Monday, May 30, 2011

Bibi's New Political Dynamic...

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unambiguous rejection of Barack Obama’s latest fantasy about the Middle East has potentially created a significant new political dynamic in the United States. By graciously but comprehensively rebutting Obama’s entire view of Arab-Israeli reality, first in the Oval Office, then before a joint meeting of Congress, Netanyahu has also exposed broader flaws in Obama’s worldview.
No Israeli leader could simply cave in immediately to Obama’s ill-disguised pressure in his uncongenial, unsympathetic State Department speech just prior to Netanyahu’s arrival in America. While Obama may have understood this limitation, he nonetheless intended to create political “facts on the ground” for Israel, pushing it into a corner difficult if not impossible to escape. While Obama did not, as some in his administration urged, lay out precise terms and conditions of, effectively, an American ultimatum, he came perilously close.
Little he said was actually new for him, including referring to Israel’s “1967 borders” (subsequently “clarified”). Nor was his tone more hostile than his past comments or those of other Administration officials. Several observers noted correctly that Obama’s speech “could have been worse,” which is unquestionably true. 
Many speculated former Senator George Mitchell, Obama’s Middle East envoy, resigned precisely because his preferred approach to muscling Israel was rejected.
The critical difference this time was Netanyahu’s reaction. He ignored the advice of Obama’s fellow liberals in the Jewish community never to cross a sitting president, especially not this one.
Israel’s American supporters, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, defend its national-security interests because of how interwoven they are with America’s own vital interests, in the Middle East and globally. Non-Jewish American support for Israel is not, therefore, to mix metaphors, a case of appearing to be more Catholic than the pope.
Accordingly, they took heart from the Oval Office exchange, and visibly demonstrated their opposition to Obama’s views by the warm greeting for Netanyahu in Congress. Since these supporters are a decisive majority of the American public, stretching far beyond the confines of one faith, they can reshape the domestic American debate on Israel and the region. This is critical, since, thanks to Obama, U.S.-Israeli relations are more politically strained than ever before, a public division inevitably providing our adversaries with dangerous opportunities for trouble-making.
Nonetheless, since Obama remains president for two more years, what should opponents of his misguided policies do to capitalize on the new dynamic Netanyahu has created?
First, members of Congress must build on Netanyahu's Joint Meeting appearance through hearings, speeches, and House and Senate resolutions that Israel’s U.S. support remains broad and deep on Capitol Hill, even as it recedes almost to invisibility in the White House
Congress cannot, of course, determine U.S. policy, but it can send a clear political message to the White House, and more importantly to Obama’s re-election campaign. That means in particular a vigorous U.S. diplomatic campaign against any efforts at the United Nations this fall to establish a Palestinian “state.” This vigorous public approach may trouble the president’s political supporters, but their reluctance to speak up is a major factor underlying Obama’s evident belief he can muscle Israel without suffering domestic political damage. 
That needs changing quickly. Visible demonstrations of political power and support for Israel may be the only thing that constrains Obama as the 2012 presidential election grows increasingly near.
Second, there must be greater U.S. and Israeli focus and determination to reckon with Iran’s high and rising global threat, both because of Tehran’s nuclear weapons program and its support for terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Gaza, and elsewhere. Obama rarely addresses Iran’s menace, even last week when he unmercifully bullied Israel. 
No wonder Iran’s leaders view their quest for nuclear weapons as essentially unchallenged. Even while divisions within Tehran’s leadership occupy the media’s attention, its belligerent attitudes and threatening capabilities are increasing.
Third, turmoil in the Middle East is also increasingly problematic. The “Arab Spring” is not self-evidently leading to Western-style pluralistic democracy, and may well turn into something darker than what it supplanted, at least in some countries. 
The peace agreement between the Hamas terrorists and Fatah, brokered by the post-Mubarak government in Egypt, marks the effective end of any realistic peace process between Israel and the Palestinians for the foreseeable future. 
Obama has not yet grasped this reality, nor does he seem to understand that the Syrian dictatorship and Lebanon’s Hezbollah terrorists remain Iranian pawns, threats both to Israel and to the United States.Accordingly, now is hardly the time to force Israel into unnatural efforts at “peace processing” with the usual suspects. 
Now that Netanyahu has spoken, it is time for Americans and Europeans concerned with true peace and security in the Middle East to carry the debate forward.
Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, is a Fox News contributor and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of "Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations" (Simon & Schuster, 2007).

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Two Important Articles ...Rebutal to AP and the Unbridgeable Gap Between Obama/Bibi

Rebuttal To AP's Unprecedented Rebuttal Of Netanyahu's Speech

 Someone named Josef Federman has written a rebuttal for the Associated Press - said to be an unbiased, international news source - to points made by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his speech before the U.S. Congress this week. 
Federman wrote that the Prime Minister's address reflected only the world view of "Israel's nationalistic right wing" - though a full 47% of Israelis said they were pleased with the speech.
The points with which Federman/AP wished to take issue appear below, followed by Federman/AP's rebuttals, followed by Israel National News commentary.
NETANYAHU:  "In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. We are not the British in India. We are not the Belgians in the Congo."
The rest of the quote (not provided by Federman/AP): “This is the land of our forefathers, the Land of Israel, to which Abraham brought the idea of one God, where David set out to confront Goliath, and where Isaiah saw a vision of eternal peace.  No distortion of history can deny the four thousand year old bond between the Jewish people and the Jewish land.”

Federman/AP: While the West Bank, or Judea and Samaria, is promised to the Jewish people in the Bible, the international community considers the West Bank occupied territory. Israel captured the area in the 1967 Mideast war but has never annexed it. Its occupied status is underscored by the presence of tens of thousands of Israeli soldiers who protect Israeli settlements and control the movement of Palestinian residents in the name of security.
INN: Some in the international community do consider this land occupied, but in fact, the last nation in history to be both sovereign in Judea/Samaria and inhabit it was the Jewish People – in the year 68 C.E. Since then, the area has been under occupation a number of times, with Israel ultimately reclaiming it during the Six Day War from Jordan - the country that illegally invaded the area in 1948, and followed this up with an occupation and annexation recognized by no one in the world other than Britain and Pakistan.
Israel's legal claim to these areas, on the other hand, stems not from illegal invasion, but rather from its victory in a defensive war.
In fact, jurist and international law expert Stephen Schwebel - later the president of the International Court of Justice in The Hague - wrote in 1970 that "Israel has better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt."
NETANYAHU: "You don't need to send American troops to Israel. We defend ourselves."
Federman/AP: Israel is a leading recipient of American foreign aid, including more than $1 billion in military assistance each year.
INN: Netanyahu meant to contrast Israel and its independent defense forces to the countries where US Army troops are deployed and risk their lives to help the local armed forces, such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
His statement was made in the context of a comparison to other Arab states, and was followed by an expression of deep thanks.
Here is the full quote: “In an unstable Middle East, Israel is the one anchor of stability. In a region of shifting alliances, Israel is America’s unwavering ally. Israel has always been pro-American. Israel will always be pro-American. My friends, you don’t need to do nation-building in Israel. We’re already built. You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it. You don’t need to send American troops to defend Israel. We defend ourselves. You’ve been very generous in giving us tools to do the job of defending Israel on our own. Thank you all, and thank you President Obama, for your steadfast commitment to Israel’s security. I know economic times are tough. I deeply appreciate this."
Federman/AP also did not mention that ahead of Israel in U.S. foreign aid are Afghanistan and Pakistan, and that in fourth place is Egypt.
NETANYAHU: "You don't need to export democracy to Israel. We've already got it."
Federman/AP: Israel does give its Arab minority full civil rights, including participation in elections. But Israeli Arabs suffer from systematic discrimination in housing and the workplace. Also, more than 2 million Palestinians living in the West Bank do not have Israeli citizenship and therefore cannot vote in Israeli elections.
INN: Yes, Israel does give its Arab minority full civil rights, including participation in elections and Arab MK's, precisely as Netanyahu said, and in sharp contrast with minorities in many Arab countries. The claim of systematic discrimination is groundless, as is evidenced by the number of Arab judges, lawyers, doctors, as compared to their population figures. The number of Arabs living in Judea and Samaria is nowhere near 2 million, and is in fact closer to 1.3 million; unlike their brethren in Israel, they do not have Israeli citizenship and do not vote because they are citizens of the Palestinian Authority.
NETANYAHU: "Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government backed by the Palestinian version of al-Qaeda."
Federman/AP: While Hamas and Al-Qaeda have killed hundreds of people in religious holy wars, they have no connection, and Hamas has in fact come under criticism from the global terror network for being too moderate.  Al-Qaeda preaches global jihad. Hamas says its struggle is solely against Israel, not the West at large. In its Gaza stronghold, Hamas has violently clashed with smaller armed groups that claim inspiration from Al-Qaeda.
INN: Yes, Hamas and Al-Qaeda sometimes differ and even clash; does this mean that Hamas is not a murderous organization bent on Israel's destruction, just as Al-Qaeda is? And if Hamas wishes to concentrate its murderous intentions on Israeli Jews, or on Jews in general, and not on other Westerners, does that make Hamas an acceptable negotiating partner for Israel – or for any country?
NETANYAHU: "The vast majority of the 650,000 Israelis who live beyond the 1967 lines reside in neighborhoods and suburbs of Jerusalem and greater Tel Aviv."
Federman/AP: Nearly all of these communities were built in the face of overwhelming international opposition and are considered illegal settlements by the world, including the U.S. There are 300,000 Israelis living in the West Bank and 200,000 in east Jerusalem, making a total of 500,000.
INN: Much of what Israel does, and even its very existence, is not applauded by all “the world.” The Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria were and are built not only in strict accordance with Israeli law, but in accordance with the British Mandate that recognized the right of the Jewish people to "close settlement" in the whole of the Mandated territory. As Eugene Rostow has written, “That right has never been terminated and cannot be terminated except by a recognized peace between Israel and its neighbors. And perhaps not even then, in view of Article 80 of the U.N. Charter, the 'Palestine' article, which provides that 'nothing in the Charter shall be construed... to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments...'"
In addition, though some governments interpret the Geneva Convention of 1949 as forbidding Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, for one, did not agree, and specifically said that though the settlements pose a psychological obstacle to the peace process, they are legal.
For the record, over 300,000 Israelis live in Judea/Samaria and another 300,000-plus live in the Jerusalem areas liberated in 1967.
NETANYAHU: " The Palestinian economy is booming. It's growing by more than 10 percent a year."
Federman/AP: The West Bank economy is indeed growing rapidly. But the World Bank has noted that the growth comes after years of contraction during fighting with Israel and has been fueled by huge amounts of foreign aid. It warns the growth is unsustainable unless Israel does more to encourage the Palestinian private sector.
INN: Netanyahu actually followed the above by saying, “Palestinian cities … have shopping malls, movie theaters, restaurants, banks.  They even have e-businesses.  This is all happening without peace.  Imagine what could happen with peace. Peace would herald a new day for both peoples. It would make the dream of a broader Arab-Israeli peace a realistic possibility. So now here is the question.  You have to ask it.  If the benefits of peace with the Palestinians are so clear, why has peace eluded us?  … Because so far, the Palestinians have been unwilling to accept a Palestinian state if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it. [emphasis added]
By Hillel Fendel

The Unbridgeable Obama-Netanyahu Gap

Analyst and former Israeli Ambassador Yoram Ettinger says Obama’s pro-Muslim advisors keep him unbridgeably away from understanding Netanyahu.
Amidst all the commentary and verbiage regarding the recent speeches by Obama and Netanyahu, American-Israeli expert Yoram Ettinger says the cultural and political gap between the two is unbridgeable – largely because of Obama’s pro-Muslim advisors and tilt.
The gap won’t be spanned, Ettinger writes, ”as long as the President assumes that the ethnic, religious, tribal and ideological violent power struggles on the Arab street constitute ‘a story of self-determination’ and ‘the vanguard of democracy.’"

Similarly, “Netanyahu cannot bridge the gap between himself and Obama as long as the President's world view is heavily influenced/shaped by his senior advisors: Valery Jarrett, who is the favorite of Muslim organizations in the U.S., Ambassador Susan Rice, who considers Israel part of the exploiting Western world and the Palestinians part of the exploited Third World, and Samantha Power, who is one of Israel's harshest critics in the U.S.  In addition, Obama considers Prof. Rashid Khalidi, who was a key PLO spokesman in the U.S., a luminary on the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

Another issue preventing Obama from understanding Israel is his underlying assumption that the Israel-PLO issue is the “root cause of Middle East turbulence, the core cause of anti-U.S. Islamic terrorism, and the crown jewel of Arab policy-making.”  
Assumption of Security in Insecure Borders
And possibly most significant of all, according to Ettinger, Obama “assumes that Israel can be secure - in the most violent and volatile region of the world - within the 1967 borders. Such borders would rob the Jewish State of its Cradle of History and would reduce its waistline to 9-15 miles (over-towered by the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria) - the distance between JFK and LaGuardia airports...”
“How can the gap be bridged,” Ettinger asks, “when Obama considers the 1967 lines - and not hate-education in Abu Mazen's schools, media and mosques - the crux of the conflict?”

Ettinger has long said, and continues to say, that Israel must respond to illogical American demands with firmness and facts on the ground – as it has done, with positive results, several times in recent decades. Ben-Gurion defied the State Department; Eshkol built in and reunited Jerusalem over Johnson’s objections; Golda built four new Jerusalem neighborhoods when Nixon proposed the Rogers Plan; and Shamir rebuffed Presidential pressure in several areas.
On the other hand, Ettinger says, Netanyahu should focus Israel’s relations with the U.S. on issues such as enhanced strategic cooperation, the mounting threats to U.S. interests, the absence of any reliable/capable Arab ally, the intensified Iranian threat, the increased Russian and Chinese profile in the Middle East, the development of energy alternatives, water technologies, homeland security, and more.
By Hillel Fendel

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Friday, May 20, 2011

Israel's Bibi Netanyahu Rejects Obama's Mid-East Policy

    • President Barack Obama meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Friday, May 20, 2011. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
(CBS/AP)  WASHINGTON - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared on Friday that Israel would not withdraw to 1967 borders to help make way for an adjacent Palestinian state. President Barack Obama, seated beside him, had called on Israel to be willing to do just that in a speech the day before.
The Israeli leader said he would make some concessions but Israel would not go back to the lines from decades earlier because they would be "indefensible."
For his part, Obama said that there were differences of formulations and language but that such disputes are going to happen "between friends."
The president never mentioned the 1967 borders as the two men talked with reporters. The leaders spoke after a lengthy meeting in the Oval Office, amid tense times.
Obama said in his speech on Thursday that the United States supports creation of a Palestinian state based on the border lines that existed before the 1967 Six Day War in which Israel forces occupied east Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. The comment drew angry criticism in Israel, and Netanyahu made clear after meeting with Obama that the idea was unacceptable.
"We cannot go back to those indefensible lines," said Netanyahu.
Both Obama and Netanyahu said they shared a desire to get to peace and played down disagreements. "We may have differences here and there," Netanyahu said.
But there was no sign of resolution of the many barriers that stand between Israel and the Palestinians, more now than last September when Obama brought the two parties together to call for a peace deal within a year -- a deadline that now looks unattainable.
Netanyahu said his nation could not negotiate with a newly constituted Palestinian unity government that includes the radical Hamas movement, which refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. He said that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had to choose between continuing the deal with Hamas and making peace with Israel.
Obama agreed that Hamas "is not a partner for a significant realistic peace process" and said Palestinians would have to resolve that issue among themselves.
Yet both Obama and Netanyahu emphasized a need to make some kind of progress, against all obstacles, as changes sweep the Arab world.
"History will not give the Jewish people another chance," Netanyahu said.
Another major stumbling block is how to resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees. Palestinians demands a "right of return" of large numbers of refugees and descendants to Israel, but Israeli leaders say this would dilute the Jewish presence in Israel so that it would no longer be the Jewish state that Netanyahu demands and Obama supports.
"That's not going to happen," Netanyahu said. He said Palestinians need to recognize that.
All in all, the comments from Netanyahu and Obama, after a longer-than-scheduled meeting that lasted more than 90 minutes, sounded more like a recitation of the many barriers to peace than an explanation of why there should be any reason for optimism.
The two leaders did not take questions from the reporters, and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was unable in a subsequent briefing to point to any concrete signs of progress.
That left the way forward as cloudy as ever.
Palestinian leaders are consulting with Arab governments on how to respond to Obama's speech. Netanyahu is to address the U.S. Congress on Tuesday to press Israel's position.
CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante said the encounter pit a president deeply frustrated with a Mideast peace effort in shambles against an Israeli leader who says he cannot do business with the newly-joined Palestinian government.
The president Thursday called for a resumption of peace talks, and for the first time put explicit U.S. approval on a key Palestinian demand: "We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines, with mutually-agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states," the president said.
Netanyahu immediately rejected any deal that would mean giving up territory gained in the 1967 War, even though in the final agreement Israel would likely retain its largest settlements.
On CBS' "The Early Show," former Assistant Secretary of State Jamie Rubin said the president's speech invited the harsh tone from the Israelis.
"That's partly a function of his willingness in the past to put to the Israeli government his differences on issues like settlements, which is now what the Israeli government is complaining about," Rubin said. "So to the extent that the Israelis respond to President Obama's urging that they get serious about the negotiations, this could have a positive effect. But right now, it's turned into a real diplomatic flap."

President Obama's stance on the 1967 borders was not a major policy change, since the U.S - along with the international community and even past Israeli governments - previously endorsed an agreement building on the 1967 lines.  This is NOT true!! Bush/2004 said that was impossible... Mid
But it was the first time he'd explicitly endorsed those borders as a starting point, a position Netanyahu rejects.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Conditions for Peace by Bibi

by Gil Ronen Netanyahu: 5 Peace Conditions


In a speech before the Knesset’s plenum in its special Herzl Day session, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu laid down five conditions for a peace treaty with the Palestinian Authority Arabs. These are: The Palestinians must recognize Israel as the Jewish nation’s state.  The treaty must be an end to the conflict. The Arab refugee problem must be solved outside of Israel’s borders. A Palestinian state will have to be demilitarized and a peace treaty must safeguard Israel’s security. The settlement blocs will remain within the state of Israel and Jerusalem will remain its united capital.

Netanyahu’s speech can be seen as an accurate indication of what he intends to say when he addresses the U.S. Congress next Tuesday. It is unlikely that he will go back on any of the principles he laid down, given the venue: a Herzl Day address before the Knesset plenum. Fearing that the prime minister intended to announce concessions in Washington, MKs within Likud had demanded that Netanyahu address Israelis before he goes to the U.S..

Based on Monday's speech, the prime minister does not appear to be planning any retreat from previous positions, and may even have toughened his stance somewhat, although this is arguable.

By and large, the speech does not depart from the one he delivered at Bar Ilan University in June 2009. In that speech as in the latest one, Netanyahu said that a PA state would be demilitarized, and that Israel would require security arrangements in a peace treaty. He also said that Jerusalem would remain united as Israel’s capital and that Arab refugees would be resettled outside Israel.  

The condition added by Netanyahu in this speech is Israel’s retention of the large settlement blocs. In the Bar Ilan speech, Netanyahu said that the territorial issues would be determined in negotiations and that until then, Israel would not be building new settlements or expropriating land in Judea and Samaria.

In Monday’s speech he was less defensive and more confident on this issue, raising the ante and announcing that Israel would insist on keeping the large settlement blocs in its possession.

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Why Israel Needs Defensible Borders...

Arab lies intensify as they show their true colors with their uprisings. And the world looks on and condones their violent actions and spreads their lies as though they were truth.
Arise, Lord, confront Your enemies...for those who speak against Your people, speak against You. Show Yourself strong on behalf of Israel that the world might see and repent and come to know the One True God. For this is Your heart...

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

The Real Nakba:Jewish Refugees from Arab Lands!

y Chana Ya'ar Ayalon: Remember the Real Nakba

Arabs across Israel spent this weekend protesting the “nakba” – catastrophe, in Arabic – of the re-establishment of the State of Israel, the 63rd anniversary of which is May 15. Israel celebrates the event on its Hebrew date, which this year was early last week.

Nevertheless, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon issued a statement Sunday calling on the public to remember what he called the “real nakba” – that of Jewish refugees from Arab lands.

“Today, as the Palestinians and their supporters commemorate their so-called 'Nakba' it is imperative that the catastrophe that befell the Jews from Arab lands be remembered and recognized,” Ayalon said.

“While the Arabs in 1948 were involved in hostilities against the Jews, the Jews of the Middle East and North Africa were not present in any theatre of war, yet overnight their citizenship was revoked, their assets stolen and they were expelled or forced to flee,” he noted.

Ayalon said he is making the issue a central point within the Foreign Ministry and believes it should be added to any future negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.

“In any future agreement with the Palestinians, the issue of the Jewish refugees should be recognized and those who fled, and their descendants, ought to receive redress,” Ayalon said.

“This issue has been recognized by United Nations resolutions, peace agreements with our neighbors, in the U.S. Congress and the Knesset. The Palestinian refugee narrative has been allowed to stand uncontested, too few people know about the real “Nakba” that saw the dispossession of almost a million Jews – and it is about time for this to change.”

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Friday, May 13, 2011

Palestinians: Prepare for 3rd Intifada

[quote from article]
According to the organizers, the event will consist of four stages – the first is a "sit-down strike" that will begin on Sunday, during which Palestinian refugees from Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, the West Bank and Gaza will gather in locations nearest to the border with Israel. These strikes will continue as long as necessary – and may last up to several weeks and even months.

The second phase is dubbed "the advance," in which refugees will proceed peacefully toward the border, as much as they are allowed. In the third phase, referred to as "crossing," the refugees will cross the border and respond in restraint to any attempt to crack-down on the procession.

The fourth and final stage will begin when each refugee reaches their original place of residence, or the nearest location to it, at which time a second sit-down strike resume, until they are allowed to return to their plot of land.
[end quote]

This article contains many details of the plans for the Palestinian stages of protest, and much more.

Full story

They insist that although they are peaceful, their intent is is to move back to "their" land. Israel must not let that happen. Perhaps the Palestinians are pushing Israel - forcing Israel to move against them. Then, the Palestinians could use that as their springboard to launch a major war on Israeli soil.

It is bad enough when your neighbors try to force you aside because they want to move in with you, but it is quite another thing to hear them say they must kill you before they move in. If Israel is forced to defend her land, and if violence erupts with women and children caught in the crossfire, then the international community will accuse Israel of heinous crimes against humanity.

The good news in all of this is that the God of Israel has already won the victory!


Tuesday, May 10, 2011

What's Edom Got To Do With It?

I did it, too...
Whenever I ran into a word in the Bible that I did not understand . . . then I just skipped over it.

About fifteen years ago I visited Israel because my daughter and my grandchildren lived in Jerusalem.

That was the last time I just "skipped" over things in the Bible that I did not understand.

Wow! That has made a huge difference in understanding the END TIME scenario.

Now, I purposefully look up these words and research them

I noticed something: every nation that Jesus will fight against when He returns is a Muslim nation.

Every country that surrounds Israel is a Muslim nation: Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey, not to mention Iraq and Iran.

Even Gog and Magog (that we were previously told by U.S. "scholars" was Russia) were regions in Eastern Turkey!

Forget about the European Union and the papacy being enemies of the Muslim nations.

If you really want to understand the END TIMES, then read Isaiah 63:1-6, Habakkuk 3:1-7, and Revelation 19. Just for your information: it is approximately 180 miles from Haifa to Petra!

Jesus is not coming back as the Sunday School Jesus, all meek and mild. The first time He came here He came as a baby in a manger.

The next time Jesus comes, He will be "The Lord of Heaven's Armies" (YHWH tseba' oth). And it is possible that many people sitting in the pews will not even know who He is. They are expecting Him to land on the Mt. of Olives. Oh, He will stand on the Mt. of Olives all right, but He is coming from Edom, and more specifically from Bozrah!

Where is Edom and Bozrah?

Edom is modern Jordan, and Bozrah is a city in that nation which is now named Bouseira, very near Petra (a well-visited tourist spot near Saudia Arabia), which is also in Jordan.

He will have blood spattered all over his white uniform (Rev. 19:13 and Isaiah 63:1). Why is He spattered with blood? Because He will be a Mighty Warrior (another truth the Sunday School crowd finds difficult to believe).

"Who is this who comes from Edom, from the city of Bozrah, with His clothing stained red? Who is this in ROYAL ROBES, marching in His great strength?"

Who wears ROYAL ROBES except the Lord Jesus Christ? Who MARCHES IN GREAT STRENGTH except Jesus?

Then He answers His rhetorical question: "It is I, THE LORD, announcing your salvation! It is I, THE LORD, who has the power to save."

This is not complicated, folks. He spells it out for us. There is only one person who has the power to save, and it is the Lord Jesus Christ!

"Why are your clothes (uniform) so red, as if you have been treading out grapes?"

Get the picture? A man in a white uniform in a pool of grapes. What would he look like after just the first few minutes squishing out the grapes? Now you have the picture in your mind of Jesus as He makes His way from Saudia Arabia and Jordan to the Mt. of Olives in Jerusalem, Israel.

"I have been treading the winepress alone; no one was there to help Me. In My anger I have trampled My enemies as if they were grapes. In My fury I have trampled My foes. Their blood has stained My clothes. For the time has come for Me to avenge My people (the Jews), and to ransom them from their oppressors (Arab Muslims). I was amazed (even Jesus is amazed by the cowardice of the Gentiles) to see that no one intervened to help the oppressed. So I Myself stepped in (from outer space: heaven) to save them with My strong arm, and My wrath sustained Me (an angry God? an angry Jesus?---and here all this time He was(like)Santa Clause). I crushed the nations in My anger and made them stagger and fall to the ground, spilling their blood upon the earth."

Why is God so angry? The answer is very simple:

Out of all the nations on the earth, He picked Israel as His prize possession. When nations of the world killed, attacked, kidnapped, tortured, and beheaded Jewish people for centuries . . . God finally blows His top.

Can you blame Him?

Oh, there is much, much more in Habakkuk chapter 3. Read it for yourself.

The King is actually coming . . . even if it is just a little different than what we learned in Sunday School. Too bad that we did not actually study our Bibles all those years. But the good news is that some of us are actually opening them now at the END OF TIME and learning something.

This is exciting news, folks, because those of us who are true believers will have indestructable bodies by then and we will be mighty warriors in an army led by Jesus Christ himself!

Israel means "God Prevails" and is mentioned 2,576 times in the Bible.

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon have a combined population of 249 million. Israel's population is 7.5 million. These Muslim nations have 33 times more people than Israel. But somehow Israel continues to survive. God does "prevail"!

Wesley Smith
End Time Truth Blog:

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Modern Day Names In Psalm 83 Prophecy

This post is an addition to my previous posting titled,"May 15th Invasion Of Israel?" - also referred to as The Third Intifada. We could be very close to seeing fulfillment of the Psalm 83 prophecy, as well as other related prophecies.

As watchmen, we must be able to relate the names in current events to those names spoken of in Scripture. I thought it might be useful to review the nations/peoples involved in the Psalm 83 prophecy, and identify them using modern day names.

Psalm 83
1 O God, do not remain silent;
do not turn a deaf ear,
do not stand aloof, O God.
2 See how your enemies growl,
how your foes rear their heads.
3 With cunning they conspire against your people;
they plot against those you cherish.
4 “Come,” they say, “let us destroy them as a nation,
so that Israel’s name is remembered no more.”

5 With one mind they plot together;
they form an alliance against you—
6 the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites,
of Moab and the Hagrites,
7 Byblos, Ammon and Amalek,
Philistia, with the people of Tyre.
8 Even Assyria has joined them
to reinforce Lot’s descendants.

9 Do to them as you did to Midian,
as you did to Sisera and Jabin at the river Kishon,
10 who perished at Endor
and became like dung on the ground.
11 Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb,
all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna,
12 who said, “Let us take possession
of the pasturelands of God.”

13 Make them like tumbleweed, my God,
like chaff before the wind.
14 As fire consumes the forest
or a flame sets the mountains ablaze,
15 so pursue them with your tempest
and terrify them with your storm.
16 Cover their faces with shame, LORD,
so that they will seek your name.

17 May they ever be ashamed and dismayed;
may they perish in disgrace.
18 Let them know that you, whose name is the LORD—
that you alone are the Most High over all the earth.

Edom = Jordan
The Ishmmaelites = Jordan
Moab = Jordan
Ammon = Jordan
Hagrites = Syria
Gebal/Byblos = Lebanon
Tyre = Lebanon
Assyria = Northern Iraq/ Aram, but really all over the "Near East"
Philistia = Gaza
Descendants of Lot = Jordan
Amalekites = Israel's southern Desert

Now...imagine the Palestinians who are already there in Israel marching toward the borders of Israel to meet the others outside Israel. Also, much of Jordan's population is Palestinian.

Their planned event beginning May 15th will result in all of Israel being surrounded by her enemies. The total numbers involved could be millions attempting to overwhelm Israel. To me, it certainly has all the earmarks of prophecy being fulfilled. Don't you think so?


Saturday, May 7, 2011

May 15th Invasion Of Israel?

There has been very little in the printed or spoken media about the up-coming planned "peaceful" invasion into Israel. The event has the potential of having very serious consequences - for it is not likely to remain peaceful for long.

Beginning only eight days from now, Israel's enemies in huge numbers are planning to surround Israel by land and sea - with intentions to march over the boarder and take the land. Can you say, "the beginnings of Psalm 83 and Isaiah 17 - with perhaps Gog/Magog (Ezekiel 38/39) following close behind?"

Most people don't have a clue about what could be happening right before our eyes.

The invaders are dead serious about carrying out their plan. The magnitude of their brutal hatred for Israel is beyond our understanding. If rioting should happen, or if armed conflict erupted, those things could provide the sparks for igniting a major blood bath on Israeli soil - or worse.

Something tells me it will not be a simple peaceful gathering on Israel's boarders. The invaders will be going for it all. If Israel is pushed beyond their limit, they will have to retailate, and it could be devastating.

Events of God's end-time plan are unfolding rapidly just as the Scriptures promised would happen. We must pray for the peace and safety of Jerusalem in the face of growing threats, and for the salvation of the Jewish people.


Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Fatah-Hamas Disagree Over Key Issues

Genesis 16:11-12The angel of the LORD also said to Hagar: “You are now pregnant and you will give birth to a son. You shall name him Ishmael, for the LORD has heard of your misery. He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.”

by Elad Benari Fatah and Hamas Disagree

As Fatah and Hamas approach the signing ceremony in Cairo of their recently announced unity deal, some serious disagreements over control of security forces and other key issues have emerged in the past two days.

The unity agreement calls for new elections next year and the integration of Hamas’ army into the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority army and security forces.

However, according to a report on Tuesday in the Associated Press, Hamas’ Prime Minister in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, has said that Hamas would not relinquish control of its security forces and would maintain its rule over Gaza even after the unity accord takes effect. His statements ran counter to the Fatah view that there would be a single authority with control of all the weapons in both the PA-controlled areas of Judea and Samaria and in Gaza.

“The resistance weapons will not be touched, but we will manage together how to act,” Haniyeh said regarding the issue of security forces, without explaining how. He gave no indication that Hamas might give up its armed struggle against Israel or approve peace talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel.

Meanwhile, Fatah’s Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad insisted that “The most important thing here is the struggle of our people should be nonviolent. We need to finalize that policy and make it official.”

Another disagreement, said the report, involves Fayyad himself. While Fatah’s chief negotiator, Azzam al-Ahmed, told a news conference in Cairo that the next prime minister would be selected through a consensus of all factions, Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar told the Arabic Al-Hayyat newspaper that the next premier should come from Gaza. These remarks signaled that Hamas does not want Fayyad to stay in office.

Hamas’ demand was clarified by Yousef Rizka, a member of the Hamas government, who was quoted by the Chinese Xinhua news agency that having the prime minister originate in Gaza “will create sort of reasonable geographic balance” since the president and the speaker of the parliament are based in the Judea and Samaria.

Rizka also said that if the Prime Minister is from Gaza, he will be able to travel since he will not have to pass through Israeli checkpoints.

Fatah official Jamal Muhissen responded to the comments and was quoted by Xinhua as saying that the nomination of the prime minister is subjected to his “qualifications and capabilities,” and that it makes no difference if he comes from Gaza or from Judea and Samaria, since “the considerations of the general interest matter,” as he put it.

The unity agreement has come under criticism from Israeli officials, such as Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who said last week that he believes Hamas will take over Judea and Samaria in the Palestinian Authority elections planned for next year as part of the unity agreement. Lieberman called the reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas “the crossing of a red line” and warned that one of its results will be that hundreds of Hamas terrorists will go free from Fatah-PA jails, and roam in Judea and Samaria.

Lieberman called upon the international community to hold on steadfastly to the conditions it has set for recognition of “Palestinian” governments: the abandoning of terror, the recognition of Israel and the honoring of previous agreements.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, on the eve of an official visit to France and Britain, also called on Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to reverse the unity course. During his visit in Europe, Netanyahu will explain to his hosts that peace cannot be made with a unity government that includes a party calling for the destruction of Israel, a formal policy of Hamas.

Mideast expert Professor Efraim Inbar, Director of Bar-Ilan University's Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies, told IsraelNationalNews last week that the Hamas-Fatah unity agreement is “a deal that makes Hamas stronger, which of course is bad for Israel.”

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua

Monday, May 2, 2011

Who Have You Chosen To Serve?

I found the reaction to the news of Osama bin Laden's death most interesting. I cannot recall another instance in my lifetime when huge crowds of people gathered spontaneously in the streets of our major cities to celebrate a death, but that is exactly what happened.

Perhaps what happened is not unlike the cheering that will take place when the two witnesses of Revelation 11 are killed by the Antichrist, and lie dead on the streets of Jerusalem for all to see for 3 1/2 days during the tribulation. At that time there will be a huge celebratiion over their death...for their ministry on earth, annoying to unbelievers, will have finally ended.

Revelation 11:10
And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.

So, how should believers react to Osama bin Laden's death? While we all feel a sense of comfort and relief with justice being done over the fact that his reign of terror has ended, we should be saddened over the horror bin Laden is facing right now, and will face for all of eternity for bowing to his pagan god allah. Just the thought of a godless eternity should be more than we can bear.

Hebrews 10:31
It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Psalm 5:4-6
For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness; No evil dwells with You. The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity. You destroy those who speak falsehood; The LORD abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit.

Ezekiel 33:11
I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live.

God desires for sinners to repent rather than to perish. It is not His will that any should be lost, but that all might come to faith in Jesus Christ. But, perish it will be without choosing Him. All are sinners...including you and me...and Osama bin Laden. All need the Savior, and in this life we must choose to serve Him. Have you chosen Him, and confessed Him as Lord? You must be very sure!


Sunday, May 1, 2011

Israel in Trouble with Hamas-Fatah State

All of Israel within Rocket Range under Hamas-Fatah State
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu Map of Hamas-Fatah Attack Range

A new illustrated map presented by the pro-Israel Americans for a Safe Israel (ASFI) shows that a Hamas-Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority state, with or without all the borders the PA demands, would leave all of what would remain of Israel within Katyusha missile range.

The map was created by Mark Langfan, a New York attorney and expert on military and strategic issues who has frequently appeared at Congressional committees on Capitol Hill.

A Hamas-Fatah PA state would allow the Hamas terrorist organization, whose stated aim is the destruction of Israel, to deploy Iranian and Syrian-supplied Katyusha missiles near all Israel urban centers.

Seventy percent of the population of Israel, and 80 percent of the country’s industrial base is located in the coastal region that includes Netanya and metropolitan Tel Aviv, AFSI pointed out. One large PA city is Tulkarm, located only a few miles east of Netanya and overlooking the high-speed north-south Highway 6 (Kvish 6).

Jerusalem would be within easy range of Jericho, where the PA army is trained on a United States-funded base by American military officers.

Be'er Sheva already has been attacked by Grad Katyusha missiles from Gaza, as have been Haifa and the Galilee from Hizbullah terrorists in Lebanon.

“Mahmoud Abbas, our supposed ’peace’ partner, has now joined forces with Hamas, the acknowledged [Hamas] terrorist group", AFSI wrote. "This is actually a declaration of war against the State of Israel since Hamas has never disguised its intentions of destroying Israel.

“The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) has used the diplomatic track, hoping to delude Israelis and the world with its words of peace, while pursuing its terrorist ideology. The truth is now out.”

It added that the creation of a new Arab state controlled by Hamas and Fatah would be “suicidal” for Israel.

Israel has been almost totally unified in its horror of the idea of Hamas being part of the Palestinian Authority.  Even before the "unity" of the two organizations, there was the fear of a Hamas takeover in the PA's Judea and Samaria areas, as happened in Gaza.

The Obama administration has only stated that it is “studying” the new agreement between Fatah and Hamas while former U.S. President Jimmy Carter stated he thinks it is a great idea.

The Carter Center, founded in 1982 by Carter and his wife Rosalynn, commended members of Hamas and Fatah for "having the vision to begin the process of reunifying the Palestinian people.”

Carter added, “Based on my years of contacts with Fatah and Hamas, I am confident that, if handled creatively and flexibly by the international community, Hamas’ return to unified Palestinian governance can increase the likelihood of a two-state solution and a peaceful outcome.”
From Arutz Sheva
WOW! Is he serious???!!! This man is seriously NOT plugged in to what is going on the Middle East. Lord have mercy on him...God will not be mocked by Jimmy Carter or Arabs...Psalm 2 !!!

Baruch atem b'Shem, Yeshua


Blog Widget by LinkWithin