THE 10 CLAY AND IRON KINGS HAVE THEIR KINGDOMS DESTROYED BY THE MESSIAH RETURNING AS A LIVING STONE CUT OUT OF THE ONE GOD OF ISRAEL – I ADVISE AMERICA TO BE ON THE WINNING SIDE!

Daniel 2:42,45 – And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

[43] And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. [44] And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and c

onsume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. [45] Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

Begin Excerpt from Khajeel Times Online Reuters Article via World News

All-round pessimism after dud Middle East ‘summit’

(Reuters)

24 September 2009, 7:44 PM

JERUSALEM – A cloud of pessimism is suffocating hopes that US President Barack Obama can pull off a miracle in the Middle East by setting negotiations on course for rapid progress towards a comprehensive peace agreement.

The New York encounter he arranged between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas this week produced no more than a schedule of lower-level meetings this week and next, which has only deepened scepticism.

Here is a sample of fairly typical comments:

‘We’re in a corner. Obama is running out of steam. He was expected to set the direction in the first six months. But now it’s the politics of no choice, of deadlock,’ said Zakaria Al Qaq, foreign affairs director at Al Quds University.

Al Qaq and other commentators say Netanyahu seems content with the status quo, and in no hurry to open talks on a final settlement leading to the creation of a Palestinian state.

In Netanyahu’s view, the threat of an atom bomb in the hands of the Islamic Republic of Iran is the top priority. In his own words: ‘The Iranian issue overshadows everything.’

Obama, Palestinian analysts note, has his hands tied by issues of greater immediacy for American voters — healthcare policy and war in Afghanistan — and cannot afford to open a new front with the right by taking on Israel in a test of wills.

‘He is captive of the healthcare issue and he cannot move freely, so the Palestinians are captive also,’ Al Qaq said.

‘Abbas wants to allow Obama 3 or 4 months more to see what happens on healthcare. But what we are getting is meetings, not negotiations, and the people are not fooled.’

Pessimism is not limited to the Palestinians.

Aaron David Miller, Mideast counsel to six US secretaries of state, writes in Politico that ‘to all but the terminally obtuse’, the chances of a deal right now are about zero.

Even if Obama could deliver a freeze on Israeli settlement building in the West Bank that Abbas has again demanded and Netanyahu has again refused, Miller says, the fact remains that the Palestinian national movement is divided and Israel ‘still doesn’t know what price it’s prepared to pay’ for peace.

Obama may soon have to decide ‘whether to get out of the serious peacemaking business … or get more deeply involved and consider an unprecedented American effort to bridge the gaps’.

‘SOMETHING DRAMATIC’

Palestinians put one positive gloss on New York’s meeting, saying it proved Obama’s personal commitment to securing a deal.

‘It is clear that Obama will not accept failure of his political investment in dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict,’ columnist Talal Okal wrote it the newspaper Al Ayyam.

But domestic concerns including the continuing recession, Afghanistan and Iraq would severely limit his scope and it would not be Israel that would feel the impact, said Okal.

‘It’s clear that the American administration is about to exercise certain pressures (and) it will be easier to put pressure on the weaker side’ i.e. the Palestinians.

American Jewish groups who advocate a critical approach to Israel over the interminable ‘peace process’ were also downbeat.

‘There is a mood of resignation, of quiet despair that there is really (no) way out of the conflict,’ said Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of the pro-peace group J Street.

Ben-Ami said it would take more than incremental diplomatic business-as-usual, along well-trodden paths, to make any change. It needs ‘something more assertive and more dramatic’.

James Besser in New York-based Jewish Week wrote that when the late Yasser Arafat and the late Yitzhak Rabin shook hands on the White House lawn 16 years ago ‘there was a sense among most mainstream Jewish leaders that the long Israel-Palestinian impasse could soon be broken’.

Now there is a ‘new consensus crystallizing that says that the status quo is about the best that can be hoped for’.

The conflict has reached another impasse, according to Michael Goldfarb in the Weekly Standard.

Israel is fixed on Iran’s perceived nuclear threat while Abbas and his Palestinian Authority cannot speak for the 1.5 million Palestinian of the Gaza Strip — which is under the control of Islamist Hamas leaders opposed to recognising Israel.

‘Obama is talking about having talks, and when talks do get underway, Hamas won’t be at the table, and the Palestinian Authority will not be able to speak on their behalf.

‘Abbas can make no deals and offer no concessions without confronting Hamas first, and the Israelis can make no concessions without forcing some kind of confrontation with Iran first.’

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.

Mr. CHARM has become Snow White’s ‘GRUMPY’!

OBAMA appeared impatient in NY SUMMIT MEETING!

Most novices of glitter and diplomatic dialog usually Do,

They finally realize they’re dealing with Conservative Foes!

The leaders of enemy foreign countries are not far left Liberals,

If They Were Obama Would Have a Big Diplomatic Dialog Carnival!

Obama’s fed up cause he’s discovered charm & speeches don’t Work,

Apart from Europe Just How Many Far Left Liberals Lead a World Nation?

September 24, 2009

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt from YNet News

Obama appeared more impatient, grumpier than ever in NY summit meetin

g

Yitzhak Benhorin

September 23, 2009

WASHINGTON – President Obama has not looked so impatient and grumpy in public ever since he was sworn-in as president of the United States. “I have just concluded frank and productive bilateral meetings,” the president said following his sessions with Netanyahu and Abbas at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in New York.

In undiplomatic language this meant: We just concluded talks where I told each of the sides precisely what I think about them and what they need to do.

Obama is fed up. It was apparent on his face and in his statement to the media. The president, a soft-spoken man who does not resort to exaggerated zeal, flexed his muscles and spoke to Bibi and Abbas as the president of a superpower to reprimanded children. He gave them a failing grade for their achievements and informed them of what he expects of them in the next semester.

Those who saw George Mitchell upon his return from the Middle East reached the conclusion that he’s rather fed up as well. At the age of 76 this impressive man has no interest in getting lost in the “come and go” between Jerusalem and Ramallah.

So Obama brought the Israelis and Palestinians to Washington. Abbas did not want a three-way meeting? There, I brought him to New York.

The prime minister of Israel and the Palestinian leader sat with their backs to the president and heard him order them to dispatch their delegations to Washington next week without preconditions.

“Palestinians have strengthened their efforts on security, but they need to do more to stop incitement and to move forward with negotiations,” the president ruled.

“Israelis have facilitated greater freedom of movement for the Palestinians and have discussed important steps to restrain settlement activity. But they need to translate these discussions into real action on this and other issues.

And it remains important for the Arab states to take concrete steps to promote peace.”

‘Time to move forward’

White House officials read the criticism by the Mideastern media over the futile invitation to the three-way meeting in New York, ostensibly meant to result in the photo Obama wanted rather than a declaration on the resumption of negotiations. Obama responded to this bluntly: “Simply put it is past time to talk about starting negotiations – it is time to move forward.”

Inviting the Israeli and Palestinian delegations to Washington next week will enable Special Envoy Mitchell, Secretary of State Clinton, and President Obama himself to closely monitor the bilateral and possibly trilateral meetings, and to get involved and exert pressure if needed.

“I’m committed to pressing ahead in the weeks and months and years to come, “ the president said to those who thought he can be given the runaround and frustrated, prompting him to abandon the issue in favor of other difficult problems that keep him awake at night. Why is Obama unwilling to give up

? “ Because it is absolutely critical that we get this issue resolved.

It’s not just critical for the Israelis and the Palestinians, it’s critical for the world, it is in the interests of the United State.”

And another note for those who think that more time can be bought.

Some White House officials endorse Palestinian PM Salam Fayyad’s proposal to set a timeframe of two years for the talks, after which the Palestinians will be able to declare a state even without a deal with Israel.

Fayyad would not have made his statement without a backwind from Washington. Israeli officials object to the setting of a timetable for talks, and the White House at this time does not wish to force its views, but rather, build trust and maintain proper work relationships between the sides.

Yet in the absence of progress, that day may come too.

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.