A Middle East Man-Made Mess Only Jesus’ 2nd Advent Will Clean Up
Obama & Kerry are leading Israel Down Path into Negev Wilderness
But Jesus will deliver Israel from the Negev to Abraham’s Land Grant
The mess is clearly shown in Six excerpts from the Jerusalem Center!
July 31, 2013
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
At the time of Ezekiel’s writings “The Land of Magog” was occupied by the Magogites, who came to be known as the Sythians. They had historically spread north and occupied the territory known as the Soviet Union during the Cold War. GOG ISN’T THE CHIEF PRINCE OF MAGOG. GOG WILL BE THE CHEF PRINCE OF MESHECH AND TUBAL, WHICH GEOGRAPHICALLY IS “GREATER SYRIA.” I GAVE MY CASE AND PROOF OF ALL THIS IN CHAPTER 1 OF “TRIBULATION TRIAD.” GOG IS THE ANTICHRIST WHO WILL EVENTUALLY ARISE OUT OF THE CHAOS OF THE WAR NOW BEING FOUGHT IN “GREATER SYRIA.”
Ezekiel 38:1-7 – And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, [2] Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, [3] And say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: [4] And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords: [5] Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet: [6] Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee. [7] Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.
For a complete line by line exposition of Chapters 38 & 39 read Chapters 1 through 4 in my book, “Tribulation Period,” which was published in the late seventies.
Six following Excerpts via Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs/Daily Alert
July 30, 2013
Excerpt 1 – New York Times
Mideast Peace Talks Begin Amid Doubts on All Sides
Michael R. Gordon and Isabel Kershner
New York Times
Middle East peace talks resumed Monday in Washington. The prevailing narrative among the pundits, including more than a few experienced Middle East hands, is that while the Israelis and Palestinians may have sent their negotiators to Washington to placate Secretary of State Kerry, neither side appears remotely prepared to make the hard calls needed to cement a lasting peace.
“The existence of talks can have a calming effect while they continue, and if they continue for several months can get us through the UN General Assembly without bitter Israeli-Palestinian confrontations,” said Elliott Abrams, a senior official on President George W. Bush’s National Security Council. (New York Times)
Excerpt 2 – Reuters
Abbas: “Not a Single Israeli” in Future Palestinian State
Noah Browning
Reuters
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, presenting his vision for the final status of Israeli-Palestinian relations ahead of peace talks in Washington, said Monday, “In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli – civilian or soldier – on our lands.” He was, however, willing to consider “an international, multinational presence like in Sinai,” referring to UN peacekeeping operations. Israel has previously said it wants to maintain a military presence at the border with Jordan to prevent any influx of weapons. (Reuters)
Excerpt 3 – CNN
PLO Faction Rejects Mideast Peace Talks
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a major faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization, has rejected new peace talks with Israel, calling it a unilateral move by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas which did not have the backing of the PLO as a whole. (AFP-Ynet News)
Israeli Ambassador: Palestinians Don’t Yet Recognize Jewish Right of Self-Determination
CNN
Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria on Sunday: “We were always ready to enter into negotiations with the Palestinians without pre-conditions….We support a solution based on two states for two peoples, a Jewish state of Israel living side-by-side in peace and security and mutual recognition with the Palestinian state.”
“It was not the Palestinian position. The Palestinians had a number of pre-conditions. They were not willing to live in a situation of mutual recognition. We recognize the Palestinians as a people endowed with the right of self-determination. They don’t recognize the Jews as a people yet with the right of self-determination.”
“When we say ‘Jewish state,’ what does it mean? It means that the Jewish state is permanent and legitimate. We’re not interlopers. We’re not trespassers. We’re not a transient state. And it also means there’ll be an end of claims and end of conflict.”
“There are about 193 states in the world. Most of them are nation states; the Bulgarians, the Hungarians, the Germans….It’s very common, certainly in Europe. And there’s nothing anomalous, nothing unusual about the arrangement which we’re seeking.” (CNN)
Excerpt 4 – New York Times
The New Mideast Talks: Much Risk, Little Hope, But Still We Must Try
Aaron David Miller
New York Times
Right now, there’s almost no chance of achieving a conflict-ending agreement; yet by pressing the Israelis and Palestinians back toward the table, the U.S. has assumed responsibility for producing one. A conflict-ending accord may not be possible now, but without a credible negotiation to manage the situation, it will only deteriorate further. A conflict-ending accord that resolves the core issues – borders, Jerusalem, security, refugees, and recognition of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people – and that also adjudicates all claims and forswears further ones seems almost unimaginable. The two sides don’t yet share a common concept for reaching it. The writer is a vice president at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. (New York Times)
Excerpt 5 – Wall Street Journal
Back on the Peace Train
Editorial
Wall Street Journal
Gathering at John Kerry’s home in Washington, Israeli and Palestinian officials on Monday relaunched peace negotiations. Syria is burning, Egypt is in turmoil and Jordan’s king is under siege, but the Secretary of State will try to push this stone up the hill one more time.
An independent Palestine must not pose a threat to Israel’s security and survival, and that means that a defensible border won’t match Israel’s pre-1967 frontier.
The biggest obstacle as ever will be the inability of the Palestinian leadership to compromise. Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the Palestinian Authority for nearly a decade, inspires little confidence as a negotiating partner. His chief accomplishment has been to lose control of Gaza to Hamas, the terrorist group that denies Israel’s right to exist.
The U.S. role should be as an honest broker, not as a backstage arm-twister of Netanyahu. Peace isn’t possible if Palestinians aren’t ready to make it on terms Israelis can live with. (Wall Street Journal)
Excerpt 6 – Israel Hayom
Wishing for an Iranian Moderate
Clifford D. May
(Israel Hayom)
Last week 131 House members urged President Obama to “pursue the potential opportunity presented by Iran’s recent presidential election.” What “potential opportunity” is that?
How much research is required to figure out that Rowhani has said nothing even to suggest that he opposes Iran’s support for terrorism abroad (including its past attempts to blow up airplanes and restaurants in the U.S.), gross violations of human rights domestically, threats of genocide against Israelis, and, of course, illegal nuclear-weapons programs?
It ought to be obvious that Rowhani is a loyal acolyte of Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader. There were 686 registered candidates for the last election. Only eight were allowed to run. Loyalty to the Supreme Leader and adherence to his ideology-theology were required.
Rowhani has candidly written that “one of the goals of his nuclear diplomacy was to create a wedge” between the U.S. and its European allies so that Iran could import nuclear technology without incurring Western penalties. To Rowhani, “constructive interaction” means persuading the enemy to let down his guard.
Rouhani has expressed the view that Iran’s strategic interests are best served by developing an industrial-size nuclear capability to manufacture dozens of nuclear weapons.
In the coming months (not years), American leaders will have to decide whether on their watch the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism, a self-proclaimed revolutionary jihadist regime that calls America “Satan incarnate,” will be permitted to acquire the nuclear weapons it needs to dominate the Middle East and reshape the world order.
The writer is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
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.