Friday, November 14, 2008

Israel's Converging Crises

Israel’s Converging Crises
by Brad Macdonald

War is brewing between Israel and Hamas again. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert admitted as much on Tuesday, telling reporters, “I have no doubt that the situation between ourselves and Hamas is in a stage of inevitable pre-confrontation.” War is unavoidable, he said, “it is merely a question of when and not a question of if.”

Grim news.

It gets worse. Fact is, war with the lethal Iranian proxy is just one of a handful of major crises and potential crises converging in Israel.

East and north of Israel, the Arab world is energized and in a state of flux as it counts down the days to January 20 and the beginning of what it believes will be a more lenient, more exploitable era of American foreign policy.

South of Israel, the moderate “Israel friendly” government of Egypt teeters on the brink of political turmoil as Hosni Mubarak’s star wanes.

The picture is similarly grim inside Israel, where the Palestinian population, frustrated and furious (at each other as well as Israel), is primed to explode, and the Israeli government is paralyzed by political gridlock awaiting the outcome of the upcoming election of a new prime minister.

As these crises develop, the United States—Israel’s staunchest ally and the nation it would normally lean on for assistance in solving these issues—has embraced as president a man who will almost assuredly further diminish America’s support of the Jewish state.

Remember, that’s all in addition to Israel’s inevitable, perhaps imminent, war with Hamas!

Crisis One: Palestinian Unrest

The Trumpet reported recently on the mounting tension between rival Palestinian political parties Hamas and Fatah. Hamas, the terrorist organization that won control of the Palestinian Legislative Council in elections in 2006 and that now controls the Gaza Strip, is insisting that Palestinians elect a new president in January. But Fatah, led by current Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, is worried that it might lose even more political influence, particularly in the West Bank, and says elections should not occur till 2010. Relations between the two became so heated earlier this week that reconciliation talks scheduled for next Monday in Egypt had to be canceled.

Don’t think for a minute that this is strictly a Palestinian problem and has nothing to do with Israel. As the terrorist attacks this summer in Jerusalem proved, Israeli citizens are a target at which enraged Arabs sometimes vent their anger. Israel is also the ring in which these rival groups are sparring, and whatever the outcome of this intense feud, Israel will be the primary loser.

Watch this trend closely. It’s possible Hamas could soon call upon its many followers in the West Bank and mount a violent coup. Such an event would place tremendous pressure on Israel to confront Hamas to resist its incursion into East Jerusalem. This could quickly evolve into a major issue for nations competing for influence in the Middle East and become a major confrontation inviting foreign intervention.

The outcome of a Fatah-Hamas compromise wouldn’t be much different. Hamas has indicated that the only way it will work with Fatah is if it receives major concessions and influence in the Palestinian government. Should a coup be avoided and some kind of power-sharing deal be struck, Hamas will still have expanded its political reach and likely even established its political influence in East Jerusalem. Depending on the level of political cooperation, the radical terrorist group may even find itself with easy access to the substantial weapons caches Israel and the West have given to the Palestinian Authority.

Crisis Two: Egypt

In addition to dealing with the likely unrest and instability caused by climaxing Palestinian tensions, the Jewish state faces potential instability and chaos in Egypt, whose comparatively “moderate” stance and “friendly” relations with Israel have long proven key to a stable southern border and Israel’s national security. After nearly 30 years of rulership, the West-friendly government of Hosni Mubarak is on the brink of collapse. The Egyptian economy is in deep recession, with an inflation rate hovering around 22 percent and unemployment around 10 percent. Food prices are soaring. With much of its population hungry, jobless and angry, Egypt is vulnerable to social chaos and anarchy. In fact, unrest is already occurring in some places, and were it not for Mubarak’s tough responses, large-scale chaos would likely have already broken out.

Such conditions would challenge any leader. But Mubarak is an 80-year-old man in poor health. With his grip on Egypt slipping, it will take very little—a sudden sickness, a terrorist attack, riots—for the country to spiral out of his control, allowing pro-Iranian Islamist radicals to take over Cairo: an immediate nightmare scenario for Israel.

Egypt is a linchpin in Israel’s national security. The loss of the world’s oldest nation as a moderate ally, not to mention its transformation into a radical enemy, would jeopardize Israel’s existence.

Crisis Three: Political Gridlock

Concurrent with the Palestinian political pandemonium, Israelis themselves are preparing to head to the polls February 10 to elect a new prime minister. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was forced to call the snap elections recently after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced his resignation and she was unable to build a coalition government.

This means that for the next three months, Israel’s leadership will be distracted by what is proving to be a fierce and tight election race. The nation will exist in an even greater state of political chaos and gridlock than usual. Although Olmert continues as caretaker prime minister, he is a lame duck, and his decisions and promises will mean little. With Olmert’s leadership defunct and the identity of the next leader unclear, Israel is effectively rendered leaderless for the next three months.

The timing could hardly be worse. Now is a time when Israel needs a swift-footed, alert government. Now’s a time for political unity and a focused, discerning foreign policy. Now’s a time for leadership capable of articulately, ardently and arduously defending Israel’s interests.

Instead, Israel has a lame-duck prime minister, a divisive, distracting political campaign, political chaos and national political paralysis!

Crisis Four: A New American Administration

The election of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency has thrust the Middle East into a state of flux. Across the region, Muslim states and organizations—from minor terrorist groups to activist organizations to regional behemoths like Iran and Saudi Arabia—are preparing for America’s new foreign policy. If we are to believe campaign promises, that policy will include more negotiation, diplomacy and compromise.

Last week, analysts at Stratfor noted, “Striking a balance between the need to reach a settlement with Iran (on Iraq, at least) and the need to maintain existing relationships with Israel and the Arab states could very well prove to be the most challenging foreign-policy issue that the Obama administration will find itself struggling with very early on in its term” (November 7, emphasis mine throughout).

Iran and some Arab states see in Barack Obama an opportunity to advance their interests. As Ralph Peters noted yesterday, they consider the president-elect “more favorable to their cause and less friendly to Israel.” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad even sent him a letter of congratulations.

Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick wrote, “With Senator Barack Obama’s victory in the U.S. presidential race, the stakes have been raised for Israel’s February 10 general elections,” adding that dealing with Obama and America’s retooled foreign policy will be one of the toughest challenges for Israel’s next leader. “Whatever the Obama administration’s position on Israel may be, it will not be more supportive of the country than the Bush administration has been. And over the past year, the supportive Bush administration has decided not to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and not to support an Israeli effort to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.”

President Bush has been one of Israel’s staunchest supporters ever. But, as Glick observes, even the Bush administration has failed to curb the Iranian nuclear weapons program—which is being pursued with Israel in mind—and has consistently refused to condone Israeli efforts to prevent Tehran from achieving its nuclear goals.

Glick continued:

If Israel’s next prime minister intends to prevent Tehran from acquiring the means to implement its stated aim of destroying Israel, he or she must be prepared to stand up to America. Indeed, the greatest diplomatic challenge he or she will likely face will be standing up to a popular new President Obama, supported by large Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress and the overwhelming majority of American Jewish voters.

Should right-wing Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu become Israel’s prime minister in February, the fracturing bond between the U.S. and Israel might turn into a yawning chasm. Despite Bibi’s pleasant response to Obama’s election last week, the former Israeli prime minister and the president-elect have some fundamental issues dividing them, including the best way to handle Iran, the peace process, and the deeply sensitive issue of dividing Jerusalem. Should the more conservative Netanyahu be elected—and his chances look good—we expect Israel’s relationship with America to cool quickly.

That’s not to say U.S.-Israeli relations will not also suffer if the more liberal Tzipi Livni wins office. Speaking on Israeli Radio last Thursday, Ms. Livni attacked Obama for indicating a willingness to talk with Iran about its nuclear program. “Livni’s interview about Iran,” wrote Matthew Fisher last week, “underscored how seriously Israel regards Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and how worried many here are that Obama may not be as staunch an ally to the Jewish state as President George W. Bush.”

The German Solution

For years now the Trumpet has explained the prophecy in Hosea 5:13 pointing to a time when the Jewish state, besieged by crises, will feel compelled to turn to Germany for protection. (You can learn about the details of this prophecy by reading Jerusalem in Prophecy.) The reason Israel will be forced to rely on Germany, as Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry has explained, is that America by this time will have stopped supporting Israel!

“Who will Israel turn to when America removes its support?,” asked Mr. Flurry in January 2007. “This prophecy [Hosea 5:13] tells us that both Ephraim (Britain today) and Judah (the nation of Israel) will run to the Assyrian (Germany) for assistance. This prophecy speaks of a time when the U.S. will lack the power and the will to assist its allies.”

Bible prophecy indicates that events now unfolding that involve the tiny Jewish state of Israel are heading toward that very event.

Watch for embattled Israel to cast around for international help to fill the security vacuum created by its impending loss of American support. And watch for Germany to ratchet up its involvement in the Middle East peace process in order to fill that void. •

Remember Herbert W. Armstrong

Is a World Dictator About to Appear?
This headline gripped the attention of a handful of readers of the first edition of the world’s then-newest current affairs magazine, way back in February 1934. Over six decades later, we review many of the predictions made by the Plain Truth magazine and its founder, Herbert W. Armstrong, and find unerring accuracy in the forecasting of events leading to the rise to global dominance of the present European Union.
Sidebar: The Mistress of Europe
Sidebar: Europe’s Latin Assault
Sidebar: Atlantic Rift
Sidebar: The Secret Nazis
Sidebar: The Uncrowned Kings of Essen
Sidebar: O Come, All Ye Faithful

Mama Evans

Mama Evans


Erma Evans, a widow in the Church of God, served as a perfect example of what the apostle Paul called for from our senior women (Titus 2:3).

She touched the lives of many and was affectionately called "Mama Evans" by the young fellows of the Worldwide Church of God in Toledo, Ohio: Church singles whom she graciously would have over for a home-cooked meal every month.

Mrs. Evans knew all about southern hospitality since she was originally from Mud Creek, Kentucky. She would offer the meal, after we prayed, and would often then fall asleep on her couch, practically purring like a kitty, content as we fellowshipped and played board games or cards.

The following is a letter from "Mama Evans" that she sent me when I was living in Israel (August 1989), getting ready to begin a work-study program at Kibbutz Sdot Yam near Caesarea. It reveals a little more of this precious woman God blessed us with:

Dear David:

Just a few lines to say hello and that I miss you very much and get a thrill of thankfulness and joy when I can speak of having a son in Israel.

This must be a dream come true. All my life I have dreamed of going to all the far off places. I think I was born a wanderlust child.

Any place even as a little girl that I read or heard about it just filled me with desire to get up and go. Even today I feel the same way.

My Dad must have been the same way because his books of which he had many were about places all over the world.

He would talk to me even when I was 5 yrs. old about the far corners of the earth even China, but I never got any farther than Toledo.

But in the world tomorrow I hope to be able to flit from place to place. When I looked at the picture I could picture Christ walking on the shores of Galilee.

I pray for His Coming to rescue the world. It can't be too soon for me.

Everyone who knows you misses you. You are a special kind of guy. A little rebellious with a head full of dreams mixed with knowledge. There can't be another like you. I have a feeling you are very special to God.

Take care honey and don't forget all that you know of God's Truth.

Bye for now.

Love you,
Mom Evans

This letter shows how loving Mama was... She was always gentle but firm if necessary, but you never doubted she always had your best interests at heart. She used to say "a little love goes a long way, " "they need love the most who deserve it the least" and "tears purify the soul."

I was pleased to write this poem for her one Sabbath day (on the spur of the moment, wanting to help let her know how much we loved and appreciated her), and gave it to her at our Church of God services before I left, getting a big hug and kiss in return:

Mama Evans
Her warmth and love is known both far & wide
Her wonderful smile illuminates lives
Her sweet laughter uplifts many hearts
Helping both young & old she knows is her part
Giving hugs & kisses, making many meals
Veritable love feasts from a woman sincere
GOD BLESS OUR ERMA we need her so dear
Keep her close to your Kingdom
Help her bring You near.


Mama Evans, 89, died October 29, 1998. We know she rests in peace and awaits the First Resurrection.

Meanwhile, Mama lives on and shines through the eyes of those who remember her and have tales to tell of her from the heart.

Heil Obama!

Behold the mindless masses who blindly worship and adore their Marxist Messiah! Their NIMROD saviour from reason and sanity and personal responsibility. "Let the White Man's Burden be doubled or tripled," they pray to their god of darkness whose shadow covers the land.

Cry, the beloved country!

Obama in the Flesh
If Obama's the Messiah...
Black Day in America: Obama Wins, America Loses
Obama is illegitimate!

Will a Black President Heal America's Race Wounds?

Will a Black President Heal America’s Race Wounds?
by Joel Hilliker

Seventy percent of Americans think Barack Obama’s presidency is going to help race relations, according to Gallup.

The majority, among all races, see this as a milestone worth celebrating—a true victory for civil rights. And after all the pre-election warnings about potential rioting in the streets in the event of an Obama loss, that concern went untested. The election came off smoother than any in recent memory. It produced a clear winner and a graceful loser. No lingering question marks. No violence.

Does the fact that America elected a black president end the argument that this is a racist nation? Everybody seems to have an opinion. Mr. Obama garnered more support from white voters than any Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter. Still, some are convinced his victory would have been much larger if not for those whites who voted against him simply because of his skin pigmentation.

The idea that Mr. Obama’s victory represents the end of racism in America has also been loudly shouted down by some blacks. Their view is essentially, Why should whites get to decide that there’s no more racism?

While there were undoubtedly some whites who voted against black, this election also saw an opposite and more powerful trend: white people embracing Mr. Obama because of his race. His candidacy represented a promise to some whites that they could wash away the stigma of racism. Supporting him was a way to prove that they were not racist. Of course, there is a contradiction in such thinking, as black author Shelby Steele points out: “When whites—especially today’s younger generation—proudly support Obama for his post-racialism, they unwittingly embrace race as their primary motivation,” he wrote. “They think and act racially, not post-racially.”

... Click here to read the rest

Reality Check in Obamaland

Reality Check in Obamaland
November 10, 2008 From theTrumpet.com
While America dreams on in Obamaland, reality is about to strike at the G-20 summit in Washington this week.


Ron Fraser
America is no longer in the box seat when it comes to dictating policy to the world. That the United States is still by far the largest single national economy in the world, possessing the mightiest military force and dominance in space-age technology, is a given. That American national debt is preposterous both in its size and the nation’s inability to control it is the matter of daily headlines. That the U.S. is to blame for the global financial crisis is increasingly being declared as such by leaders in the world’s greatest single trading combine, the European Union, especially within Germany. That reality, and its consequences, will be vocalized, very stridently, by nations gloating over America’s demise this week at the G-20 summit in Washington commencing Saturday.

What really counts in international relations is not so much the reality of a nation’s power, but the perception by other nations of that power. And perceptions of U.S. power are rapidly changing around the world, especially since the results of the latest U.S. presidential election were posted.

The U.S. is a drastically divided nation politically. Barack Obama did not win the U.S. election by a landslide popular vote. Thus, there is still a very deep chasm between conservative and liberal voters in the U.S., notwithstanding the impression that the liberal press seeks to tout of a nation caught up in the spirit of Obamamania.

Dream on!

The fact is, there has seldom been a more opportune moment this century for America’s enemies to take advantage of its political, social and economic sclerosis to force their own will upon the U.S.

The perception of America that is spreading throughout world leadership circles, especially among America’s enemies, is of a nation that has had its day. A nation in a state of rapid decline—morally, socially and economically. A nation whose military force is stretched to the breaking point, with a drastically reduced capability to support its national goals, let alone play policeman to the world.

Enter the European Union, in particular the Franco-German connection.

“[T]he political class on the old continent has been upgraded to savior of the financial system …,” Spiegel wrote on October 28.

Those who have been watching developments beyond the shores of America ought to be struck by the new sense of urgency sparking the divisive EU into more affirmative action, with an unusual touch of unanimity, in preparation for this week’s summit of nations convened in Washington to discuss the global economic crisis.

Over the past month, it has been the EU leadership that has driven the agenda to establish a new system to regulate the global economy. The EU has held numerous conferences on the subject, its leaders have visited the U.S. and China and held talks also with Russian leaders to set the tone for Wednesday’s summit in Washington. Last week, EU states voted unanimously on a course of action they will present to the Washington summit, fully expecting that their lead in that forum will be respected and their recommendations accepted. The EU idea is to establish a new form of global economic governance following EU guidelines on the regulation of the global financial system. The Union is already firmly entrenched as a global leader in the regulation of business and commerce—to the extent that it has already extracted massive fines from global corporations that have infringed its onerous regulations. Thus, the precedents are set on which to further consolidate increasing control by the EU of global business.

“The EU agreed on Friday a general line to take at a Washington summit of world leaders next week, which includes initiating a period of 100 days to draw up proposals on reforming the international financial system.

“One hundred days after November 15, the date of the G-20 summit in the U.S., a new meeting is to be held to look at how much progress has been made on the goals” (TheParliament.com, November 7).

Of the Group of 20 principal nations meeting in Washington, only the European Union, acting as a federal body with a single voice, has an articulated strategy to lay before the summit. EU President Nicolas Sarkozy and Germany’s finance minister are laying the blame for the global economic and financial crisis squarely on America. Sarkozy, hinting at the anti-U.S. tone the EU will adopt at the summit, declared, “This is a world crisis, but we know perfectly well where it started. We will not allow nothing to be done. Europe will not accept an explanation that says nothing has happened” (ibid., emphasis mine throughout).

Yet, as all eyes turn to Washington this week for an inkling of just what form any new global system of finance and economic control might take, we would do well to ponder the current mood in Germany that this global crisis has created.

In Germany, two phenomena are have been catalyzed by the global economic crunch: a change in politicians’ thinking, and a change in the mood of the people. Both spell trouble for the future.
As Spiegel Online reported, “The effects of the worldwide economic crisis are leading to a new globalization in politics. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is seeking unity in Europe to deal with the financial crisis, while at home consensus and cooperation are the new watchwords. Is it the beginning of a new politics?” (November 3). Historically, crisis in Germany has always led to a “new politics,” with disastrous results. Too often that “new politics” has paved the way for a demagogue to take advantage of the national mood swing in times of economic challenge.
On the current mood of the people in Germany, Spiegel Online observes, “Rarely has the mood in Germany been so strange. It is as if Germans were living in two worlds, a real world in the here and now, and an imaginary world in an unpleasant tomorrow. The country, like the rest of the world, is in transit, and no one knows where the journey is headed” (ibid.).

The most prophetic result of the global economic crisis, relating to the European Union, is the opportunity it is presenting for the realization of a long-sought Teutonic imperial dream: the binding together of old Europe under a single economic government. Joschka Fischer, Germany’s foreign minister in the Schröder government era, was moved to make public his view that “Europe needs an economic government. The individual nations are simply too small to handle a crisis of this magnitude” (Spiegel Online, op. cit.). Unsurprisingly, Fischer thinks that European economic government should be modeled along Germanic lines.

Journalist Dirk Kurbjuweit comments on a new “politics of the backroom” having been stimulated by the financial crisis in Germany. “… Germany stands for the social market economy, with all of its rules and regulations,” he wrote. “[G]lobal policy for German politicians must, most of all, be integration policy in Europe. … Germany currently has something akin to a secret chancellorship. … [C]oncepts that compete directly with freedom are gaining in popularity: enforcement, control. … The overriding question, therefore, is this: How will freedom and control be doled out in the future?” (Spiegel Online, op. cit.).

How indeed?

With so much media attention being given to the president-elect in the U.S., few there be who detect the change in politics and the mood swing in Germany that is morphing out of this great global financial and economic crisis.

Watch the G-20 summit in Washington for a newly assertive European Union to force its way in the outcome of that vital conference.

Watch Germany as it faces a federal election in the coming year, with all state elections being conducted in the lead-up to that national election continuing to swing right as the mood in Germany changes.

And as you watch, remember the words of Herbert Armstrong, who declared that a strong and forceful leader would again arise in Germany amid great social upheaval triggered by the collapse of the global financial and economic system!

We would be foolish indeed to ignore these signs of the times and not prepare for the obvious.

Read our booklet Germany and the Holy Roman Empire for deeper insight into just what it is that is building before your eyes in the construct of the new global order in the wake of America’s decline. •

New South Africa articles

Die nuwe Suid-Afrika - 4 new articles
Evidence links man to double murder
'Communities want to act on farm attacks'
Robbers now face extra charge
Cops arrive 13 hours too late

More Recent Articles
Hijackers drug, dump victim
Oudpolisieman sê arrestasie was ‘heksejag teen wit lede’
Man bedwelm ná kapers hom inspuit
Gran killed, released suspect arrested
Doodstraf, want hy glo in ‘oog vir oog’
Teens held for elderly woman's murder
Athlete knifed during race
‘Toeskouer’ steek atleet met mes in rug
Man (19) 33 j. tronk toe
Polisie wil René Burger se verkragtingsaak sluit