and there would be a reason they go it alone....

End-of-Days Scenarios Part 9

Damascus lies in nuclear rubble, completely cut off from ever becoming a city again. The major jihadist terrorist heads were cut off in Israel’s pre-emptive strike. But, the collective wrath of the rest of the world’s nations –led by the U.N. Israel-haters, surround the tiny Jewish state, figuratively, at least.

The Islamic hordes of every stripe are in full rage. The battle cries scream from every media and diplomatic venue, as well as in the streets of Europe and other nations where Islam’s populations have grown exponentially.

Israel’s leadership --particularly the military leadership—know that it is fight or die as a nation, as a people.

But, just as the Samson Option is about to be invoked (bringing the house of Israel and all of its enemies down with nuclear holocaust), a man from the EU steps from among his fellows, speaking great things of the diplomatic sort.

“And of the ten horns that [were] in his head, and [of] the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even [of] that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look [was] more stout than his fellows” (Dan. 7:20).

This European leader tells Israel that he is their friend. Almost the only friend they have among the voices of the U.N. and the newly developed superstate, thanks to the rapture of the Church, and America coming under the European umbrella, bringing with it the most powerful and sophisticated nuclear weapons arsenal on the planet.

He may be but one voice, but what a voice! No one would dare to make war with this man, who commands such awesome might. As a matter of fact, this man will one day be worshipped as a god. But not quite yet.

"And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who [is] like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?” (Rev. 13:4).

This leader promises Israel that he, personally, will guarantee they are not attacked, and that they are accepted by other leaders of the nations now threatening an all-out assault on the Jewish state.

He will begin with his wondrous works of convincing all the mesmerized world that he is the man of the hour. He is the ultimate negotiator –the great, longed-for peacemaker.

He even promises Israel they can build a Temple on the most sacred spot to religious Jews–atop Mount Moriah, the Temple Mount.

But, in exchange, Israel must agree to put down all of its defense, especially its great nuclear arsenal. Israel must agree to rely totally on him to be their national protector, their savior. They once rejected their true Messiah, but will readily accept this great leader’s overtures of peace. Jesus prophesied about this: “I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive” (Jn. 5:43).

Although Israel and the world have been forewarned, this proud, arrogant, nefariously ambitious man will invoke his peace. It will–ultimately-- produce catastrophic results.

However, he will appear at first to be a miracle worker of unprecedented magnitude: "And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify [himself] in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many…” (Dan. 8:25).

He is called the man of sin, the son of perdition, Antichrist, the beast, the king of fierce countenance, the prince that shall come, and other names. But, interestingly, he is called “the Assyrian.”

I recommend that you get a book by my great friend, Phillip Goodman, The Assyrian Connection, to read about the Bible’s reference to this man. He and Antichrist seem to be one and the same in terms of considering the future tyrant that is referred to as the beast most prominently in Revelation, chapter 13.

Antichrist, though coming out of the geographic area of the ancient Roman Empire, based upon Daniel 9:26-27, will nonetheless be of Middle Eastern extraction.

I will let you read Phillip’s much-studied thoughts on the whys and wherefores surrounding this postulation, but suffice it to say that –in my view, at least—the following prophecy seems to reference, to some extent, the beast’s ethnic origin: "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all" (Dan. 11:37).

Who is this “God of his fathers?” If this most terrible tyrant of history is Assyrian, based upon ethnic and/or religious history considerations, the “god” referred to might be the “god” of Islam. However, the “God of his fathers” could refer to God Jehovah, Abraham, and Abraham’s predecessors. The God of Heaven. The use of the capital G in God makes it almost certain that this refers to the one, true God.

He rejects the true God of Heaven. (And, I don’t mean that he will be a Jew. Abraham –and Abraham’s fathers before that great patriarch—sired many, many people who are not Jewish. The whole of the Arab nations, for example, have Abraham as their Gentile father-progenitor.

This man, the son of perdition, who stands above all others of like mind –to rule the world, by hook or by crook— is out of the geographical area that comprised the old Roman Empire. While he is a prince who comes forth out of territories encompassed by the ancient Roman Empire, his ethnic origin is from people (his fathers) of Middle Eastern extraction.

He honors the “god of forces.” This is a most interesting proposition. And, there are other fascinating factors and considerations in pursuing this line of conjecture.

But, that will have to await next week’s space allowances in the Nearing Midnight commentary section.

--Terry

............................................benny

While on the road to Damascus....



Jacob is renewed...

Bible Gateway Commentary

Report: Syria has underground 'missile city'

Jerusalem, Israel
30 April 2007 10:31
http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx...ticleid=306192

Syria has built a fortified complex buried deep underground and cloaked in secrecy to manufacture and store ballistic missiles capable of striking Israel, an Israeli newspaper said on Monday.

The complex includes 30 reinforced concrete bunkers, production facilities, development laboratories and command posts, the mass-selling Yediot Aharonot quoted "foreign experts" as saying, without specifying its location.

The "missile city" houses mainly Scud missiles capable of reaching anywhere in Israel. Given its weak air power, Damascus is boosting its arsenal of surface-to-surface missiles and protecting them in the complex, Yediot said.

According to the paper, Syria has 200 Scud-B missiles, 60 Scud-C and a certain number of North Korean Scud-D missiles with a range of 700km, and has developed chemical warheads for all its Scuds.

The chemical warfare agents are stored in a separate facility, Yediot quoted the foreign experts as saying.

It also said that Iran recently supplied Syria with about 100 Chinese shore-to-sea C-802 missiles -- the same missile that Hezbollah used to hit an Israeli warship during last year's Lebanon war.

In March, military and government sources told Agence France-Presse that Syria had positioned thousands of rockets on its border with Israel, as part of indications that Damascus may be preparing for future "low-intensity warfare".

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has made peace overtures in recent months to Israel but the Jewish state rejected them, saying Damascus must first stop supporting militant groups in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

Peace talks between Israel and Syria collapsed in 2000, mainly because of deadlock over the return of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in 1967 and unilaterally annexed in 1981. -- AFP
__________________
.............................................benny

Monday, April 30, 2007
NUCLEAR ATTACK: HOW REAL IS THE THREAT? Ex-CIA chief says it's Al-Qaeda's top priority




* War report accuses Olmert of "severe failure"
ORIGINAL POSTING:
To answer the question many of you have emailed me about: yes, I am working on another novel...it's called, Dead Heat....I'm about half-way done at the moment, I hope to finish it later this summer and, Lord willing, it will release in the spring of 2008....a political thriller set in the midst of a presidential campaign, the novel explores a "what if" scenario that concerns me more every day: what if a terrorist network or terrorist regime were to actually launch a nuclear attack against the United States?....how might they do it?....what cities might they target?....how would we stop them?....how would we retaliate?....to develop the most realistic scenario possible, I've been meeting with top military and intelligence experts in the U.S. and the Middle East....while these conversations have been off the record, I can tell you that there is a growing (if reluctant) consensus that it's not a matter of "if" but "when" such an attack, or series of attacks, will occur....in February of this year, for example, James E. Goodby of the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies wrote: “It’s only a matter of time. That’s what the experts say when asked whether a terrorist organization might detonate an atom bomb in an American city"....Yossef Bodansky, former director of the U.S. Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, said in 2004 that the United States is losing the war on terrorism and faces an "inevitable" al-Qaida attack with weapons of mass destruction that will be worse than 9/11 -- "All of the warnings we have today indicate that a major strike – something more horrible than anything we've seen before – is all but inevitable.’”....Graham Allison, author of the 2004 book, Nuclear Terrorism, warned: "If policy makers in Washington keep doing what they are currently doing about the threat, a nuclear terrorist attack on America is likely to occur in the next decade. And if one lengthens the time frame, a nuclear strike is inevitable.”....former Senator Sam Nunn (D-Georgia), once head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told National Geographic in 2005: "Increasingly, we are being warned that an act of nuclear terrorism is inevitable. I am not willing to concede that point. But I do believe that unless we greatly elevate our effort [to secure nuclear materials] and the speed of our response, we could face disaster."....now ex-CIA chief George Tenet is issuing the same warning, saying al-Qaeda's top priority is obtaining nuclear weapons to attack the U.S. directly: "The main threat posed by Al Qaeda lies in its quest to obtain a nuclear bomb, former CIA Director George J. Tenet writes in his new book. In At the Center of the Storm, Tenet writes at some length about Al Qaeda's attempts to obtain or develop a nuclear weapon. 'I am convinced that this is where [Osama bin Laden] and his operatives desperately want to go,' Tenet writes. 'They understand that bombings by cars, trucks, trains and planes will get them some headlines, to be sure. But if they manage to set off a mushroom cloud, they will make history.' Tenet details several attempts by the CIA to prevent Al Qaeda from acquiring nuclear weapons. Just weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks, a Pakistani organization, Ummah Tameer-e-Nau, or UTN, had met in Afghanistan with Bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, to discuss how Al Qaeda 'should go about building a nuclear device,' the CIA was told. Tenet also sketches out details of an attempt by Al Qaeda leaders in Saudi Arabia to buy what he described as three black-market Russian nuclear devices in 2002 and 2003."
EXCERPTS FROM NUCLEAR TERRORISM:
--Every day 30,000 trucks, 6,500 rail cars, and 140 ships deliver more than 50,000 cargo containers into the United States, but only 5 percent ever get screened. But even this screening, which rarely involves physical inspection, may not detect nuclear weapons or fissile material.

--There are approximately 130 nuclear research reactors in 40 countries. Two dozen of these have enough highly enriched uranium for one or more nuclear bombs.

--If terrorists bought or stole a complete weapon, they could set it off immediately. If instead they bought fissile material, they could build a crude but working nuclear bomb within a year.

--In Russia, 10,000 nuclear warheads and fissile material for 30,000 additional weapons remain vulnerable to theft.

--Pakistan's black marketers, led by the country's leading nuclear scientist, A. Q. Khan, have sold comprehensive "nuclear starter kits" that included advanced centrifuge components, blueprints for nuclear warheads, uranium samples in quantities sufficient to make a small bomb, and even provided personal consulting services to assist nuclear development.

posted by Joel C. Rosenberg @ 10:09 AM
................................................benny

DEBKAfile Exclusive: Assad shifts units from Iraqi to Lebanese border shortly after Lebanon War panel slams Olmert government

April 30, 2007, 10:28 PM (GMT+02:00)


Syrian troops on the move


DEBKAfile’s military sources say this move diverts an infantry brigade from the Iraqi border for beefing up the Syrian 14th Commando Division deployed opposite Golan and the sensitive Mt. Hermon- Shabaa Farms sector where the Lebanese, Syrian and Israeli borders converge. A source in Israel’s northern command says the stationing of an infantry brigade on the forward line with Israel stiffens Syrian defenses and frees Syrian command units for operational duties.

A careful watch will be kept on these movements in the coming days to ascertain whether Syrian president Bashar Assad is engaging in mere muscle flexing, or means to capitalize on the Israeli government’s weakness for a military move on the Golan Heights.
....................................................benny

April 30, 2007
Why You Care What Finland Does
By Michael G. Mickey
4-30-07

According to an EU Observer article, Finland is holding off on applying for NATO membership until the new EU treaty clarifies if there will be any new EU-level defense deal.

Remember all the times when I have drawn attention to the fact that the revived Roman empire of Bible prophecy is going to have at its disposal a mighty military in the prophetic future and how that could impact the balance of world power? For Finland to be taking the position it presently is publicly, there MUST be at least something going on that those of us watching for fulfillment of Bible prophecy can draw from it of interest!

Finnish prime minister Matti Vanhanen's spokeswoman, Sanna Kangasharju, told the EU Observer the following on Thursday (26 April), as recorded in the article linked above:

Our next foreign and defence policy report will not come out before the EU constitution treaty. We are waiting for some kind of solution on that, so probably before 2009 we will have our new report.
In January many of the EU's long-awaited battle groups,which are rapid reaction forces capable of being deployed to hot spots around the world within ten days to act as peacekeepers, became available, causing many in the United States to wonder what these uniquely European forces could mean in terms of Europe's long-term commitment to NATO. This, in my opinion, should raise further concerns.

Finnish prime minister Matti Vanhanen's spokeswoman quoted earlier also said the following on the topic,
"The general public opinion [in Finland] would be for a European security solution instead of NATO. But the politicians don't hold out much hope for this - the EU is not a military alliance and any security guarantees given by the EU states are not such as could offer real defence."
Through Vanhanen's spokeswoman, we see that there is a desire, at least in Finland, for the European Union to leave its present military arrangements behind and form a military force that would uniquely serve its purposes, which would further isolate the United States in a world that is growing more and more hostile to it all the time.

As I demonstrated in yesterday's commentary, some leaders in Europe believe the European Union's major power brokers are secretly plotting to create a European super-state.

Today's topic, in my opinion, shows that some may have cause to think the EU super-state may be coming and are waiting for the bloc to make clear what it plans to do militarily before committing any of its military resources to an organization that may be on its way out, particularly as Russia is suggesting that a missile defense system the United States is leading the way in getting deployed in Europe could ignite another Cold War between Russia and the West.

All of the above is why you care what Finland does in the years ahead concerning its military alignment, assuming for a moment we are even here that long.

Just a few nights ago, John Funk, a frequent contributing writer for RaptureAlert.com, and I were discussing a common observation we've been making recently - a sense of rapidly increasing spiritual darkness in the world around us that is seemingly growing in power by leaps and bounds of late. We are in agreement that a darkness that few are seeing and even less seem to actually care enough about to sound the alert that Jesus Christ is coming soon is in the air. I know many of you who will read this know exactly what I'm talking about.

Bearing that in mind, all I can say in closing is this: Christians, wrap your arms around the foot of the cross and hold on for dear life! Soon, I believe with all my heart, Jesus Christ is going to call us home that all the things waiting in the wings can explode onto the world stage, starting the seven-year countdown to the visibile, physical, bodily return of our Lord and Savior to the earth.

Even so, come Lord Jesus!

Posted by Michael G. Mickey at 4:40 PM
.............................................benny

Mass military maneuvers foresee Syrian attack

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Printer-friendly version By Stan Goodenough
April 29, 2007

The Israel Defense Forces, which although one of the world’s top battle-tested armies was bested by the Lebanese Hizb’allah terror group 10 months ago, is undergoing intensive drills in anticipation of a surprise Syrian attack on the Golan Heights.

Last Thursday saw thousands of IDF troops and hundreds of tanks deployed for war games in the Judean wilderness, in what observers called one of the largest training exercises carried out in a number of years.

Security analysts in Israel believe Syrian dictator Bashar el-Assad to be a weak leader who could initiate a surprise grab of the Golan Heights in an effort to earn esteem in the eyes of his people.

Assad is believed to have been wowed by Hizb’allah’s successful use of rocket fire to drive fear into the hearts of millions of Israelis and deal heavy blows to the Israeli economy.

Since last summer, heads of Israel’s various intelligence agencies have reported Syria gearing up for war, though most assessments agree the process is defensive rather than offensive.

Nonetheless, Israel’s war scenarios include the use of elite Syrian troops backed by advanced Russian-made tanks and ballistic surface-to-surface missiles capable of hitting any Israeli center.

While IDF officials interviewed about last week’s mass military maneuvers said any Syrian strike was likely to be conventional, Damascus is known to possess non-conventional weapons, including VX gas warheads for its SCUD missiles.

US Secretary of State Robert Gates recently cautioned Israel that the situation with Syria was increasingly volatile and could explode if not handled carefully.

..........................................benny

Dome of the Rock: Target of Muslim Extremists?
by Emanuel A. Winston

Collapsing the Dome and Al-Aksa may trigger a war.


Concern has been raised in Israel that Islamic terrorists such as Hamas or Al-Qaeda may target the Muslim shrine of the Dome of the Rock or Al-Aksa Mosque, both of which sit atop the site of the Jewish Temple Mount in Jerusalem.


The Islamic terrorists would then blame Israel to arouse Muslim anger, in order to trigger a war in the Middle East. The subsequent loss of Muslim lives is of little concern to them. On the contrary, they even think this is the best way to get their fellow Muslims into their paradise, by making them shuhada (plural of shahid, martyr for Islam). We have already seen Shiite and Sunni Muslims target each others' mosques for demolition, and that both use their so-called "shrines" for the storage of weapons, explosives and safe houses for their terrorists. They do, however, expect Americans and Israelis to respect the self-proclaimed sanctity of their mosques and shrines.


Suspicions were raised in light of the frenzied reaction to Israel repairing a crumbling, earthquake-damaged earthen ramp that leads up to the site of the Temple Mount. Muslim leaders tried to assert that the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aksa Mosque were endangered by these repair measures - a rather ridiculous claim. It was also thought that Muslim terrorists were planning to collapse the shaky ramp on top of Jewish worshipers at the Western Wall. They may have intended to use this excuse to permanently close the Mughrabi Gate (the only gate up to the Mount open to non-Muslims) to the Temple Mount so no infidels (non-Muslims) could enter.


In this light, it is clear why Muslim leaders always opposed any infrastructure improvements in the area. With an anarchist agenda, they want people to get hurt and
It is clear why Muslim leaders always opposed any infrastructure improvements in the area.
are happy to help the process along if it benefits their religious war against the Jews, Christians and all other non-Muslim infidels whom they must kill.


In fact, the Muslim Wakf (religious administrative authority) has been carrying out secret excavations under the Temple Mount, to invent and reinforce their own religious claims while disposing of all Jewish artifacts - some from the First and Second Temple periods.


Israeli engineers warned the Wakf that they were weakening the supporting walls of the Temple Mount, including those of the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aksa Mosque. A dangerous bulge was spotted on a major retaining wall of the Temple Mount. Yet, the Wakf has continued to undermine the foundations until today.


A moderately small earthquake in February 11, 2004, coupled with the effects of a major snowfall, damaged the Mughrabi Gate ramp leading up to the Temple Mount. Even a small earthquake could completely collapse the ancient stone walls. Many earthquakes have hit this region, which lies on a major fault along the Jordan River, called the Dead Sea Rift, running the length of Israel and creating a series of active faults throughout the country. The area underlying the entire region is a series of major and minor faults under constant pressure to slip or crack, producing major and minor temblors. (If you wish to explore this further, then pull up the words "earthquake," "2004," "damage to Mughrabi ramp to Temple Mount" on Google.)


Even a small temblor could collapse the wall of Solomon’s Temple Mount now that the Muslim Wakf has dug out the core of the Mount. It is merely an event waiting to happen. The other possibility is that Muslim Arab terrorists might be preparing to place high explosives on the remaining supports that hold up the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aksa Mosque.


Time will tell.
......................................benny ...P.S. ..."Even a small earthquake could completely collapse the ancient stone walls. Many earthquakes have hit this region, which lies on a major fault along the Jordan River, called the Dead Sea Rift, running the length of Israel "........Ezekial38;19....For in My jealousy and in the fire of My wrath I have spoken: Surely in that day there shall be a great earthquake in the land of Israel, so that the fish of the sea, the birds of the heavens,the beasts of the field, all creeping things that creep on the earth, and all men who are on the face of the earth shall shake at My presence. The mountains shall be thrown down, the steep places shall fall,and every wall shall fall to the ground.....Scriptures indicate that the Ezekial 38 war may happen before Daniel's 70th week begins.......If this is true, and it sure does look like that it is, based on current developing events....The dome of the rock will be destroyed by the Lord.......and when Daniel's 70th week begins, the Jews will build the third temple on the temple mount.

JPost.com » Israel » Article


May. 2, 2007 23:11 | Updated May. 2, 2007 23:44
Meridor offers reassurances to Syria
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar


Faced with what he called the biggest military buildup by Syria along its border with Israel since the 1973 Middle East war, Israel's ambassador to the US said Wednesday his country is privately reassuring its Arab neighbor it is not seeking a confrontation.

"We use every effort to send messages to Syria we have no offensive intention," the envoy, Sallai Meridor.

The ambassador dwelled on what he called a major buildup of Syrian missiles that could reach any part of Israel "and create major damage" and, "a preparedness" along the border "that we have not seen since 1973."

Meridor said Russia was contributing to Syria's arsenal by providing the country with missiles.

Steering clear of the political turmoil at home, which he said was "not appropriate" for him to discuss publicly, Meridor nonetheless said Israel would continue "to do everything humanly possible to enhance peace" opportunities with the Palestinians.

"We are trying to create opportunities for the Palestinians to make peace," he said.

Offering massive evacuation of Jewish settlers on the West Bank and other concessions, Meridor said at a luncheon sponsored by The Israel Project, a private group: "I do not know a country in the world which would risk as much" for peace.
"We are not going to give up the slightest opportunity to move forward," Meridor said.

However, he gave no indication Israel would alter its policy of not dealing with Hamas, which plays a dominant role in the Palestinian government and is considered a terror group by the United States and Israel.


.............................................benny

Despite Syrian military border build-up, Israel has no plans to attack but stands ready to ward off a surprise Syrian strike

May 3, 2007, 8:50 AM (GMT+02:00)

Reporting that this message had been relayed from Jerusalem to Damascus, Israeli Ambassador to US Salai Meridor said in Washington Wednesday night that Syria has amassed on Israel’s borders strength and missiles capable of reaching every part of the country. On April 30, DEBKAfile reported exclusively that Bashar Assad had shifted units from the Iraqi to the Lebanese border shortly after the Winograd panel had slammed the Olmert government for its mishandling of the Lebanon War. Our military sources specified that an infantry brigade had been relocated from the Iraqi border to beef up the Syrian 14th Commando Division deployed opposite Golan and the sensitive Mt. Hermon- Shabaa Farms sector where the Lebanese, Syrian and Israeli borders converge. A source in Israel’s northern command says the stationing of an infantry brigade on the forward line with Israel stiffens Syrian defenses and frees up Syrian command units for operational duties.

A careful watch is trained on these movements to ascertain whether Assad is engaging in mere muscle flexing, or trying to capitalize on the Israeli government’s weakness for a military move on the Golan Heights.
................................................benny

Looks like we could possibly see this: Assad thinks the Israeli leaders are weak and cant beat Hizballuh so Syria should have no problem attacking and regaining the golans....Israels presumed weakness spurs this attack...on the other side of the golan, Israels leader is afraid of being ran out of office in the near future. Why? because he did not respond with enough force vs. hizbullah. He would see an attack by Syria as a chance to show he is tuff, remove the taste of defeat and strike hard at damascus....causing it to be a ruinous heap. May 14th is the date Israel became a nation again. Will syria attack on that date? nations do not move troops to borders just for the fun of it. We have loaded up the gulf with our warships, syria has loaded the border with military equipment. Soon we will have peace or war and those dont sound like peace drums they are beating over there.....

That's what I've always wondered would happen.

May 3, 2007
The peace covenant of the Sanhedrin
by Michael G. Mickey
(5-3-07)

When the Sanhedrin reformed recently after a long absence from among the Jewish people, it shocked many watching for the return of Jesus Christ to occur. Now there's even more to be shocked about, upon examining a news article entitled "The Sanhedrin’s peace initiative."

Just below the title of the article, the following is written:

Jewish group devoted to rebuilding Temple in Jerusalem to send letters to all world leaders, including Arab ones, inviting them to take part in project, attend conference on Temple Mount in Israel
A Middle East peace conference being held on God's holy hill under the guidance of the Sanhedrin with numerous world leaders in attendance, should it come to pass, would be, quite possibly, the grandest stage of all for a leader of Roman descent to come forth with a plan that would lead to peace being confirmed in the Middle East for seven years, in fulfillment of Daniel 9:26-27. Wow! Again, WOW!

The article states the following, in part (emphasis added mine):
In recent days, the group members have drafted a letter that will be translated into 70 languages and sent to all government institutions in the world, including “the sons of Esau and Ishmael” who do not hold diplomatic ties with Israel.

In the letter, the rabbis of the self-proclaimed Sanhedrin warn that the world is nearing a catastrophe, and write that the only way to bring peace among nations, states, and religions is by building a house for God, where Jews will worship, pray and offer up sacrifice, according to the vision of the prophets.

The rabbis also call on the non-Jews to help the people of Israel fulfill their destiny and build the Temple, in order to prevent bloodshed across the globe.
Am I highly skeptical that world leaders will take the Sanhedrin up on their offer? Certainly. We are talking about a situation that would require the Muslim world to hand over a parcel of land on the Temple Mount that the Jewish people might resume their religious practices in a Holy Temple they would build soon afterward to honor a God other than Allah! That is NEVER going to happen, right?

But there's something I always remind myself of concerning information of this nature when it comes across my desk: We're not living in just any time in mankind's history; we're living in the END TIMES! Because that is true and we know that the impossible, not to mention the inconceivable, is going to take place in the troubled Middle East, whether it takes place now or decades from now, we shouldn't take anything we hear for granted! To do so could, quite possibly, lead to us being caught sleeping at the return of our Lord and we certainly don't want that!

We know for a fact, as detailed in the Word of God, that a Holy Temple is going to be standing and in full operation by the midpoint of the Tribulation Period that the one who is going to bring peace to the Middle East - the prophesied Antichrist - may commit the abomination of desolation revealing his true nature to a world that will have, up to that point at least, loved everything about him in all likelihood. For a Holy Temple to be standing on the Temple Mount at that point, it seems logical to presume that something very dramatic and totally unexpected is going to have to take place.

Could it be that the trigger event that will lead to the advent of Antichrist may be in the works right now, being undertaken by the Sanhedrin? I don't know but I'm going to be watching developments on that front very closely.

Only God knows how it's all going to play out, but it sure is fun watching, huh?

Posted by Michael G. Mickey at 4:18 PM
...............................................benny

http://www.hallindsey.org/ .......video.............................................................benny

Warships, Warships Everywhere, and Many a Bomb to Drop

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/klare1.html

Persian Gulf Update

Looking down from the captain's deck some six stories high, the flight deck of the USS Nimitz is an impressive sight indeed: 80 sleek warplanes armed with bombs and missiles are poised for takeoff at any minute, day or night. The sight of these planes coming and going from that 1,100-foot-long flight deck is almost beyond description. I can attest to this, having sailed on the Nimitz 25 years ago as a reporter for Mother Jones magazine.

Today, the Nimitz is rapidly approaching the Persian Gulf, where it will join two other U.S. aircraft carriers and the French carrier Charles De Gaulle in the largest concentration of naval firepower in the region since the launching of the U.S. invasion of Iraq four years ago.

Why this concentration now? Officially, the Nimitz is on its way to the Gulf to replace the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, which is due to return to the United States for crew leave and ship maintenance after months on station. But the U.S. Central Command (Centcom), which exercises command authority over all U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf area, refuses to say when the Eisenhower will actually depart – or even when the Nimitz will arrive.

For a time, at least, the United States will have three carrier battle groups in the region. The USS John C. Stennis is the third. Each carrier is accompanied by a small flotilla of cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and support vessels, many equipped with Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles (TLAMs). Minimally, this gives modern meaning to the classic imperial term "gunboat diplomacy," which makes it all the stranger that the deployment of the Nimitz is covered in our media, if at all, as the most minor of news stories. And when the Nimitz sailed off into the Pacific last month on its way to the Gulf, it simply disappeared off media radar screens like some classic "lost patrol."

Rest assured, unlike us, the Iranians have noticed. After all, with the arrival of the Nimitz battle group, the Bush administration will be – for an unknown period of time – in an optimal position to strike Iran with a punishing array of bombs and missiles should the President decide to carry out his oft-repeated threat to eliminate Iran's nuclear program through military action. "All options," as the administration loves to say, remain ominously "on the table."

Meanwhile, negotiations to resolve the impasse with Iran over its pursuit of uranium-enrichment technology – a possible first step to the manufacture of nuclear weapons – continue at the United Nations in New York and in various European capitals. So far, the Iranians have refused to give any ground, claiming that their activities are intended for peaceful uses only and so are permitted under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), of which it is a signatory. The United States has made vague promises of improved relations if and when Iran terminates its nuclear program, but the full burden of making initial concessions falls on Tehran.

Just this weekend, a conference in Egypt, called by Iraqi officials to explore regional approaches to stability in the region (with Iranian officials expected to be in attendance), was being viewed in Washington as yet another opportunity to pressure Tehran to be more submissive to the West's demands on a wide range of issues, including Iranian support for Shiite militias in Iraq.

President Bush keeps insisting that he would like to see these "diplomatic" endeavors – as he describes them – succeed, but he has yet to bring up a single proposal or incentive that might offer any realistic prospect of eliciting a positive Iranian response.

And so, knowing that his "diplomatic" efforts are almost certain to fail, Bush may simply be waiting for the day when he can announce to the American people that he has "tried everything"; that "his patience has run out"; and that he can "no longer risk the security of the American people" by "indulging in further fruitless negotiations," thereby allowing the Iranians "to proceed farther down the path of nuclear bomb-making," and so has taken the perilous but necessary step of ordering American forces to conduct air and missile strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. At that point, the 80 planes aboard the Nimitz – and those on the Eisenhower and the Stennis as well – will be on their way to targets in Iran, along with hundreds of TLAMs and a host of other weapons now being assembled in the Gulf.

May 4, 2007

Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and author of Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum.

.............................................benny

An interesting new possibility...
Want Middle East Stability? Move UN to Iraq (April 9, 2007) - “Get the U.S. out of the U.N.!,” a sign near Gettysburg shouts. “The United Nations sabotages America’s security,” author Eric Shawn declared in his book The U.N. Exposed. Iranian spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham told reporters that the U.N. “must be relocated from the U.S.” And a few days after Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez’s rant before a U.N. audience, a New York Daily News editorial encouraged Chavez to “take the atrophied, self-abasing remains of a global idea 2,100 miles to Caracas!” The idea of moving U.N. headquarters seems to resonate with many—those who believe that the U.S. is being manipulated by anti-American and anti-Israeli elements within the U.N., as well as those who feel that the U.S. is doing the manipulation. For Americans, it would of course mean the loss of a global status symbol—but it would also mean the reacquisition of valuable New York real estate, fewer cases of diplomatic immunity for the legal systems, and perhaps a reduction of anti-American sentiment worldwide. Where should it go? Try Iraq. While moving the U.N. headquarters to Venezuela or Iran is probably not wise, moving it to Iraq might be a strategic coup. There is even a ready-made location for it—Saddam Hussein’s 600-room palace and compound constructed over the remains of the ancient city of Babylon. Americans might even consider footing the bill for the relocation. Think about it. If the U.S. should be forced to abruptly withdraw from Iraq, a peacekeeping force—something similar to the International Security Assistance Force now in Afghanistan—would probably be deployed. Yet peacekeeping forces under temporary mandates, with all the associated communications problems, functional restrictions, and managerial arguments that so often spring from ego or nationalist pride, generally don’t work. They would be even less viable in a region like Iraq, where the threat of kidnapping and indescribable torture would keep many countries from participating. Relocating U.N. headquarters to Iraq, however, might actually be a reasonable alternative. Former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan agreed with member states’ demands for the U.S. to leave Iraq. Yet he admitted that any force reductions would have to be planned so as not to lead to greater violence and instability. Moving the U.N. to Iraq might be the only method of ensuring that a departure of U.S. forces would not leave the country and the region in chaos. Considering the severe cutbacks in U.N. personnel within Iraq following the 2004 truck bombing of its Baghdad compound, the idea might seem ridiculous; but the mission of the U.N. is to promote and preserve peace. In order to maintain its fledgling democracy, Iraq needs international commitment, an inducement to stop factional violence, and a stable form of income not subject to the terrorists’ reprisals. It is hard to imagine a more visible and binding form of commitment than a change of such magnitude. The prestige factor alone might guarantee stability. Middle East leaders may seize upon the move as recognition of the region’s importance, thus stimulating their sense of self- and nationalist esteem while gaining further incentive for dealing with internecine conflict. more... | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom |

-Phillip

JPost.com » Middle East » Article


May. 5, 2007 19:46 | Updated May. 5, 2007 20:56
'Hizbullah is ready for another war against Israel'
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar


Talkbacks for this article: 14

"Hizbullah has rebuilt its itself and is prepared for another Israeli strike," Naim Kassem, the deputy secretary general of the Iranian-backed terror organization told Al Jazeera TV on Saturday.

"We have completed the groundwork necessary and we have new battle plans," Kassem added.

Kassem said that Hizbullah was not expecting another round of fighting against Israel but that the organization was preparing itself nevertheless.

Kassem also denied that his organization paid
off or received intelligence reports from former MK Azmi Bishara during the Second Lebanon War. He said that Israeli government was trying to divert attention from its own failures in the war, by placing blame on Bishara.

A high ranking Lebanese official said that Hizbullah has been rearming itself at an accelerated pace. "All that Hizbullah had achieved in six years, since Israel withdrew from Southern Lebanon, it has now managed to gain in only six months," the official was quoted by Army Radio as saying, adding that "Hizbullah renewed its rocket arsenal and built new concrete bunkers north of the Litany River and in the Eastern border of Lebanon."

UN resolution 1701, passed at the end of fighting last August, called on Hizbullah to completely cease rearming.

IDF reserve soldiers Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser, whose unconditional release was also demanded by resolution 1701, are still held by Hizbullah.

Sheera Claire Frenkel contributed to this report.


...........................................benny

JPost.com » Israel » Article


May. 7, 2007 12:40
Peretz: Israeli restraint won't continue forever
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar

Defense Minister Amir Peretz said on Monday that Israel was making every effort to prevent escalation in the Gaza Strip, but warned terror groups not to delude themselves into believing that Israel's restraint would continue forever.

Speaking at a ceremony recognizing companies that give special benefits to employees serving int he reserves, Peretz declared that the obligation to protect Israeli citizens was inarguable.

He also emphasized that it was important to weigh the diplomatic messages coming from Syria.


..........................................benny

Hezbollah: Rockets fired into Israel directed by Iran
Militia deputy chief says 'all policies and activities' coordinated with Tehran

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 7, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Aaron Klein
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


JERUSALEM – All of Hezbollah's policies and activities are coordinated with the leadership of Iran, including the firing of rockets into Israeli population centers for which direct Iranian approval is required, said a senior Hezbollah official in a rare admission.

"Even when it comes to firing rockets on Israeli civilians, when they [Israel] bombed the civilians on our side, even that decision requires an in-principle permission from [the ruling jurisprudent]," said Sheikh Naim Qassem, the deputy chief of Hezbollah, in an Arabic language interview translated yesterday by the Information and Terrorism Center at Israel's Center for Special Studies.

(Story continues below)


According to the Center, "the ruling jurisprudent," or "al-wali al-faqih" in Arabic, is the title of Supreme Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

In the interview, given last month to the Al-Kawthar, Iranian Arabic-language TV channel, Qassem says Khamenei's authority is crucial for all Hezbollah operations:

"Hezbollah relied and relies still in its Islamic religious position, which has to do with its activity in general and its jihadist activity in particular, on the decision of (Khamenei). The ruling jurisprudent is the one who allows and the one who prohibits."

He said Khamenei approves acts suicide terror.

"We ask, receive answers, and then apply [them]. This is even true for acts of suicide for the sake of Allah – no one may kill himself without a jurisprudent permission (from Khamenei)."

During Israel's war in Lebanon last summer, Hezbollah fired over 3,000 rockets into Israeli civilian population centers, killing 43 civilians and injuring thousands. There were multiple reports, denied by Hezbollah, of Iranian officers operating in Lebanon to aid the militia.

Qassem's statements come as Israeli defense officials told WND this weekend Hezbollah has replenished its rocket arsenal and is stronger now than before last summer's war. According to the officials, Hezbollah, aided by Iran, is preparing for another conflict with the Jewish state.

In an interview Saturday with Al Jazeera, Hezbollah's Qassem admitted his group rebuilt its militia and is ready for war. He claimed Israel will attack first.

"We have new military plans. We have completed our ground work in preparing our men, as well as our land, so that we would be ready if the Israeli government thought one day (of launching an attack)," said Qassem.

.........................................benny

Non-Political Israeli Officials Take Charge of Urgent Policy Business with Washington

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report and DEBKA-Net-Weekly 291

May 7, 2007, 2:14 PM (GMT+02:00)





To subscribe to DEBKA-Net-Weekly click HERE .

DEBKAfile’s US sources reveal that, this week, Israeli military and intelligence circles informed their opposite numbers in Washington that there is no vacuum in the management of vital issues and it is ongoing despite the crisis tying the hands of Israeli government leaders, prime minister Ehud Olmert, defense minister Amir Peretz and foreign minister Tzipi Livni, in the aftermath of a critical war report.

This was the first confirmation by senior Bush administration sources that they are working with non-political Israeli circles on urgent and critical affairs and leaving the Olmert government outside policy-making in Washington.

Those Israeli circles have voiced their deep concern over the Bush administration’s inclination to meet Iran halfway on the nuclear question. DEBKAfile’s sources reveal that Washington is considering a compromise that will let Iran continue uranium enrichment against guarantees never to produce weapons-grade fuel or develop a nuclear weapon.

Israel military and intelligence experts have warned the administration that Iran is up to its old tricks of handing out promises it has no intention of keeping. Since this warning appears to be falling on deaf ears, they have asked for a quick and clear decision on the Iranian question. They fear that if it is delayed, the US withdrawal from Iraq in late summer of this year will catch Israel – and the rest of the Middle East – in the grip of two major crises: the dispute with Iran will either be settled or flare, American troops will be in the process of quitting Iraq - and both events may be exploited by Syria, Hizballah, Hamas and Jihad Islami for offensive operations against Israel.

Israel will then face a multiple threat without due preparation.

The US is therefore asked to reach a decision on Iran in the next couple of months before the onset of its pullout from Iraq.

Washington’s Israeli contacts did not spell out the reaction they planned to a US-Iranian deal entailing concessions to Tehran on the nuclear question, perhaps because no one in Jerusalem is in a fit state for a balanced decision. But they inferred that the Israeli military option against Iran was not off the table.

DEBKAfile learns that US Vice President Dick Cheney will shortly be visiting Saudi Arabia and Jordan to discuss two main subjects:

1. The volume and type of US military assistance for the two kingdom to help them absorb the buffeting from the US exit from Iraq and stand up to any military threat from Iran.

2. To pick up the pieces of the disappointing foreign policy tactic led by US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, which hinged on the formation of a moderate American-Arab axis for reining in Iran to be led and brokered by Saudi Arabia.

On March 2, 2007, DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Middle East experts reported that Rice’s policy was built on shifting sands. Here are some excerpts from the article

Washington Can Trust Saudi Mediation – But Only for the Short Term

Saudi Arabia’s performance as diplomatic middleman tends to peak when oil revenues are high. Abdullah’s Middle East peace plan finally debuted in 2001 and was adopted with revisions by the 2002 Beirut Arab summit. It then gathered dust for five years. But then, when oil prices soared and the royal coffers overflowed with oil revenues, Abdullah swung into action against the rising threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its contributions to the vicious violence in Iraq, Lebanese instability and Syrian intransigence.

Saudi initiatives may have conveyed the impression of dramatic audacity. In practice, they boiled down to handling the Iranian threat by the classical methods favored by Saudi rulers of dialogue and engagement, fueled by oceans of petrodollars to reward those in tune with their goals.

In the short term, Riyadh’s mediation efforts may work, but their long-term sustainability is problematic. There is no guarantee that oil prices will stay as high as they have been in the last two years; and Saudi diplomacy tends to fade away when oil prices sink. End of quote from DEBKA-Net-Weekly

DEBKAfile adds: The outcome of the Rice initiative was unfortunate; instead of the promised moderate Arab bloc allied with Washington, the Saudis have moved over and joined the radical camp of Iran, Syria and the Palestinian Hamas. Riyadh maintains in its defense that this alignment will wean Syrian president Bashar Assad and Hamas’ hardline Khaled Meshaal from their ties with Tehran. That is something Cheney will have to sort out.

Jerusalem is too engrossed in political antics for keeping Olmert and Peretz afloat in the face of popular disaffection to heed the course of events among Israel’s neighbors. Ignorant of those events, Olmert and Peretz still cling to the illusory windows of opportunity for peace which they believed had opened up in Damascus and Riyadh at the last Arab summit in late March.

For this reason, military and intelligence officials have taken matters in their own hands to make sure that the most pressing issues with Washington were attended to without further delay.

......................................benny

May 7, 2007
Turkey's less than cozy with Sarkozy
by Michael G. Mickey
(5-7-07)

Nicholas Sarkozy has been elected President of France, which an EUBusiness.com article indicates the Turkish press is wary about. Two of Turkey's dominant newspapers bore the following headlines in the aftermath of his election:


"Alas! It is Sarko" (The Aksam Daily)
"Sarkozy the new obstacle on the path towards EU" (Milliyet newspaper)
Why should Christians pay any attention to the role the newly-elected French President may have in Turkey's EU bid? Because, as we look at the nations expected to participate in the Gog-Magog attack described in Ezekiel 38,39 pictures the following nations aligned against Israel:

Gog - Most agree this is a reference to Russia.
Meshech - Most associate this with modern day Turkey, ancient Anatolia, but some say it refers to the Moscow area.
Tubal - Most associate this with modern day Turkey, ancient Anatolia.
Persia - modern Iran
Ethiopia
Libya
Gomer - eastern Europe or Turkey
Togarmah - southeastern Europe or Turkey
What does this demonstrate to us, in my opinion? A very strong likelihood that Turkey's European Union bid, which has been on shaky ground from the outset, may never bear fruit and, even if it does, won't, in all likelihood, stand for any significant period of time that Ezekiel's prophecy may be literally fulfilled. That prophecy clearly, as demonstrated above, shows Turkey acting in allegiance to its Arab/Muslim brothers instead of the West.

Sarkozy's win comes little over a week since the European Union warned the Turkish army not to "interfere in the country's democratic process amid a dispute over the ruling party's Islamist-rooted candidate to be Turkey's next president" as documented in an EUBusiness.com article.

In closing, the article which indicates the Turkish press is less than cozy with the idea of Sarkozy holding the reins of power in France, the following is written:
In his election campaign which won him 53 percent of the vote in Sunday's polls, Sarkozy often spoke out against Turkey's ambitions to become an EU member, arguing that Ankara "has no place" inside the bloc.

The popular Vatan daily said Sarkozy's election would prove a "turning point" in Turkey's troubled ties with the European Union.

"If he implements what he has so far said, Turkish-EU ties will be dragged into a tense adventure. Such a tense situation has the potential to affect Turkish-French ties," it said.
As we look at Bible prophecy, it would seem that Turkish-EU ties are going to be dragged into far more than a tense adventure.

It would seem that a break-up of dramatic proportions lies ahead.

Posted by Michael G. Mickey at 6:53 AM
..............................................benny

Israel draws battle lines around nuclear monopoly
By Dan Williams Reuters - Sunday, May 6 01:28 pmJERUSALEM (Reuters) - When Egypt and Syria launched a surprise joint offensive in 1973, many Israelis braced for a fight to the finish.

(Advertisement)
But historians now agree that, for all their rhetoric about destroying the Jewish state, the attacking Arabs -- who were eventually repelled -- only intended to recapture the Sinai peninsula and Golan Heights, lands lost in a previous war.

One reason posited for the restraint was belief in Cairo and Damascus that Israel could use atomic weapons if fighting spilled over from occupied territory and into home turf.

For Israelis, it served as endorsement for preserving an exclusive, last-ditch nuclear defence. Today, this helps explain Israel's agitation over the prospect of arch-foe Iran busting up the monopoly with a nuclear programme of its own.

Privately, Israeli officials acknowledge the immediate risk they see is not in an exchange of nuclear missiles with Iran, but in an increased chance of "classic" regional wars launched in the belief that Tehran has blunted Israel's strategic edge.

"In 1973, Israel's nuclear option transformed what could have been an existential war into a contained conflict," said Israeli military historian Michael Oren.

"A nuclear-armed Iran would risk transforming a contained conflict into a regional and global conflict," he said.

While Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons, its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has fuelled war fears by urging Israel's elimination and questioning whether the Holocaust happened.

Experts note that even if Iran gets the bomb, its primary goal may be to ward off any U.S.-led attack. It would also be many years away from achieving parity with an advanced Israeli arsenal believed to include between 80 and 200 atomic warheads.

But nuclear strategizing begins with the binary distinction between countries that do and don't possess the ultimate weapon of mass destruction. One bomb is enough to join this "club", and membership confers enormous latitude in non-nuclear conflicts.

"Say that tomorrow Iran gets nuclear weapons, and issues the following ultimatum on Israel: Withdraw from the (Palestinian) West Bank or we will fire conventional missiles at you. Do we get into that sort of fight?" said one senior Israeli official with knowledge of nuclear affairs.

"The potential for extortion and major regional instability is mind-boggling," the official said.

NEIGHBOURHOOD BULLY?

While supporting Western diplomatic pressure on Tehran, Israel has made clear it considers preemptive strikes -- such as its bombing in 1981 of Iraq's main nuclear reactor -- as a legitimate last resort for curbing Iranian atomic ambitions.

Such unilateralism by Israel has long been denounced by its neighbours as a bullying byproduct of nuclear monopoly, though Israel does not confirm having weapons of mass destruction under an "ambiguity" policy billed as avoiding needless provocations.

Some Middle East states cited Israel's arsenal in justifying their own arms races, or opted for indirect confrontation by cultivating anti-Israel proxies like Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian armed factions -- hardly recipes for stability.

"There is just one country with WMDs in the Middle East -- Israel. And in that case, perhaps in the near future, other countries will try -- and it is their right -- to protect themselves against such weapons," Arab League chief Amr Moussa, who has proposed a nuclear-free region, said in 2004.

Mustafa Alani, an analyst at the Gulf Research Centre in Dubai, said this preoccupation has been eclipsed, among Sunni Arabs at least, by fears over Shi'ite Iran's ascendancy.

"The rationality of their leadership is in question," Alani said. "We don't want to go back to the day when the Shah of Iran declared himself the policeman of the region."

Alani said most Arabs have accepted, if grudgingly, Israel's rationale that its nuclear option is a defensive "last resort".

"Israel's existence is no longer in question," he said, pointing to Israeli-Arab peace initiatives. "You can pressurise Israel to a certain point, but not to the point of destruction."

Many Israelis attribute their slow rapprochement with the Arab world to their country's military superiority, proven in past wars, rather than any new ethos of coexistence.

Israeli mistrust will likely grow, given several Arab states' declarations they may pursue civilian nuclear programmes.

There is also concern in Israel over Islamist militants that challenge moderate leaderships in Arab states -- especially Hezbollah, which, some analysts speculate, could one day be used by Iran to deploy tactical nuclear devices on Israel's border.

That being the case, Israel is in no mood to give up its nuclear monopoly, and drive to see it preserved, any time soon.

"Our policies have served us well so far, and there is no reason to embrace change," the Israeli official said.

.........................................benny

JPost.com » Israel » Article


May. 8, 2007 0:27 | Updated May. 8, 2007 3:05
UN Chief in Syria to 'Post': Assad not preparing for war
By YAAKOV KATZ AND SHEERA CLAIRE FRENKEL
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar


While Syria is repairing its military positions along the border with Israel, its army has not beefed up its forces on the Golan Heights, Austrian Maj.-Gen. Wolfgang Jilke, commander of the UN force deployed along the border, has told The Jerusalem Post in an exclusive interview.

Jilke, commander of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) responsible for maintaining the cease-fire on the Syrian-Israeli border, dismissed Israeli claims of an unprecedented military buildup within Syria.

"Within my area of responsibility, there is no military buildup," Jilke told the Post in his first interview since taking up the post in February. "From my point of view there is nothing on level of strategic interest that could or would lead to concern [for Israel]."

Established in 1974 following the Yom Kippur War, UNDOF troops conduct patrols and man outposts along an 80-kilometer section of the border.

It maintains an area of separation where no other military forces are permitted. The force also maintains "areas of limitation" - some running 35 kilometers into Israel and Syria - where the countries are allowed to deploy agreed-upon numbers of troops and weaponry.

Jilke said Syria was repairing trenches and positions along the border with Israel, but that within the areas of limitation, Syria had only amassed 40 percent of the permitted forces. There was more military activity on the Israeli side of the border, he said.

"We are much below the allowed figures," Jilke said. "There is a peaceful atmosphere and there is no intention to prepare for war."

Israeli defense officials rejected Jilke's assessment and pointed to what they called an unprecedented military buildup by the Syrian military that included exercises, the procurement of advanced weaponry such as Russian anti-aircraft systems and missile ships, as well as the movement of rockets and missiles within range of Israel.

Earlier this week, Ambassador to the US Sallai Meridor said Syria had missiles aimed at every part of Israel, and that its forces were deploying near the Golan Heights in numbers "that we have not seen since 1973."

National Security Council head Ilan Mizrahi told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday that Syria's move to restart the peace process was authentic.

"It's not clear whether they want peace or whether they just want the peace process," he said. "They are still figuring out how it will best serve them, but the call for peace talks themselves is authentic."

Israel has received mixed messages regarding Syrian peace overtures - both from Damascus itself and from Israeli intelligence sources - since Syrian President Bashar Assad purportedly offered to renew peace talks last year.

At an Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee meeting in late December, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni expressed sentiments similar to Mizrahi's when she questioned whether Assad was truly interested in peace, or only in negotiations.

However, Military Intelligence Research Division head Brig.-Gen. Yossi Baidatz told the same panel a day earlier he believed Assad was sincere - contradicting Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who had told them the opposite the previous week and said the Syrian leader should not be taken seriously because his country was preparing for war with Israel.

That type of flip-flopping made it difficult for MKs on the panel to form a firm opinion on the Syrian overtures, said committee MK Matan Vilna'i.

On Monday, Mizrahi also spoke about the trend of Middle Eastern states' acquiring civilian nuclear reactors, saying it could lead to a nuclear weapons program....................There is growing concern that those who talk about civilian nuclear capabilities are thinking about future military capabilities," he said.

Mizrahi also said al-Qaida was establishing a presence in Lebanon so that it could play a greater role in determining that country's political future.

Al-Qaida has also been trying to establish footholds in Sinai and in Jordan, the NSC chairman said. He is also a former deputy Mossad chief.

It was his first meeting in front of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

.....................................................benny

JPost.com » Middle East » Article


May. 8, 2007 0:14 | Updated May. 8, 2007 2:07
Analysis: Assessing Syria's true intentions a tricky task
By YAAKOV KATZ
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar


On Sunday in Kuneitra, just east of the Israeli-Syrian border, Syrian Prime Minister Mohammad Naji Otri opened activities of the first Golan Festival by pouring cement for the foundations of a new war memorial.

During the event, Otri stressed the importance of the memorial and claimed that it demonstrated President Bashar Assad's decision to place the 'liberation of the Golan Heights from Israeli occupation' at the top of Syria's list of priorities.

The Golan Festival did not go unnoticed in Israel. Both the defense establishment and the Foreign Ministry recognize the significance of Assad's decision and fear that the Syrian leader might go as far as to draw Israel into a war in an attempt to redeem the Golan.

Following the Second Lebanon War and the country's poor showing in the fight against Hizbullah, Israeli defense officials have pointed to an increase in chances for war with Syria, referring to the double-tongued Assad as someone who extends his hand in peace while simultaneously threatening the use of force to win back the Golan.

While Damascus has made several clear and repeated overtures to engage the Israelis in peace talks, on the other side of the border a cacophony of assessments and opinions within the Israeli intelligence community has created confusion as to the authenticity of the Syrian proposals.

On Monday, head of the National Security Council Ilan Mizrachi threw his hat into the ring and expressed to the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that he believed the overtures were authentic, contradicting an assessment voiced at the same committee by Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who said Assad should not be taken seriously.

Dagan and other defense officials believe that Syria is actually preparing for war with Israel. Add to this the periodic press reports about the Syrian military buildup along the border, as well as the deployment of ballistic rockets pointed towards Israel, and you get a very confused picture of what is really happening on Israel's northern front.

Maj.-Gen. Wolfgang Jilke, commander of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) along the Syrian-Israeli border, told The Jerusalem Post in an exclusive interview that not only was Syria not preparing for war, but that the increase in military activity was far more noticeable on the Israeli side.

While his assessment cannot be taken at face value, it should also not be ignored. Jilke lives in Damascus and is based out of Camp Faouar on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights. He holds daily meetings with Syrian and IDF officials and has a sense of the mood within the Syrian military and political echelons. His motive is quite clear - as the UN commander responsible for maintaining the ceasefire he is intent on preventing war at all costs.

While Jilke might be telling the truth when he claims that there is no Syrian military buildup along the border with Israel, there is no doubt that both countries are escalating the activities of their respective militaries.

Syria, which is in negotiations to purchase advanced anti-aircraft systems from Russia, has moved up its annual military exercises in advance of a possible conflict over the summer. The IDF is conducting massive brigade-level exercises throughout the country aimed at preparing the military for war on all of its fronts - in the Gaza Strip against Hamas, in southern Lebanon against Hizbullah and against Syria.

In Israel, there is a real concern about the prospects of war with Syria. Defense officials are predicting that should another round with Hizbullah erupt, it would not remain isolated to Lebanon. And unlike last summer when it watched from the sidelines, Damascus will be forced to join the fray,



JPost.com » Middle East » Article


May. 8, 2007 0:14 | Updated May. 8, 2007 2:07
Analysis: Assessing Syria's true intentions a tricky task
By YAAKOV KATZ
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar


(Continued from page 1 of 2)
With all of these different assessments it is difficult to predict what the government will do, particularly following the publication last week of the interim Winograd report on the failures of the Second Lebanon War.

The growing consensus in the defense establishment is that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will be extremely careful and hesitant before sending Israel back to war.

While Mizrachi's Knesset announcement could be per Olmert's bidding as part of an effort to lay the ground for a new diplomatic initiative vis a vis the Syrians, it may also be an attempt on Mizrachi's part to prevent war and to urge his boss to answer the Syrian overtures.

In an opinion piece published Monday in the New Republic, Dennis Ross, the former American envoy to the Middle East, questioned Olmert's decision to ignore the Syrian peace offers until now, which he claimed stemmed from American opposition to the talks.

The Bush administration, Ross writes, is opposed to negotiating with Syria since the talks would not be used to make peace but to get back at Lebanon and forestall the international tribunal into the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

Ross, however, asks an important question - one that given the lack of clarity within Israel should be brought to Olmert's attention: "If the Israeli military is right and the prospects for war in the coming year with Syria and Hizbullah are increasing... what exactly would be lost by testing Assad's call for talks?"

........................................................benny

Such fools!! Don't any of you allow the lawless one to deceive you with what is going on in the middle east. The center of God's testimony is not the country of Israel. It's very very sad that Satan has deceived many into "thinking" it is. But just as the devil did to Eve, he is doing to many of you now. The God of Jesus Christ has sent Elijah to prepare the Bride of the Lamb for marriage and all any of you are worried about are the distractions of Satan.
Let us now confess before the Lord Jesus Christ and ask Him for mercy. Afterwards, ask Him for the Holy Spirit and pray in tongues by faith that God Himself may give you power to overcome the devil and no longer be led by temptations but be led by the Holy Spirit of Truth; be baptized in water (fully immersed) in the Name of the Three in Heaven (I John 5:7) and continue daily in the Water of God's Word by believing. Once we receive the three baptisms (Blood, Water, Holy Spirit), God will see we have a heart to obey Him and He will deliver us from the evil one. But if we continue to reject the Truth and desire to believe our own foolish way, then God will send strong delusion that you should believe the lie (II Thessalonians 2:11).

The Case for Strikes Against Iran

May 08, 2007
The Christian Science Monitor
Louis Rene Beres
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0508/p09s01-coop.htm

Iran's latest defiance of the International Atomic Energy Agency says it all: Further diplomacy has no chance of stopping Iran's nuclear program. Neither will UN sanctions have any effect.

Unless there is a timely defensive first strike at pertinent elements of Iran's expanding nuclear infrastructures, it will acquire nuclear weapons. The consequences would be intolerable and unprecedented.

A nuclear Iran would not resemble any other nuclear power. There could be no stable "balance of terror" involving that Islamic Republic. Unlike nuclear threats of the cold war, which were governed by mutual assumptions of rationality and mutual assured destruction, a world with a nuclear-armed Iran could explode at any moment. Although it might still seem reasonable to suggest a postponement of preemption until Iran were more openly nuclear, the collateral costs of any such delay could be unendurable.

Ideally, a diplomatic settlement with Iran could be taken seriously. But in the real world, we must compare the price of prompt preemptive action against Iran with the costs of both: (1) inaction; and (2) delayed military action. To be sure, all available options are apt to be injurious.

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad maintains that his country's nuclear program is intended only to produce electricity, but there is no plausible argument or evidence to support this claim. Meanwhile, Mr. Ahmadinejad's genocidal intentions toward Israel are abundantly clear.

Iran must be stopped immediately from acquiring atomic arms, and this can only be accomplished through "anticipatory self-defense." Precise defensive attacks against Iran's nuclear assets would be effective – and they would be entirely legal.

They would be effective because the US has at its disposal the "McInerney Plan" (after Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, USAF/ret.). It calls, in part, for an immediate strike force to hit Iran's nuclear development facilities, command and control centers, integrated air defenses, selected Air Force and Navy units, and its Shahab-3 missiles, using more than 2,500 aim points. Operationally, the United States Air Force is best configured for such a complex task, but it would not necessarily be impossible for the Israeli Air Force to execute.

It would be lawful because the US and/or Israel would be acting in appropriate self-defense. Both countries could act on behalf of the international community and could do so lawfully without wider approval. The right of self-defense by forestalling an attack has a long and authoritative history in international law. In the 1625 classic "On the Law of War and Peace," Hugo Grotius expresses the enduring principle: "It be lawful to kill him who is preparing to kill…."

Today, some scholars say that Article 51 of the UN Charter overrides that right. But international law is not a suicide pact.

We must act very quickly on Iran. Many critics will argue that the expected consequences of any prompt preemptive strike would be overwhelming, including greatly expanded terror attacks against assorted Western targets, and perhaps regional or even global war. Although such dire prospects should not be dismissed, there is certainly no reason to believe that an American or Israeli preemption would make them more likely. On the contrary, it seems far more plausible that defensive strikes would suppress Iranian adventurism and subversion. Iran's foreign policy is animated by very rigid religious expectations, and these expectations won't diminish if Iran is allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

A more important reservation about preemption involves tactical difficulties. Due to delays, the success of strikes against certain key Iranian targets may already be in doubt. Worse, such strikes would probably entail high civilian casualties because Iran has deliberately placed sensitive military assets amid civilian populations – an international crime called "perfidy."

But further delay will only multiply the number of casualties from any future operation, or – in the worst-case scenario – allow Iran to become fully nuclear.

• Louis Rene Beres, a professor of international law at Purdue University, is the author of many works on nuclear strategy.
__________________
.......................................benny

Bush won't give up military option on Iran: Rice
Tue May 8, 2007 10:33am ET27


DUBAI (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush will keep a military option on the table as he seeks a diplomatic solution to the standoff with Iran over its nuclear plans, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said.

"The American president will not abandon the military option and I believe that we do not want him to do so," Rice said in an interview with Al Arabiya television, part of which was broadcast on Tuesday.

Iran is embroiled in a standoff with the West over its nuclear ambitions. The West suspects it is seeking to develop atomic weapons but Tehran says it wants only to generate electricity so that it can export more of its oil and gas.

Rice in remarks dubbed in Arabic said Bush remained "committed to the diplomatic option. If the world remained strong, there would be a chance for the success of the diplomatic option".
Reuters Pictures
Photo

Editors Choice: Best pictures
from the last 24 hours.
View Slideshow

Two sets of United Nations sanctions have been imposed on Iran since December and major powers have warned a third, tougher resolution might be needed if Tehran did not halt uranium enrichment.

"I say to the Iranians ... there are two options -- isolation and dialogue," she said.

Analysts say the measures, including arms and financial sanctions, are hurting business and deterring foreign investment in the Islamic state, which despite its oil wealth is struggling with inflation and unemployment.

Iranian officials have repeatedly rejected Western demands to halt work to enrich uranium, which can be used to fuel nuclear power plants or make atom bombs if refined further.

Rice reiterated that Washington would change its policy against Tehran, adopted after anti-U.S. Iranian clerics toppled the U.S.-allied Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in an Islamic revolution in 1979.

"The international community has made its demands through the United Nations; Iran should stop nuclear enrichment, after that there would be a change in the U.S. policy that has been going on for 27 years and then I can talk to them about any issue."

Washington severed its ties with Tehran in 1980 after students seized the U.S. embassy there and held 52 hostages for 444 days.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...N-USA-RICE.XML
__________________
...............................................benny

I have a feeling that Isaiah 17;1 will come to pass very very soon based on what this article is stating..................................................................................Olmert Holds Army Back in Face of Imminent Hizballah, Hamas Threats and Buildup

DEBKAfile Special Report

May 8, 2007, 12:05 PM (GMT+02:00)


Sophisticated C-802 shore-to-sea missiles


Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert and foreign minister Tzipi Livni staged a revealing scrap of asides behind open microphones and TV cameras Monday, May 8.

She said the army chiefs was complaining the politicians were holding them back from dealing with the Palestinian Qassam missiles flying daily from Gaza. He replied: Tell them to take it easy.

Less than a week after Livni told Olmert to resign over the Winograd panel’s deadly criticism of his handling of last year’s Lebanon War, the duo were ready to act out a piece of theater and a course of military passivity. Neither seriously wants to hear what the army has to say – and not just the chief of staff, as in last year’s conflict, but the different views of commanders, as the panel advised. They are too preoccupied with personal survival maneuvers to attend to urgent security issues.

Military experts, some of them recently retired from combat duty, tirelessly warn in daily media interviews that the war build-up on three Israeli borders, Lebanon, Syria and Gaza, has reached dangerous proportions. Not only is the army again unprepared for another conflict in the months to come, but it is held back by the Olmert government from destroying the plentifully rearmed enemy installations before they go on the offensive.

Confirming the generals’ worst fears, Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah laid out a plan Sunday, May 6, for attacking IDF positions on Mts. Hermon and Dov from the Shebaa Farms, and Israel Navy vessels with the new long-range missiles just delivered (smuggled) by Syria, while also turning the militia’s guns on the UN peacekeepers posted in south Lebanon.

The plan was aired in a well-publicized interview broadcast Sunday by Iranian television in Arabic, a clear signal that it was first cleared with his Tehran masters.

Yet the Israeli government had no response – even verbal.

This time, unlike Hizballah’s provocation in 2006, Tehran is solidly behind the Lebanese Shiite militia’s war plan. The Islamic Republic is furthermore willing to be party to a conflict against Israel launched from Lebanese territory. This willingness is compatible with Nasrallah’s public denial of the legitimacy of the Fouad Siniora government in Beirut.

The plan to wage war on Israel has been carefully calculated to knock over several targets, including the Siniora government, while toppling the entire edifice put in place by UN Security Council’s Resolution 1701 of August 2006.

Under its terms, Hizballah and Israel accepted a ceasefire and the Shiite group pulled out of southern Lebanon.

To put a legal varnish on these tactics, the Hizballah leader coined the phrase “defensive existence.” He said: “We have a defensive existence, meaning that if Lebanon or the south came under attack, we will defend Lebanon.”

“We” means Hizballah. This is tantamount to denying the legitimacy of the Lebanese sovereign army and its displacement of Hizballah in South Lebanon under the terms of Resolution 1701.

Before the Nasrallah’s threats to Israel were aired in Tehran, everything was in place. DEBKAfile’s military sources report: Hizballah troops which had pulled back from the Shebaa Farms sector during the war have been redeployed. Syria had replenished the militia’s stocks of sophisticated C-802 shore-to-sea missiles of the type which struck the Israeli missile ship Hanit in the first week of the 2006 war, together with the latest mobile radar shore batteries. They are lined up along the Lebanese coast, including the Tyre sector close to UNIFIL headquarters at Rosh Hanikra. Vessels in Israeli waters south of the Lebanese border up to Nahariya and Acre are now within range of those missiles.

In last year’s war, Hizballah seized shore radar centers from the Lebanese armed forces to fire at seaborne targets. Now they have their own.

According to our military sources, the new Hizballah coastal deployments force Israeli naval vessels on patrol against weapons and terrorist smuggling from Lebanon to detour much farther out to sea than before.

The demands by Israel’s armed forces for action to break up Hizballah and Hamas’ military buildup - or even put a stop to Palestinian daily Qassam attacks on Israeli towns and villages in the south - fall equally on deaf ears in Jerusalem.

Seeing the Olmert government tied so tightly in its own knots that elementary measures for national security are blocked, it was not surprising to hear the US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack announce Monday night, May 7, that Condoleezza Rice has decided to put off her visit to Jerusalem and the Palestinian Authority because of “…the domestic political woes of Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert.”

Vice president Dick Cheney will likewise give Israel a miss during the Middle East tour he starts Wednesday, May 8, to Riyadh, Amman and Cairo.

Israel’s current leaders are holding onto their seats for dear life, but the ground on which those seats stand is being sacrificed in the process.




.....................................benny

Kuwait Reviews Readiness for Possible US-Iran War

May 09, 2007
Agence France Presse
Yahoo News!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070509...iranusmilitary

Kuwait's government on Wednesday briefed MPs on contingency plans to face a possible outbreak of Iran-US hostilities over Tehran's nuclear programme, a senior minister and lawmakers said.

A government emergency team briefed parliament's foreign relations committee on the possibility of Kuwait being attacked or targeted by terrorists if Washington strikes Iran, committee chairman Mohammed al-Sager told reporters.

The meeting was held at the request of parliament and attended by several ministers including Defence and Interior Minister Sheikh Jaber Mubarak al-Sabah, who heads the emergency team.

"We have briefed MPs with all the preparations we have taken for any future emergency or catastrophe," Sheikh Jaber said in a statement.

Sager said the discussion also tackled issues like a possible influx of refugees into Kuwait and nuclear fall-out from neighbouring Iran.

Asked if there were indications of a military confrontation that prompted the meeting, Sager said: "There are three (US) aircraft carriers in Gulf waters. They are here either to strike, or to deter Iran."

Both Sager and parliament speaker Jassem al-Khorafi however said the preparations were precautionary in nature and played down the possibility of war, expressing hope the US-Iran standoff will be resolved through diplomacy.

"I don't think there is a danger of a war being waged on Iran ... I believe Iran is very keen on preserving stability in the region and is ready to exert every effort for this," Khorafi told reporters.

Sager who recently visited Iran said he was optimistic that no war will break out. "The Iranians are confident that nothing will happen," he said.

Two weeks ago, the cabinet formed the team, which includes representatives of the defence, interior, oil and health ministries as well as the fire and civil defence departments.

Sager said MPs were pleased with the government's preparations which are "much better than during the Iraqi invasion of 1990," when Iraqi troops rolled over the emirate within a few hours.

"I can say that the government has learnt the lesson from the Iraqi invasion," he said.

Washington has said it would prefer to address its concerns about Tehran's nuclear programme diplomatically but refuses to rule out the option of military action.

It has beefed up its military presence in the Gulf and has a second aircraft carrier stationed in the strategic waterway for the first time since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Kuwait served as the launch-pad for that invasion and remains the main staging point for US-led troops in Iraq. Around 15,000 US troops are stationed at several bases in the emirate.
........................................benny

Cheney vows to “stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating this region”

May 11, 2007, 7:04 PM (GMT+02:00)





The US Vice president Dick Cheney spoke aboard the USS John Stennis, one of two aircraft carriers stationed in the Persian Gulf Friday, adding: We’re sending a message to friends and adversaries alike. We’ll keep the sea lanes open.” Monday, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visits Abu Dhabi. On Iraq, which Cheney visited Thursday, he declared: “We want to complete the mission, get it done right and return with honor.” Saturday, the vice president stops at Saudi Arabia and goes on to Egypt and Jordan.

Between 3,500 and 4,000 of the carrier’s 5,000 sailors and Marines stood in sweltering heat to hear Cheney speak.

"It’s not easy to serve in this part of the world. It’s a place of tension and many conflicts," said the vice president.
.......................................benny

Friday Sermon in Kerman, Iran: If Iran Is Attacked, Tens of Thousands of Missiles Will Be Fired at Israel; President Bush Should Be Sentenced to 100 Deaths

The following are excerpts from a Friday sermon in Kerman, Iran, delivered by Sayyid Yahyah Ja'fari. The sermon was aired on Kerman TV on May 6, 2007.

To view this clip: http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1444.




Sayyid Yahyah Ja'fari: "As you can see, the killing in Iraq is outrageous. That international criminal, George Bush... If there is any justice in the world, undoubtedly, this man and his ilk, without a doubt, should be sentenced to 100 deaths. There is no doubt about it. Meanwhile, they hold all the power in their hands, and the world has not yet begun to confront them the way it should, even though these peoples have great power.

"The power of the world of Islam is great. The governments are dependent [upon America], and so they prevent the Muslim peoples from doing anything, and even if they were to do anything, it would be ineffective.

"These occupying, racist, and plundering Zionists kill the Palestinian children and youth on a daily basis. This is so sad, you could die of sorrow. They drive a people out of its land, and then, when it wishes to defend itself, they accuse it of terrorism. This is so sad. The international community remains silent. It has never done anything about it. On the other hand, if some Zionist goes to hell, then all the Western, American, and European media, as well as the Security Council, the U.N., and everyone else, go into action. However, if 100 Palestinians unjustly die a martyr's death on a single day - they don't care about it.

"The American threats are psychological warfare. You must know this. The Supreme Leader [Khamenei] recently said so. But let's assume that it isn't psychological warfare; with God's grace, our people, our strong army, our powerful Revolutionary Guards, our brave Basij volunteers - in sum, all our armed forces, of which we are proud - are in full readiness, and they will rub the invaders' noses in the mud."

Crowd: "Allah Akbar

"Allah Akbar"

[...]

Sayyid Yahyah Ja'fari: "According to our officials and political analysts, this will not happen - I only said it for the sake of argument - because some of the American officials have a little sense, and they realize that their interests throughout the world would be in danger, and that the plundering Israel would also be attacked severely by us. America is doing all these things in order to ensure Israel's security. If it acts stupidly and invades an Islamic country - especially a country like Iran - it should bear in mind that Israel will come under a very severe attack. Several days ago, the stupid Israeli prime minister said: 'We can attack the Iranian nuclear industry with 10,000 cruise missiles, and delay it for another 10 years.' Our response is that if he is planning to fire 10,000 missiles, we will fire tens of thousands of missiles on Tel Aviv and Israel."

..........................................benny

Iran Seeks Improved Ties With NKorea

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iran's foreign minister said North Korea's debts stand in the way of improving ties between the two countries - both U.S. foes under international pressure over their nuclear programs.

It was the first time an official of either country referred to their dealings, which go back to at least the 1980s but are not publicly known. The extent of North Korea's debts to Iran remain unknown.

North Korea's "debts to Tehran are among the obstacles in the way of cooperation," the official IRNA news agency quoted Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki as saying Friday. "The two countries can find a formula to remove this obstacle."

Mottaki met late Thursday with North Korean acting Foreign Minister Kim Yong Il. He added that Iran was still interested in improving ties with North Korea "in the fields of politics, economics and culture" with North Korea.

Kim said his country was ready to cooperate with Iran "in various economic fields" and support the country on the international level.

On Friday, Vice President Dick Cheney issued a warning to Iran while aboard an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf, saying the United States would join allies "to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating this region."

The U.N. Security Council has imposed two sets of sanctions against Iran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors or the material for atomic bombs. Iran, which denies it is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons, has another deadline later this month to freeze enrichment or face tighter sanctions.

The Security Council imposed sanctions on North Korea last year for conducting its first nuclear weapons test. North Korea has since refused to act on a February pledge to start dismantling its nuclear program in exchange for economic aid and political concessions.

The North Korean government is believed to have cooperated with Iran militarily since early 1980s, when Saddam Hussein waged an eight-year war against Iran. Officials of the two countries regularly meet.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/...ap3712411.html
..........................................benny

Cheney Lines up Middle East Arab Allies for US Iraq Pull-out
and Possible Iran Attack

May 12, 2007
DEBKAfile
DEBKAfile Special Report

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1273

US Vice President Dick Cheney arrived in Riyadh Sat. May 12, with a full caseload for his talks with Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz . He is seeking coordination with the Saudis in good time for the approaching winding-down of US military forces in Iraq. Cheney will also clinch the Bush administration’s offer to double the Saudi air force in size, boosting its capability for contending with Iranian air might and the Revolutionary Guards’ naval and marine strength.

The USS offer of advanced warplanes was first revealed by DEBKAfile when it was presented in Riyadh by visiting US defense secretary Robert Gates last month.

The vice president’s regional presence from Wednesday, May 8, set up a whirlwind of activity. In Baghdad, he had a tough message for Iraqi leaders that time was running out and the country’s security crisis had reached a critical point.

"We've got to get this work done. It's game time. ... Everybody's got to sit down, raise their game, redouble their efforts," he is quoted as saying.

He then flew to Abu Dhabi for talks with the deputy chief of UAR armed forces, Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahayan.

Friday, aboard the USS John Stennis, one of two US air carrier strike groups deployed in Gulf waters, the vice president pledged the US would “stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating this region.”

This statement was not taken in the Gulf as a military threat, but rather a message that Washington is not looking for a military showdown with Iran, at this sensitive juncture ahead of a US troop withdrawal from Iraq, but rather bidding for strategic understandings to hold in check Iran’s nuclear weapons plans, on the lines of the accommodation with North Korea, while conditionally allowing enrichment of uranium to go forward.

In the last two weeks, Washington has marginally trimmed down the US buildup opposite Iran’s shores. Shortly before Cheney arrived, the Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike group reached the Gulf with 6,000 men - not to augment the US naval presence, but to relieve the USS Boxer Strike group which is returning to base.

While no Bush administration official has publicly admitted to a timeline for the US pull-out from Iraq - and has in fact fought one tooth and nail through Congress - DEBKAfile’s sources in Washington, the Gulf and Baghdad report that Cheney is bringing the news to the Middle East rulers that Washington will make its decision in the second half of August and an evacuation will begin shortly thereafter.

In parallel with preparations for a partial US exit from Iraq, DEBKAfile discloses that Washington and Iran will embark on negotiations, which could lead to the Bush administration accepting parts of Tehran’s civilian nuclear activities, including uranium enrichment in agreed quantities.

In the meantime, as part of US preparations for this event - and a possible Iranian threat - American military strength in the Gulf is regrouping, while Saudi forces are being buttressed.

The coming weeks may, therefore, see President George W. Bush backing down on two of his most stubbornly-held foreign policy issues: a timeline for US forces to depart Iraq and uranium enrichment by the Islamic Republic.

Israel, which will be vitally affected in the years to come by these sweeping regional changes, happens to be ruled by a leadership too crippled by survival tactics to look ahead and prepare.

Its Arab neighbors are in contrast running ahead, with the Saudis and Jordanians already on the move in April. (Jordan’s Abdullah has launched a new diplomatic initiative for the West Bank, disclosed in a separate report in this page)

April 1, the Saudi monarch met Adm. William J. Fallon, US Central Command chief. April 16, he received defense secretary Gates and, two days later, April 18, he held a long conversation with the US state department Iraq coordinator, David Satterfield.

These talks led to a decision to make the Saudi air force the biggest in the Middle East, on a par with Israel’s air might, by an infusion of sophisticated aircraft equipped with the most advanced avionics, electronic warfare instruments and missiles.

In a war contingency, the boosted Saudi air force will undertake the key function of immobilizing the antiquated Iranian air force, preventing it from posing a threat to the Gulf or providing air cover for sabotage squads or marines seeking to attack oil installations, disrupt oil tanker passage through the Gulf or seize territory in Gulf emirates.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report: The Iranian air force, numbering 600 combat-ready fighter-bombers, is technologically backward and weak in combat skills. Some of its planes are early American models or home-made craft based on outdated US, Chinese or Russian technology.

The Saudi air force is smaller – 350 aircraft organized in 17 squadrons - but more modern and in better shape - even before the promised American infusion, which is likely to consist of first line F-16 Cs and Ds, F 15 Es and possibly the F 22 Raptor. Israel has strenuously objected to this upgrade. However, since last year’s Lebanon war, the Olmert government has by and large found itself talking to deaf ears in Washington.
__________________
.........................................benny

Iran warns U.S. over strike threat

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates (AP) -- The Iranian president said Monday Iran will retaliate if the U.S. strikes the country militarily.

The Iranian president made a tough response to recent comments by the Vice President Dick Cheney that Washington would prevent the Islamic republic from dominating the Middle East.

Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also said Iran had agreed for the benefit of the Iraqi people to meet with the U.S. in Baghdad to discuss security in Iraq.

"They (the U.S.) cannot strike Iran," he said at a press conference during a two-day visit to the United Arab Emirates. "The Iranian people can protect themselves and retaliate."

The Iranian president's comments followed those on Friday by Cheney, who said from the deck of an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf that the U.S. and its allies would prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

Despite the tense words, the U.S. and Iran announced Sunday that they have agreed to meet in Baghdad to discuss security and stability in Iraq.

"Both parties have confirmed the talks will take place in Baghdad in the presence of the Iraqi government," Ahmadinejad said Monday. "We decided we were ready and prepared to do this to support the Iraqi people."

The Iranian president, in a subdued mood after the previous night's raucous anti-American rally in a Dubai soccer stadium, repeated his calls for the United States to leave the Gulf region. Washington holds military bases in all Gulf countries except Saudi Arabia.

In stark contrast to Cheney's low-key visit, Ahmadinejad was greeted with fanfare by the top leaders of the Emirates, who apparently had no objection to Sunday's rally.

Ahmadinejad said relations with the Emirates had taken a "quantum leap," with the two countries agreeing to create a joint committee headed by their foreign ministers to boost cooperation in tourism, trade, energy and development.

"There's a willingness on both sides to upgrade relations," he said. "Relations between Iran and the UAE can be a model for all the countries of the region."

Ahmadinejad appeared to be pushing his agenda at a time when the U.S. administration's popularity in the region is at a low point. He said Iran is ready to band together in a Gulf-wide security alliance with Washington's traditional regional allies.

He also called for the reestablishment of diplomatic relations with Egypt that were broken in 1979, saying it would strengthen regional security and stability.

The U.S. presence in the Gulf, Ahmadinejad said, runs counter to the best interests of the Muslim-majority countries on both sides of the oil-rich sea. Similar pleas for a regional security alliance have come during recent visits by Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and national security adviser Ali Larijani.

Ahmadinejad said the Americans had overextended their welcome in the region and were advocating tough actions that reached beyond what their Arab allies wished.

"What are these others doing in our region?" he replied when asking to comment on Cheney's remarks aboard the USS John C. Stennis on Friday. "Are they more keen with regard to the nuclear issue than everyone else in the region?"

The U.S. has accused Iran of covertly developing nuclear weapons, but Iran has denied the charge, saying its nuclear program is peaceful. Tehran has also objected to U.S. claims that Iran is supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with deadly roadside bombs that kill American troops.

Ahmadinejad said the U.S.-