Let the Blame Game Begin…

Newsmax wrote on December 30:

“President Obama has acknowledged that the United States had early signals that a terrorist attack was being plotted in Yemen and failed to take adequate steps to prevent it. According to a page one story in the New York Times, two federal officials told the paper that U.S. intelligence was aware that a Nigerian Muslim was preparing an attack, yet officials did nothing to give warning of such an attack…”

It was predictable that Republicans would seize on the opportunity, accusing the Obama administration of weakness on security measures. However, as the Financial Times warned on December 29, such criticism might very well backfire:

“Republicans have seized on the Christmas day attempted terrorist attack as evidence that Democrats are weak on national security issues, as they seek to bolster their credentials ahead of next year’s congressional elections. As the Obama administration’s investigation into how a 23-year-old Nigerian was able to carry explosives on to a US-bound aircraft gathers pace, a slew of Republicans have criticised everything from the timing of the president’s first public comments to his plans to close the Guantánamo Bay prison camp…

“Barack Obama… answered such critics on Tuesday with a surprisingly blunt admission that ‘human and systemic failures’ were to blame… Republicans had been emboldened by the administration’s faltering response to the attempted attack. Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary, on Sunday said ‘the system worked’ but later performed a U-turn, saying that it did not work and ‘no one is happy with that’, comments that were reinforced by Mr Obama on Tuesday…

“Americans traditionally perceive Republicans to be strong on national security issues. But the party’s tactics in this case could backfire. ‘If this line of attack continues, it is going to reveal problems not just with the Obama administration but with the homeland security system, a system that was put in place by President [George W.] Bush,’ said Julian Zelizer, a professor at Princeton University.

“‘If Republicans want hearings into what happened, it could very well raise questions about Bush-era failures and that would be politically dangerous.’ Some Democrats are already pointing to Republican obstructionism on national security matters. More than 100 Republicans in the House voted against the Department of Homeland Security’s 2010 appropriation bill funding airport security measures, including explosives detection systems.”

New “Security” Measures for Airline Passengers

The Associated Press reported on December 26:

“Some airlines were telling passengers on Saturday that new government security regulations prohibit them from leaving their seats beginning an hour before landing (including going to a restroom). The regulations are a response to a suspected terrorism incident on Christmas Day. Air Canada said… that during the final hour of flight passengers must remain seated. They won’t be allowed access to carryon baggage or to have any items on their laps.

“Flight attendants on some domestic flights are informing passengers of similar rules. Passengers on a flight from New York to Tampa Saturday morning were also told they must remain in their seats and couldn’t have items in their laps, including laptops and pillows…

“Air Canada said it was limiting passengers to one carryon bag in response to a request from the U.S. and Canadian governments. The airline advised U.S.-bound passengers to restrict their carryon item to ‘the absolute minimum’ or to not carry any bag on board at all. ‘Carriage of any carryon item will result in lengthy security delays for the customer,’ the airline said.”

Disruptive Air Travel

The Telegraph wrote on December 27:

“Tens of thousands of people flying to the US for the New Year break have been forced to endure delays of up to three hours after strict new security rules were imposed overnight in the wake of the attempted terrorist attack in Detroit.

“… the most stringent restrictions came as aircraft entered US airspace, with passengers confined to their seats for the last hour of their flight, banned from having access to books, newspapers or even blankets or pillows. Passengers were warned to expect the restrictions to remain in place ‘indefinitely’.

“With pilots ordered to switch off ‘moving maps’ throughout the flight in an effort to conceal the exact locations of their aircraft from potential terrorists, passengers on some Virgin flights on Boxing Day were warned to buy books as in-flight films and other entertainment systems were also being disabled for the entire journey…

“Meanwhile travellers arriving at British airports from the US told a similar story of delays and restrictions… In Paris passengers were told to check all hand baggage into the hold with anything essential for the flight placed into clear plastic bags usually reserved for liquids.

“Meanwhile several Asian airlines disabled cabin telephones or internet connections on flights to the US… Information was kept deliberately vague prompting confusion among passengers about what was allowed… While check-in and security queues were unaffected at British airports, there were long delays in departure areas as airlines were forced to impose a second set of checks at flight gates.

“All passengers were subjected to body searches and baggage checks as they boarded flights, holding departures up by an average of one hour. At Heathrow some departures were delayed by up to three hours while at Manchester New York flights were two hours late. With most flights to the US at least 90 per cent full over the holiday period, the numbers affected could reach almost 30,000 per day this week. Some of the delayed passengers arriving from the United States missed their connecting flights.”

Discouraged Business Fliers?

The Associated Press wrote on December 28:

“New security restrictions… will make air travel more burdensome and could discourage some business fliers, key customers for the airlines… business travelers may think twice before flying if stepped-up security means spending hours at the airport. That’s troubling to the airlines, because business travelers tend to fly frequently and pay higher fares.

“Alarmed by the prospect of losing their best customers, airlines are already asking federal officials to make any new procedures palatable to passengers… Travelers on incoming international flights said that during the final hour, attendants removed blankets, banned opening overhead bins, and told passengers to stay in their seats with their hands in plain sight…

“Jack Riepe, a spokesman for the Association of Corporate Travel Executives… said corporate travel managers want the government to explain how Friday’s suspect reached Detroit even though he was on a watch list maintained by counterterrorism experts. A government official said the suspect’s father raised concerns about him to U.S. officials several weeks ago, but the father’s information about his son’s possible ties to fundamentalist Islamic groups was too vague to act upon.”

So we’d rather (re-)act now by imposing ridiculous restrictions on all air travelers, threatening the very survival of some airline companies. We are seemingly reaching more and more the point of the biblical warning that there will not be any more soundness in the land (or in the air), compare Isaiah 1:6. But perhaps, there is still a little bit left today, considering the next two articles.

Don’t Overreact!

Deutsche Welle reported on December 28:

“Wolfgang Bosbach, the chairman of the parliamentary Internal Affairs Committee told the Berliner Zeitung daily on Monday that the recent attempt to blow up a Northwest/KLM flight from Amsterdam to Detroit should not result in the introduction of new security procedures at German airports… Bosbach said, however, that European Union plans to relax certain restrictions, such as on bringing liquids onto aircraft, should probably be put on hold…

“A key opposition figure, the Green Party’s Hans-Christian Stroebele, echoed Bosbach’s assessment. He said that last week’s attempted attack was made possible by a failure to correctly assess existing intelligence, not a lack of security… The head of a German police union, Rainer Wendt, also said it would be a mistake to adopt new, more intrusive search methods like the much-debated full-body or ‘nude’ scanner.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 29:

“German media commentators say the new measures smack of hysteria, and will do nothing to improve security because they can easily be circumvented by a determined terrorist. For example, if toilets are out of bounds in the last hour, an attacker could still assemble a bomb there earlier in the flight. The solution, German editorials say, is to improve security checks at airports rather than treating all passengers as potential terrorists once they’re on board.”

President Obama’s Missed Opportunities

The Financial Times wrote on December 27:

“Many Americans – conservatives, liberals and centrists – are dismayed by Barack Obama’s first year. Republicans call Mr Obama a tax and spend liberal. Progressives say he surrendered to corporate interests, and his foreign policy is a continuation of George W. Bush by other means. Independents feel let down because Mr Obama said he would bridge the partisan divide and unite the country. Except for uniting left and right in disappointment, he failed…

“Foreign policy saw the biggest gap between expectations and any real likelihood of success. Foreigners and Americans naively thought the world would submit to Mr Obama’s charm. It did not. Yes, he brought US diplomacy back from the dead – but diplomacy is a means to an end, not an end in itself… Afghanistan underlines the point… Mr Obama took too long to make up his mind, and muddled the message by talking of an early withdrawal…

“Just as those earlier hopes were exaggerated, so now is much of the criticism. The sense of betrayal on the left, in particular, is just bewildering. Progressives want the troops brought home, the security state dismantled, capitalism defanged, the profit motive dethroned, the banks nationalised, private health insurance abolished, and energy policy turned over to Greenpeace. Anything less is just another sell-out. Who on earth did these people think they were electing?

“Republican complaints have a bit more justification. Having cast himself as a fiscal moderate, the president laid out a first budget that permanently raises the ratio of US public spending to gross domestic product, without disclosing the tax increases that will be needed to pay for it. In announcing that programme, Mr Obama did reveal himself more clearly than before as a centre-left Democrat. To be fair, though, in the campaign he never claimed otherwise. The point is, there was wishful thinking to his right, as well as to his left.

“Independents have much the most reason to be disappointed. They see – and are right to – a broken political system. Congress is polarised to its roots. The country’s wide political centre is largely unrepresented on Capitol Hill. Committed Democrats and Republicans can hardly bear to be in the same room, let alone talk to each other. Mr Obama promised to strive for consensus…

“In his first year, he rarely even tried. He simply chose not to exercise this kind of leadership. To be sure, moderate Republicans (an endangered breed) offered no encouragement, content to oppose for opposition’s sake. But Mr Obama made no stand against this. Instead he went with the flow, deferring to the implacably partisan Democratic majorities. This disengagement, this reluctance to lead, is the real disappointment of Mr Obama’s first year.”

The lack of U.S. leadership is becoming increasingly apparent around the world–a power vacuum which will be filled soon, as the following articles postulate.

Sarkozy Cool on Relationship With Obama

The Financial Times wrote on December 27:

“Nicolas Sarkozy, the most pro-American president of France for half a century, has gone cold on Barack Obama, the most popular American leader in France in generations. A year ago Mr Sarkozy was engaged in a tussle among European leaders anxious to be the first to secure a meeting with the freshly elected Mr Obama. Mr Sarkozy described Mr Obama as ‘my friend’ after meeting him just once as a senator.

“But the French president has since clashed with his US counterpart on a series of issues, raising the question of whether Mr Sarkozy is reverting to the more Gaullist, anti-American posture of his predecessor, Jacques Chirac…

“Like his predecessor, Mr Sarkozy plays up differences with the US for domestic purposes. But there is a crucial difference. Whereas Mr Chirac’s stance towards the US was determined by suspicion of US power, current French frustration is aimed at Washington’s hesitancy or even weakness.”

This article and the following ones show that the relationship between the USA and Europe is not improving, and that due to the lack of U.S. leadership, Europe is determined to fill the vacuum.

Germany and USA Continue Disagreements on Substance

Deutsche Welle reported on December 28:

“The good personal chemistry between president [Obama] and chancellor [Merkel] and Obama’s immense international popularity has smoothed over some quite profound differences on major topics…

“Berlin has all but ruled out deploying troops to the more dangerous southern part of [Afghanistan] and in fact is very reluctant to significantly increase its military contingent at all. Despite Obama’s hope for a stronger German role in Afghanistan, the new center-right government’s position is largely unchanged from that of [Germany’s] grand coalition during the presidency of George W. Bush…

“While Germany and the US agree on the broad goal of mitigating the effects of the worst recession since the 1930s and reforming the global financial system, Berlin and Washington are not on the same page when it comes to how this can be accomplished. The German government contends that the goal of stimulating the economy has to be balanced against fiscal responsibility. For the US administration however, restarting the economy clearly trumps concerns about fiscal stability…

“The new US administration by acknowledging the problem and by vowing to take an active role in combating climate change reversed the stance of Bush presidency – at least in theory. But as observers in Germany have had to learn against the backdrop of the failed negotiations at the Copenhagen climate conference, even an American president who supports European efforts to curb global warming cannot by himself convince a reluctant Congress to sign on to an international climate change treaty…

“When push comes to shove, when words need to be translated into action the current leaderships in the US and Germany have not behaved very differently to those under the previous administrations. That is true not just on Afghanistan, the financial crisis and climate change, but also on other issues such as how to deal with the Guantanamo prisoners.”

The relationship between the USA and Europe will steadily deteriorate, according to the clear prophecies of the Bible.

“Europe (under Germany) Must Lead”

On December 28, 2009, Der Spiegel published a revealing interview with German Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen. As the magazine wrote, Mr. Röttgen talked about “the failure of the Copenhagen climate summit, why neither China nor the US can take the lead in the fight against global warming and Germany’s role in the new world order.” We are bringing you the following excerpts from his statements:

“First and foremost, the result [in Copenhagen] is a great disappointment… There is no disguising the fact that the outcome does not meet our criteria for success, and it is miles away from what we consider to be urgently necessary…

“Emerging economies, led by China, were not willing to commit themselves to CO2 reduction targets as a part of their foreign policy or to join the common political will. With the United States, the problems were domestic in nature. The political conditions are lacking there for the country to be part of a global framework. Both countries… seem to consider national politics to be more important…

“A chapter has been closed in Copenhagen, the well-intended attempt at harmony. Now the wrestling will begin for positions of power, but no fixed structure has yet taken hold. At the moment we are experiencing a lack of structure, a lack of results and an inability to act, triggered mainly by the United States which, in the case of climate protection, as in capital markets, is no longer capable of leading. This has created a power vacuum. And when there is a power vacuum, there are others who would like to step in…

“The US as leader is part of the political concept of the West. But the US hasn’t led — instead it reached a deal with China that there wouldn’t be any leadership… I see an erosion of their leadership role. Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao have agreed to the lowest common denominator: China doesn’t want to lead, and the US cannot lead. The major blockade at the summit grew out of an unfortunate combination of weak leadership on the part of the Americans and Chinese power to impede progress…

“Europe is not the loser because it presented itself as a unified bloc at the summit, with clear goals and a solid strategy. That was one of the few really positive experiences in Copenhagen and vitally important to our role in this new world order. We have shown what Europe’s role could be… I do not believe there is a conscious American-Chinese alliance. It is more a case of two forms of weakness coming together… The government in Beijing, of course, takes advantage of the fact that the US and Europe do not have a common position…

“Germany alone cannot determine anything in global politics — the only thing that counts there is European unity. And we worked to unite the Europeans in Copenhagen… It is German policy to take a leading role in environmental technology…”

Of course, the concept that carbon dioxide is responsible for climate change is by no means undisputed, as the next article shows. However, from a biblical perspective, the discussion on climate change and its political consequences may contribute to the fulfillment of biblical prophecy, clearly revealing that the influence of the USA on virtually every aspect of life will continue to diminish worldwide, while the United States of Europe under German leadership will become the most powerful bloc in the world–including on economic, political and military issues.

Will the Earth Become Cooler Rather than Warmer?

Newsmax wrote on December 28:

“A university professor challenges the widely held notion that carbon dioxide is responsible for climate change — and says the Earth will continue to cool for the next half-century. Rather than carbon dioxide, cosmic rays and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) — already implicated in depleting the Earth’s ozone layer — are to blame for changes in the global climate, according to a paper by Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Waterloo in Canada…

“Lu’s peer-reviewed paper, published in the prestigious journal Physics Reports, states: ‘My findings do not agree with the climate models that conventionally thought that greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are the major culprits for the global warming seen in the late 20th century. Instead, the observed data show that CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays most likely caused both the Antarctic ozone hole and global warming. These findings are totally unexpected and striking, as I was focused on studying the mechanism for the formation of the ozone hole, rather than global warming.’

“The total amount of CFCs decreased around 2000, Lu said, and ‘correspondingly, the global surface temperature has also dropped. In striking contrast, the CO2 level has kept rising since 1850 and now is at its largest growth rate.’ Lu found that while there was global warming from 1950 to 2000, there has been global cooling since 2002, and his research indicates that the cooling trend will continue for the next 50 years.”

War in Middle East Continues–With No End in Sight

Deutsche Welle reported on December 27:

“The year began in the Middle East with war and ended without peace. New leaders arrived with optimistic plans for a resolution to the Israel-Palestinian crisis but little was achieved by the year’s end…

“Any hopes of a lasting peace coming from the Gaza war would be dashed, the international community would increasingly isolate Israel, a UN report by South Africa’s Richard Goldstone would accuse both Israel and Hamas of war crimes and threaten to bring both sides before the International Criminal Court…

“Between Obama’s inauguration and his speech in Cairo, Israel had taken a radical swing to the right. Many observers believed that the election victory for Benjamin Netanyahu of the hard-line Likud party was a direct reaction to the rise of Hamas, the continued threat of rocket attacks from Gaza and the increasing anti-Israel rhetoric from a belligerent, nuclear ambitious Iran…

“Before peace talks could resume, President Mahmoud Abbas demanded that Israel should endorse a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [and] stop all Israeli construction in the occupied West Bank… Netanyahu’s ban on construction fell far short of the full freeze demanded by the Palestinians…

“The apparent inability of the Obama administration to get Israel to agree to its first condition for resuming peace talks angered the Arab world and heaped more pressure on a US president who had promised much when he first came to office… The Arab world is… very disappointed with Obama because the Arabs really thought that this president would be able to put pressure on Israel, not only on the settlement issue but in the wider context of finding a solution to the Middle East conflict…”

“USA Should Attack Iran”

The New York Times wrote on December 23:

“If Iran acquired a nuclear arsenal, the risks would simply be too great that it could become a neighborhood bully or provide terrorists with the ultimate weapon, an atomic bomb. As for knocking out its nuclear plants, admittedly, aerial bombing might not work. Some Iranian facilities are buried too deeply to destroy from the air. There may also be sites that American intelligence is unaware of. And military action could backfire in various ways, including by undermining Iran’s political opposition, accelerating the bomb program or provoking retaliation against American forces and allies in the region.

“But history suggests that military strikes could work… Iran’s atomic sites might need to be bombed more than once to persuade Tehran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons. As for the risk of military strikes undermining Iran’s opposition, history suggests that the effect would be temporary… Yes, Iran could retaliate by aiding America’s opponents in Iraq and Afghanistan, but it does that anyway…

“Incentives and sanctions will not work, but air strikes could degrade and deter Iran’s bomb program at relatively little cost or risk, and therefore are worth a try. They should be precision attacks, aimed only at nuclear facilities, to remind Iran of the many other valuable sites that could be bombed if it were foolish enough to retaliate.

“The final question is, who should launch the air strikes? Israel has shown an eagerness to do so if Iran does not stop enriching uranium, and some hawks in Washington favor letting Israel do the dirty work to avoid fueling anti-Americanism in the Islamic world. But there are three compelling reasons that the United States itself should carry out the bombings.

“First, the Pentagon’s weapons are better than Israel’s at destroying buried facilities. Second, unlike Israel’s relatively small air force, the United States military can discourage Iranian retaliation by threatening to expand the bombing campaign… Finally, because the American military has global reach, air strikes against Iran would be a strong warning to other would-be proliferators…

“We have reached the point where air strikes are the only plausible option with any prospect of preventing Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. Postponing military action merely provides Iran a window to expand, disperse and harden its nuclear facilities against attack. The sooner the United States takes action, the better.”

Europe Warns and Condemns Iran’s Leadership

Deutsche Welle reported on December 28:

“In a strong statement to the press on Monday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the actions of Iran’s state security services ‘unacceptable.’… At least eight people were killed in street clashes in Tehran when police and Basij militia members confronted protest marchers who were attempting to gather at a number of central squares. Sunday’s protests took place on Ashura, a Shiite Islamic holy day devoted to honoring martyrs, often through street marches… According to opposition sources, security forces used tear gas and live ammunition to try to get the marchers to disperse.

“German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle criticized Iran’s tactics as ‘brutal,’ and said that the international community ‘would be watching, not looking away.’ A spokesman for the French foreign ministry, Bernard Valero, said his country again expressed ‘deep concern,’ and ‘condemns the arbitrary arrests and violence carried out against ordinary protesters.’… The Italian foreign ministry, meanwhile, warned the Islamic republic that ‘safeguarding human lives is a fundamental value which must be defended everywhere and in every circumstance.'”

It is becoming more and more plausible that we will soon see an outright war in the Middle East, involving a military attack on Iran. This attack might be led by Israel with or without American support; and it will also be interesting to see how powerful players such as Europe and Russia will react to such military action. The Bible shows that ultimately, Europe will turn against the USA and Israel; and that it will intervene militarily in the Middle East in an effort to bring peace to that region.

How Russia Justifies Its Nuclear Policies

The Russian pro-government paper, Pravda, wrote the following on December 24:

“Russia now announced its right to use nuclear weapons not only in case of aggression against itself, but also as a ‘response to a threat of using (or usage) against itself and (or) its allies of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction, as well as a response to the aggression with regular weapons in the situations critical for the Russian Federation.’

“The similar document signed by the United States does not have this provision. The US does not consider itself entitled to use nuclear weapons as a response to a ‘threat’… Russia does not have resources for aggression. Even Pavel Felgenhauer, a Moscow-based defense analyst said… ‘The weaker the army, the more important nuclear weapons are. We don’t have anything left besides our nuclear weapons. We have no guarantees that the West would not interfere with our wars, like it happened with Georgia, therefore, we do need nuclear restraining…’

“Nuclear weapons remain the main, and maybe, the only defense for Russia. It would be silly to walk around the area filled with stray dogs without an electroshock or at least a good stick.”

Russia Justifies Its Military Occupation of Georgia

The Pravda wrote on December 23:

“As though it was any of their business, six US senators have taken it upon themselves to warn France against the planned sale of a warship to Russia… The senators were ‘worried’ and underlined a Russian Navy commander’s recent statement that the ship would have allowed Russian forces battling Georgia’s military in August 2008 to land troops ashore in 40 minutes, against the 26 hours it took them to do so in last year’s war.

“Well that’s good, perhaps more lives would have been saved. But these saber rattling, arrogant Americans are still bound and determined to protect the criminal behavior of their puppet in Georgia. Of course their words make them nothing less than hypocrites of the worst kind, and accessories to the war crimes of Georgia and Saakashvili.

“The truth is not in them, they either knowingly or ignorantly promote the lie that the war was Russia’s fault and of course Russia has no right to save the lives of citizens. Again, how dare they!… Senator Lugar and other neo-con Senators called on President Obama to increase military supplies to Georgia. I am sure if this were 1939, they would also call on the President to increase military supplies to Nazi Germany.”

Interestingly, the Pravda conveniently forgets to mention the friendship pact between Russia’s war criminal, Josef Stalin, and Germany’s war criminal, Adolf Hitler. There will not be a war between Russia and the United States, prior to Christ’s return. But a worldwide war WILL occur very soon. However, the respective allies and enemies will be quite different from what many may expect. For more information, please read our free booklets, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America,” “Europe in Prophecy” and “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”

Japan Moves Closer to India, While Moving Further Away from the USA

India’s national newspaper, The Hindu, wrote the following on December 26:

“Apart from improving their coordination on security issues, India and Japan will also consolidate their economic ties… Japanese investment in India [has] exceeded its investment in China for the first time in 2008-09… Without India, Japan cannot grow in [the] future.”

Times on Line added on December 26:

“Yukio Hatoyama, the new Japanese Prime Minister, has stunned a nation already mired in huge public debt by unveiling the country’s biggest ever postwar budget: a 92.3 trillion yen (£630 billion) spending spree… The new budget will require additional debt issuance of Y44.3 trillion…

“Four months on from [his election] victory and Mr Hatoyama has spent more than any of his predecessors and has yet to make any serious impact on the wider effort of repairing Japan’s shattered economy… Mr Hatoyama has also been hurt personally by the arrest of a former aide this week amid a money scandal that bore all the hallmarks of the politics of ‘old Japan’… Prosecutors in Tokyo accused Keiji Katsuba, 59, of falsifying funding reports beginning in 2000 and listing dead people as donors.

“Political analysts said that the episode would not be crippling to Mr Hatoyama… but it adds to pressures that already include a weakened domestic economy and strained relations with the United States…”

The Bible clearly shows that in these last days, many nations in the Far East, including Japan, India, China and Russia, will align and cooperate, even militarily, and an outright war will see a military confrontation between these nations and the emerging United States of Europe.

Britain Powerless?

AFP wrote on December 30:

“Shaikh, a 53-year-old father-of-three whom supporters say was mentally ill, was executed on Tuesday [in China] for drug smuggling despite extensive British ministerial lobbying that continued almost up until his death. But in a letter to the Guardian newspaper, his cousins Amina and Ridwan Shaikh lamented the lack of real British influence in the case.

“‘This is an example of Britain’s powerlessness in the world. Their strategy of being shoulder to shoulder with the US in the “war on terror” has not given them the status they so desperately desire,’ they said… ‘Britain’s economic dependence far outweighs these “individual cases.”‘

“Shaikh was arrested in September 2007 in Urumqi in far western China with four kilograms (nine pounds) of heroin, but campaigners say a criminal gang duped him into carrying the drugs. He was the first national from a European Union country to be executed in China in 50 years… China’s ambassador Fu Ying was hauled into the Foreign Office hours after the execution on Tuesday to be told of Britain’s anger, in what was described as a ‘difficult’ meeting…

“Britain has vast trade and economic ties with China, and has long underlined the need to engage closely with the emerging global powerhouse despite criticism notably of China’s human rights record… But ties have long been complicated, and tensions were highlighted at this month’s Copenhagen climate summit where environment minister Ed Miliband said China had led a group of countries that ‘hijacked’ the negotiations.

“In a commentary on the Shaikh case the Times said that Britain’s ‘diplomatic failure’ was forcing a rethink of strategy towards China. ‘After the Copenhagen debacle this month and the execution of the first citizen of a European country by China since 1951, Britain is now reassessing how to handle China diplomatically,’ it said.”

How Votes Are “Bought”…

Fox News reported on December 21:

“Sen. Ben Nelson [is] hardly the only lawmaker extracting sweetheart deals out of the health care reform bill. While the Nebraska Democrat got a particularly juicy concession in exchange for a ‘yes’ vote on the 10-year, $871 billion package — permanent and full federal aid for his state’s expanded Medicaid population — support from a slew of other senators likewise came with a price…

“Senate Democrats said the payoffs are nothing unusual, and in fact typical. ‘People fight for their own states. That’s the nature of a democracy,’ Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said… ‘This is just part of the normal legislative process,’ said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

“As a measure of just how typical they are, a slew of payoffs and concessions have been struck over the past several months.

“Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., won between $100 million and $300 million in additional federal aid for her state’s Medicaid population. The deal, secured before she cast her critical vote in favor of bringing the health bill to the floor, was immediately dubbed the ‘Louisiana Purchase,’  though the actual Louisiana Purchase was considerably cheaper.

“Vermont and Massachusetts got $1.2 billion in Medicaid money… Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders also boasted Saturday that he requested and won an investment worth between $10 and $14 billion for community health centers.

“Western states secured higher federal reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals that serve Medicare patients. The provision covers the low-population ‘frontier’ states and applies to Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming — the latter two states are both represented by two Republicans, but ended up as beneficiaries anyway since they qualify…

“Florida, New York and Pennsylvania — where five of six senators are Democrats — will have their seniors’ Medicare Advantage benefits protected, even as the program sees massive cuts elsewhere. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., reportedly secured expanded Medicare coverage for victims of asbestos exposure in a mine in Libby, Mont.

“One unknown state is receiving $100 million for a ‘health care facility’ affiliated with an academic health center at a university that contains the state’s only ‘public academic medical and dental school.’ It’s unclear for which state that language was written.

“Nebraska’s Nelson won permanent federal aid for his state’s expanded Medicaid population, a benefit worth up to $100 million over 10 years. Other states get the federal aid for three years, but Nebraska’s benefit is indefinite. His state also got an exemption for nonprofit insurance companies from a health insurance company tax. Many believe this was targeted at Mutual of Omaha, but senior Democratic aides would not confirm that…”

Whatever will come out of this, the methods and means used do not “sanctify” the outcome. God hates corruption, bribery, payoffs and political maneuvering for personal gains. “Unless the LORD builds the house, They labor in vain who build it” (Psalm 127:1).

President Obama Blamed for “Copenhagen Debacle”

The Associated Press reported on December 18:

“President Barack Obama said the United States, China and several other countries reached an ‘unprecedented breakthrough’ Friday to curb greenhouse gas emissions – including a mechanism to verify compliance – after a frenzied day of diplomacy at the U.N. climate talks. The agreement, which also includes the developing nations of India, South Africa and Brazil, requires each country to list the actions they will take to cut global warming pollution by specific amounts, a senior Obama administration official said…

“The U.S. got its share of blame… Obama may eventually become known as ‘the man who killed Copenhagen,’ said Greenpeace U.S. Executive Director Phil Radford… Swedish Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren, negotiating on behalf of the 27-nation European Union, blamed the impasse on the Chinese for ‘blocking again and again,’ and on the U.S. for coming too late with an improved offer…”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 19 that President Obama did not appear in Copenhagen as the “Messiah,” but as the “Debunked” or “Disenchanted.” The magazine also wrote that one participant at the summit said that President Obama offered developing nations “30 pieces of silver” for their future.

Deutsche Welle reported on December 19:

“For US President Barack Obama, Copenhagen offers no good news. His last trip in Copenhagen was his failed attempt to bring the 2016 Olympics to Chicago. Now with the stakes much higher, he has failed again. His speech was good – but others like Brazil’s Lula da Silva were better. His effort was good, but simply not good enough. In terms of his leadership, there was little to be seen.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 19:

“What a disaster. The climate summit in Copenhagen has failed because of the hardball politicking of the United States, China and several other countries — and because people just can’t seem to fathom how catastrophic climate change will be… The debacle of Copenhagen is also Barack Obama’s debacle…

“When it comes to immediate assistance for impoverished countries, the United States intends to contribute a total of $3.6 billion between 2010 and 2012. But, if you compare that with what other regions contribute, this figure appears rather miserly. The European Union plans to contribute about $10.6 billion, or about three times as much. And even Japan is chipping in $11 billion. In poor countries, people are presumably confused about whether they should laugh or cry about the US contribution.”

The world is turning away from confidence in American leadership. As the next selection of articles shows, some strongly implore Europe to take a leading role in the world. Bible prophecy reveals that while the USA will drift further and further into political oblivion, Europe will emerge as the most powerful entity on the planet.

Now What After “Flopenhagen”?

Deutsche Welle reported on December 21:

“After the widely disappointing UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen – aka ‘Flopenhagen’ – European editorialists let the bitter comments flow… Britain’s Guardian newspaper saw positives alongside negatives in the outcome of the conference… ‘while the Copenhagen product is every inch the sham that campaigners say it is, the Copenhagen process has set important precedents,’ the Guardian wrote. ‘Most obviously …the sheer fact that it took place – and at such a high political level – means it will probably do so again.’…

“Taking a harsher line, left-leaning French newspaper La Libération oozed disappointment in the ‘large countries which, in a delirium of diplomatic ineptitude and the blindness of superiority, torpedoed the binding worldwide accord’ they had hoped for. The paper pitched for the EU to take immediate, unilateral action: ‘Eco-reformers need to focus on the US and China,’ it wrote… ‘If the EU took the necessary actions from its side, it would jump to the head of the movement. Then the fiasco of Copenhagen could be overcome step by step’…

“German editorialists were less inclined to focus on positive signals from the conference. The Sueddeutsche Zeitung called the Copenhagen summit an ‘insult to the world community,’ noting that ‘never were expectations for a climate conference higher, and never before were so many heads of state and government officials in one place, meeting to solve one single problem. But they didn’t solve it – they made it worse’…

“Finally, the Stuttgarter Zeitung expressed the disappointment felt by many in Europe when they compared US President Barack Obama’s focus on China and other developing countries with his relative lack of interest in the European negotiators… ‘The trans-Atlantic relationship is coming up on hard times. Barack Obama showed one thing for certain in Copenhagen: His focus will be on the trans-Pacific axis with China,’ [the paper wrote].”

Der Spiegel Online added on December 21:

“German papers on Monday are scathing in their criticism of the climate conference and most are resoundingly pessimistic about the prospects for ever reaching an agreement in the future… The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘Above all national selfishness stood in the way of an agreement… That can only change if such a refusal has consequences. There are already methods of imposing sanctions…’

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘Forget Copenhagen, now we are making a climate treaty in 2010 in Bonn and Mexico. That is the message from those who are talking up the conference, and trying to sell the result as some kind of progress. But after the fiasco there is no sensible reason for assuming that things will be any better next year. From the very beginning it was an illusion to believe that the two biggest climate sinners — China and the US — would allow themselves to be roped into a binding agreement with clear emissions targets and international monitoring’…

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘Even if Chancellor Merkel is warning people not to bad mouth the climate summit, the result is still deplorable. Over 40,000 politicians, diplomats, scientists, journalists, lobbyists and NGO activists traveled there to save the world. One hundred and forty private jets landed, 1,200 limousines ferried delegates around. The feverish summit, which gave a new name to gigantism, offered a soapbox for alarmists and the self-important. But now it is time to consider whether smaller, more matter-of-fact conferences would make more sense. It would also mean allowing those scientists to speak who have expressed well-founded doubts about the scenarios presented by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They have many facts on their side.

“‘Evaluation would be more appropriate than roaring that the world is about to end. The question of whether binding and dramatic limits of CO2 emissions are the only correct way to protect the climate must also be revisited. This is not only dogmatic but would also cost a fortune and have little effect. The plan to limit the average rise in the global temperature to 2 degrees Celsius is the most expensive task of all time. … Besides, it is a figure that has been set arbitrarily. The one-sided fixation on CO2 limits could be a greater detriment to the global economy than climate change itself. A global competition for the cleanest energy production and investments in saving and replanting forests would be more useful than the rabid caps in emissions at the cost of economic growth.’

“The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: ‘The climate summit in Copenhagen was no success — not even a small one. That’s why one can’t bad mouth the results, which Merkel has warned them not to do. No one can make them sound better than they are: Copenhagen was an all-out failure. … How this (process) is to be brought to an end in the next year remains a mystery. The format of the consultations at the UN level, in which every member state can exercise veto power, holds no promise for any success…'”

More U.S. Banks Fail…

The Associated Press reported on December 18:

“Regulators on Friday shut down two big California banks, as well as banks in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Michigan and Illinois, bringing to 140 the number of U.S. banks brought down this year by the weak economy and mounting loan defaults. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. took over all seven. Regulators shuttered First Federal Bank of California…[and] Imperial Capital Bank… [bringing] to 17 the number of California banks to fail this year…

“As the economy has slumped, with unemployment rising, home prices tumbling and loan defaults soaring, bank failures have accelerated around the country. The 140 bank failures are the most in a year since 1992 at the height of the savings-and-loan crisis. They have cost the government-backed deposit insurance fund – which has fallen into the red – more than $30 billion so far this year. The failures compare with 25 last year and three in 2007. The FDIC expects the cost of bank failures to grow to about $100 billion over the next four years…

“If the economic recovery falters, defaults on the high-risk loans could spike. Nearly $500 billion in commercial real estate loans are expected to come due annually over the next few years. Last week, the Obama administration extended until next October the $700 billion financial bailout program, saying the fund was still needed to prevent further turmoil in the banking system.”

Reality is sinking in that the recession is by no means ending–expressions of political correctness notwithstanding. The Bible shows that in these last days, the political, economic and even military downfall of the USA will be accelerating.

Obama Czar “Promotes Sex Between Children and Adults”

On December 9, the Washington Times reported the following:

“The Obama administration is stonewalling serious inquiries about sexual filth propagated by a senior presidential appointee who is responsible for promoting and implementing federal education policy. Democrats clearly are terrified of ruffling the feathers of their activist homosexual supporters, who are an influential part of the Democratic party’s base. This scandal, however, is not merely about homosexual behavior; it is about promoting sex between children and adults – and it’s time for President Obama to make clear that abetting such illegal perversion has no place in his administration.
 
“It is curious why White House officials and Education Secretary Arne Duncan believe it’s worth… politically to continue taking arrows for defending Kevin Jennings, who is Mr. Obama’s controversial ‘safe schools czar.’ The evidence suggesting he is unfit to serve as a senior presidential appointee is startling and plentiful. It was revealed this week that Mr. Jennings was involved in promoting a reading list for children 13 years old or older that made the most explicit sex between children and adults seem normal and acceptable…

“But there is more. There are shocking new revelations this week of tape recordings from a youth conference involving 14-year-old students. The conference, billed as a forum to encourage tolerance of homosexuality, was sponsored by Mr. Jennings’ organization and was held at Tufts University in March 2000. Mr. Jennings was executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) from its founding in 1995 until August 2008. The conference sessions appear to have had less to do with promoting tolerance and more to do with teaching children how to engage in sex.

“Andrew Breitbart’s Biggovernment.com provides tapes of some of the sessions. Describing the subject matter as smut would be putting it lightly. The conference discussions were very graphic… Teaching children sexual techniques is simply not appropriate. Unfortunately, it is part of a consistent pattern by some homosexual activists to promote underage homosexuality while pretending that their mission is simply to promote tolerance for so-called alternative lifestyles. It is outrageous that someone involved in this scandal is being paid by the taxpayers to serve in a high-powered position at the Education Department, of all places.”

This is awful. The agenda of homosexual activists destroys the very fabric of our nation. When innocent children become victims in the hands of these kinds of influences, which are not restricted by our leadership, then we should know that the end of this God-defying civilization is drawing near (compare 2 Peter 2:4-9; 3:1-13; Jude 5-7).

But “Our Legal System Works…”???

CNN reported on December 17:

“After more than three decades in prison, a man in Florida was set free Thursday after a DNA test showed he did not kidnap and rape a 9-year-old boy in 1974. James Bain, 54, was 19 when he was convicted on charges of kidnapping, burglary and strong-arm rape… Bain was serving a life sentence… Of the 245 people in the United States who have been exonerated by DNA testing, none has spent more time behind bars than Bain…

“Bain was convicted in 1974 of taking a 9-year-old Lake Wales, Florida, boy from his bed and raping him. According to police records, the victim told police that he fell asleep with his brothers and sisters, but when he woke up a man was dragging him by a baseball field. The boy said he was forced to the ground and raped. The Lake Wales police report says that the boy told police that his attacker had bushy sideburns and a mustache. After being shown five photographs of potential suspects, the report says, the victim picked out the photo of Bain…

“Florida in 2001 passed a statute allowing cases to be reopened for DNA testing. Four times Bain submitted handwritten motions seeking such testing, only to be denied. His fifth try was successful only after an appeals court ruled that he was entitled to a hearing… His twin sister, Jannie Jones, told police that James was home with her, watching a popular television medical drama called ‘Medical Center’ at the time of the attack.”

The Bible prohibits the conviction of an accused unless at least two eye witnesses agree on and confirm the facts of the underlying charge. If, however, the witness lied or was negligent in his or her testimony, he or she had to be punished.

Strained Relations Between Vatican and Israel

Deutsche Welle reported on December 19:

“Pope Benedict XVI is facing criticism after he put a controversial wartime predecessor one step closer to sainthood. Jewish groups say Pope Pius XII did not do enough to save Jewish lives during the Second World War… Pope Benedict has approved a decree that recognizes the pontiff, who is accused of doing too little to help Europe’s Jews during World War II, as having ‘heroic virtues.’ The posthumous honor gives the former pope the title ‘venerable’ and places him two steps from full canonization.

“Pius XI has been accused of turning a blind eye to the Nazi genocide of the Jews, in a controversy that has strained relations between the Vatican and Israel… Attempts to beatify the former pope had been described as ‘unacceptable’ by Israel’s social affairs minister Isaac Herzog… ‘Throughout the period of the Holocaust, the Vatican knew very well what was happening in Europe,’ Herzog told the Haaretz newspaper in 2008.”

The New York Times added on December 23:

“In an effort to calm growing tensions with Jewish groups, the Vatican said Wednesday that Pope Benedict XVI’s decision moving the wartime pope Pius XII closer to sainthood was not a ‘hostile act’ against those who believe Pius did not do enough to stop the Holocaust. The Vatican spokesman… issued a statement saying that the beatification process evaluated the ‘Christian life’ of Pius, who reigned from 1939 to 1958, and not ‘the historical impact of all his operative decisions’… Benedict confirmed the ‘heroic virtues’ of Pius — along with those of John Paul II — on Saturday, opening the door to beatification once a miracle is attributed to each. A second miracle would be required for sainthood.

“The move created anger among many Jewish groups, which have argued that Pius did not speak out vocally enough against the Nazis or intervene to save Jews during World War II, and that the Vatican helped many former Nazis escape to South America after World War II. The decision by Benedict — a German who was an unwilling member of the Hitler Youth — to move Pius closer to sainthood was the latest in a series of controversies. It came less than a year after he revoked the excommunication of a schismatic bishop who had denied the scope of the Holocaust, an act that caused the pope and the Vatican to issue a series of extensive clarifications. Benedict also upset many Jews when he did not directly mention the Nazis or Germany during a visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Israel in May, as John Paul II had done, although Benedict has denounced the Holocaust on many other occasions…

“[The Vatican spokesman] added that the Vatican hoped the pope’s expected visit to the Rome synagogue next month would reaffirm ties between Judaism and the Roman Catholic Church… The legacy of Pius is particularly sensitive for the Jewish community in Rome. More than 1,000 of its members were rounded up in 1943 and deported to Auschwitz. Documents in the Vatican archives indicate that Pius knew of the deportation and did not act to stop it.”

The Bible shows that ultimately, the Roman Catholic Church will be at odds with Israel. In spite of wrong assumptions taught by some, there is nothing in the Bible prophesying a future friendship pact, contract or treaty between Catholic Europe and the state of Israel, which will allegedly last for 3 1/2 years. Rather, the relationship between these two entities will steadily deteriorate. For more information, please read our Q&A on Daniel 9:27.

Will the Habsburgs Run for Presidency?

Europe World News reported on December 16:

“Austria’s Habsburg family suffered a blow in their bid for the Austrian presidency Wednesday, after the country’s Constitutional Court delayed a ruling on whether the former rulers could be barred from running for office until after forthcoming elections. Ulrich Habsburg-Lothringen and his daughter-in-law Gabriele Maria Habsburg-Lothringen are seeking to overturn a clause in the constitution that excludes members of current or former ruling families from being elected head of state. The court said it has no mandate to take up the matter before the elections in April – but advised the Habsburgs on how to proceed in order to have their case heard eventually.

“They should formally announce their candidature, which would be rejected by the national election authority, and Habsburg-Lothringen and his daughter-in-law could then contest the decision at the court. ‘Of course, I will follow through with this,’ said Ulrich Habsburg-Lothringen, 68. He is a third-degree nephew of Otto von Habsburg, the son of the last emperor Charles. He is set to run as an independent candidate, but the Green party, along with the far-right Freedom Party, has said it wants to change the constitution so that former ruling nobility can be elected. Habsburg-Lothringen said he was confident that he could collect the 6,000 signatures necessary to launch a presidential bid.”

This development is worth watching, as the Bible says that modern Europe will unite as the tenth resurrection of the ancient Roman Empire, and the Habsburgs (under Charles V.) constituted the seventh revival of the Roman Empire (and the fourth revival of the Holy Roman Empire). For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize–“Fundamental Misjudgments”

The Financial Times wrote on December 10:

“When the Nobel committee awarded Barack Obama the annual Peace Prize a few months back, it made two fundamental misjudgments. First, it failed to recognise that there would be widespread dismay that the prize was being awarded to someone at the outset of his public journey, with little to show in terms of solid international achievement. Secondly, it failed to predict that Mr Obama would end up making his acceptance speech little more than [a] week after ordering a massive US troop uplift in the war in Afghanistan.

“To be fair to Mr Obama, his acceptance speech in Oslo recognises these points head on… while he may be winding down the war in Iraq, the conflict in Afghanistan is accelerating: ‘We are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed.’ As statements on war go, world leaders rarely get this blunt.

“Mr Obama’s frankness does not stop there, however. He keeps up this blunt approach before a Norwegian audience which, I suspect, must have wondered at times whether they’d chosen the right guy for the peace prize. For the major theme of Obama’s speech is his defence of the ‘just war,’ of the argument that nations are right at times to take military action…

“As ever with Obama, it all adds up to a finely crafted carefully balanced speech. Yet what stands out, when considering the audience before which he stands, is his justification of military action when necessary. Barack Obama must surely  be the first Nobel peace laureate ever to turn up at the prize ceremony and confront a notably pacifist audience with such belligerence.”

“Mr. President, War Is Not Peace!”

The Huffington Post wrote on December 12:

“Eloquence in Oslo cannot change the realities of war… From President Obama, we hear that peace is the ultimate goal. But ‘peace’ is a fixture on a strategic horizon that keeps moving as the military keeps marching… War is not peace. It never has been. It never will be…

“In the name of pragmatism, Obama spoke of ‘the world as it is’ and threw a cloak of justification over the grisly escalation in Afghanistan by insisting that ‘war is sometimes necessary’ — but generalities do nothing to mitigate the horrors of war being endured by others. President Obama accepted the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize while delivering — to the world as it is — a pro-war speech. The context instantly turned the speech’s insights into flackery for more war.”

As Christians, we are not to participate in any war fought by humans. The Bible clearly prohibits this. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Should You Fight in War?” Also, please watch our most recent StandingWatch programs on the subject, “Lessons from the Afghan War,” and “Coming–Worldwide Nuclear War.” 

“Obama Does Not Deserve the Peace Prize”

The Israeli paper, Haaretz, wrote on December 10:

“An American president who has not yet managed to make peace anywhere in the world will be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He will be awarded the prize even though he is personally responsible for scores of targeted killings and much slaughter of civilians in aerial bombardments. He will be awarded the prize even though he has just decided to escalate one of the two ineffectual wars he is conducting. He will be awarded the prize only because he is a Democrat, a liberal and a black man who defeated the Republicans and cast George W. Bush out of the White House.

“Oslo has provided us with many amusing jokes in recent decades. However, the joke of Obama as peace prize laureate is the funniest of all. It proves the absurdity of the lengths to which the self-righteous European culture of political correctness can go. Obama is not to blame for the Norwegians having decided to act foolishly. However, if he had any courage he would have refused to accept a Nobel [Peace Prize] prematurely. He would have asked the prize committee to judge him at the end of his term in office and not at its start.

“Obama hasn’t done so, and this isn’t surprising. Thus far the glamorous president has not shown courage on any issue or in any area. True, Obama is intelligent, articulate and charismatic. However, he hasn’t really done anything yet in the international arena. He has orchestrated neither confrontations nor reconciliations. He has neither won a victory nor made peace. He has not evinced willingness to pay any sort of price for any sort of achievement. In his first year as president of the world, Obama has not proved he has a backbone. He has not yet manifested himself as a leader.

“In 2010 the world will need a leader. From day to day, Iran is increasingly becoming a nuclear nightmare; Pakistan is a barrel of nuclear explosives and North Korea is a nuclear rogue. The Iranian-Pakistani-North Korean triangle makes clear what the challenge of the 21st century is: how to prevent turning the world into a nuclear jungle. How to maintain nuclear order and prevent nuclear chaos. How to get through the next half-century without a Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

“Obama’s Washington understands the challenge very well. So do Nicolas Sarkozy’s Paris, Angela Merkel’s Berlin and Gordon Brown’s London. Even Dmitry Medvedev’s Moscow is beginning to understand. But the general public in North America and Europe has not yet internalized what its leaders know. The media are indeed reporting on centrifuges, enrichment programs and warheads. Politicians and pundits are indeed paying lip service to the Iranian-Pakistani-North Korean nuclear triangle. But there is no fervor in the talk. There is no real sense of urgency. There is no committed discourse. International public opinion is still focused on global warming, not global nuclearization, as the most urgent issue on the agenda…”

The Bible clearly prophesies that in these end times, the world will be facing nuclear war–and that no human being would SURVIVE this terrible time soon to come, unless God was to intervene and cut those days short. For more information, please listen to our StandingWatch program, “Coming–Worldwide Nuclear War,” and read our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”

The Ongoing Health-Care Debacle–Politics at its “Finest”…

ABC News reported on December 16:

“President Obama said he likes the Senate health care compromise and wants it passed by Christmas, but he faces a revolt from some liberals who say the health care bill has been gutted to appease insurance companies. ‘This is a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than AIG,’ former Democratic National Committee chairman and medical doctor Howard Dean [said]… ‘A very small number of people are going to get any insurance at all, until 2014, if the bill works… Dean sent shockwaves when he said Tuesday… that the removal of the Medicare buy-in means Democrats should just kill the health care bill and start over.”

ABC News added on December 16:

“[Joe] Lieberman has scrambled the politics of health care overhaul continually… His objections to including a public option were a main reason Democrats fashioned a compromise that would replace such a mechanism with a Medicare expansion, allowing people as young as 55 to buy into the system. Then, on Sunday, Lieberman seemed to reverse himself on that provision, notifying Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada that he couldn’t support the expansion in Medicare after all.

“That leaves Senate Democratic leaders, who can’t afford to lose a single vote on health care, poised to strip that out as well, with the White House’s acquiescence… Lieberman benefits from the simple fact that Democrats need him, even if many of them don’t like him. He might be among the few political figures who comes out of the grueling health care debate with a smile.”

The Associated Press reported on December 16:

“The Senate is in health care gridlock after a Republican senator forced the clerk to read aloud a 767-page amendment. GOP Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma had sought approval to require that any amendment considered by the Senate must be offered 72 hours in advance and with a full cost report. When he was rebuffed by Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, Coburn invoked his right to require that an amendment by another lawmaker be read aloud. That sent the Senate into limbo, since the amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, is 767 pages long.”

ABC News reported on December 16:

“President Obama told ABC News’ Charles Gibson in an interview that if Congress does not pass health care legislation that will bring down costs, the federal government ‘will go bankrupt.’”

At the same time, the Associated Press reported on December 16:

“President Barack Obama has signed into law a $1.1 trillion bill that increases the budgets in many areas of the government by about 10 percent, including health, law enforcement and veterans’ programs. Obama signed the bill privately at the White House on Wednesday after receiving the bill from Congress on Sunday… Most Republicans opposed the bill, citing runaway federal spending… Democrats said the spending would help the economy recover from the recession.”

Why the Disdain for Britain by Obama Administration?

The Wall Street Journal wrote on December 14:

“Britain is the only European country President Barack Obama can really count on to respond positively to his plea for NATO to provide extra forces for Afghanistan. So why is it, then, that the Obama administration can barely conceal its disdain for a nation that, by its deeds, time and again proves itself to be America’s staunchest and most reliable ally?…

“Before he became president it was said that Mr. Obama harbored a deep grudge against Britain for its colonialist past. It is alleged that his paternal grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama, was tortured by the British during the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya in the 1950s, when it was controlled by Britain. In his autobiographical book “The Audacity of Hope,” Mr. Obama unflatteringly compares the British Empire to South Africa’s apartheid regime and the former Soviet Union.

“Soon after his inauguration, he sent back to the U.K. a bust of Sir Winston Churchill that had been loaned to President George W. Bush after the 9/11 attacks. The sculpture had enjoyed pride of place in the Oval Office.

“There is also an important ideological reason that Britain’s leading policy makers find themselves increasingly shunned by the U.S. Key foreign-policy advisers to Mr. Obama are keen advocates of a federal Europe, one in which the European Commission based in Brussels is the main center of power and influence, rather than the individual capitals, such as London, Paris and Berlin. In this context, Britain’s dogged attachment to a ‘special relationship’ with America is regarded as an embarrassing relic of a previous era.”

Britain Angers Israel

Deutsche Welle reported on December 14:

“Israel has slammed an arrest warrant issued by a British court against former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. The now opposition leader is under fire for her role in the offensive in the Gaza Strip one year ago… A statement released by the foreign ministry urged Britain to change the law to prevent such action from being taken in the future.

“The details of the warrant are currently unclear. British daily The Guardian reports that the warrant was issued on the weekend for Livni’s role in the war in the Gaza Strip almost a year ago. The warrant has now been withdrawn after it emerged that Livni had cancelled a planned visit to Britain…

“Several Israeli officials have previously called off trips to Britain as a result of efforts by Palestinians to prosecute Israelis in British courts. In September, pro-Palestinian activists tried to have Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrested for his role in the Gaza conflict but the attempt was rejected on the grounds of diplomatic immunity. Livni would not have enjoyed this immunity as she is no longer a government minister.”

The Jerusalem Post wrote on December 15:

“British Foreign Secretary David Miliband called Kadima head Tzipi Livni and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman Tuesday evening in an apparent effort to prevent the diplomatic crisis stemming from a British arrest warrant issued against Livni from spinning completely out of control. According to a statement put out by Livni’s office, Miliband expressed his ‘shock’ at the arrest warrant and promised to work immediately to ensure that a similar occurrence would not happen in the future against Livni or other Israeli leaders. Miliband told Lieberman that the warrant was ‘completely unacceptable.’

“While Israel has heard such promises numerous times over the last five years, there was a sense in Jerusalem Tuesday night that the wall-to-wall outrage in Israel that accompanied news of the warrant against Livni had registered in London. Britain’s outgoing ambassador Tom Phillips bore the brunt of Israeli anger over the matter, being summoned to the Foreign Ministry and having a conversation on the matter with National Security Council head Uzi Arad.

“Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s office issued a statement saying he instructed Arad to deliver a ‘clear message’ to Phillips that Israel expected the British government to ‘act against this immoral phenomenon which is trying to impair Israel’s right to self-defense’…

“While in the past Israel did not press too hard on the issue, that policy seemed to change abruptly when the Foreign Ministry issuing a statement Tuesday morning, surprisingly harsh in the cautious world of diplomacy, saying that Israel rejected the ‘cynical’ move taken in the British courts at the behest of extremist elements in Britain and called on the British government ‘for once and for all’ to keep its promises and work to prevent the manipulation by anti-Israeli elements of the British legal system against Israel. ‘The lack of determined and immediate action to correct this distortion harms the relations between the two countries,’ the statement read. ‘If Israeli leaders cannot visit Britain in a dignified manner, it will naturally be a real obstacle to Britain’s desire to have an active role in the peace process in the Middle East’…

“The crisis comes at a time of already deteriorating relations between Israel and Britain, with Jerusalem frustrated at London for its abstention in the UN General Assembly on the Goldstone report, its support of the Swedish proposal that the EU recognize east Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, and its guidelines to stores and retailers last week to label produce from the territories as either coming from Palestinians or the settlements.”

Britain’s conduct in this matter can only be described as outrageous, provocative, negligent, ignorant and stupid at the same time. As the Associated Press reported on December 16, “Livni’s office says the British premier phoned her Wednesday afternoon and said he intends to act to change a law that allows non-citizens to be brought before British courts.”

It added: “Britain is vowing to curtail a peculiar legal power that lets judges order the arrest of visiting politicians and generals — a threat currently focused on Israeli visitors that, one day, might be invoked against Barack Obama or Vladimir Putin. Lawyers working with Palestinian activists in recent years have sought the arrest of senior Israeli civilian and military figures under terms of ‘universal jurisdiction.’ This ill-defined legal concept empowers judges to issue arrest warrants for visiting officials accused of war crimes in a foreign conflict.”

The shameful truth is that the British government knew of this ridiculous law to empower political judges to issue offensive decisions, promised Israel to repeal this law, and did nothing to keep this promise. Britain must be careful that it does not find itself alienated from and abandoned by the rest of the world because of its own doing.

Is EU Backing East Jerusalem as Palestine Capital?

The EUobserver wrote on December 11:

“Palestine Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has said that the EU backs the establishment of East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, fueling the dispute over a recent EU communique. Mr Fayyad on a visit to Brussels on Friday (11 December) said Tuesday’s EU statement on the Middle East makes a number of references to East Jerusalem that, ‘if added [together], in my reading, add up to nothing less than recognising East Jerusalem as the future capital of the state of Palestine’…

“Mr Fayyad’s remarks continue a dispute on what the EU really thinks about Palestine, which erupted two weeks ago when Israel first attacked a Swedish draft of the EU statement, which contained more explicit pro-Palestinian language. East Jerusalem – which is home to Muslims and Jewish settlers as well as some of the holiest sites in Islam and Judaism – lies at the heart of international efforts to bring peace to the region, with Israel claiming it as part of its own ‘indivisible’ capital…

“The [EU] commission is preparing to launch a new Action Plan for Palestinian relations that is to involve sending in more EU experts and ‘front-loading’ €158.5 million of aid in early 2010…”

The Bible states that Jerusalem will be “surrounded” by European armies [of the LAST resurrection of the ancient Roman Empire], and that it will become a stumbling block for ALL nations. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Iran’s Latest Advanced Missile

On December 16, the Associated Press reported the following:

“Iran on Wednesday test-fired an upgraded version of its most advanced missile, which is capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe, in a new show of strength aimed at preventing any military strike against it amid the nuclear standoff with the West. The test stoked tensions between Iran and the West, which is pressing Tehran to rein in its nuclear program. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said it showed the need for tougher U.N. sanctions on Iran…

“Wednesday’s test was for the latest version of Iran’s longest-range missile, the Sajjil-2, with a range of about 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometers). That range places Israel, Iran’s sworn enemy, well within reach, as well as U.S. bases in the Gulf region and parts of southeastern Europe… Iran has repeatedly warned it will retaliate if Israel or the United States carries out military strikes against its nuclear facilities, at a time when the U.S. and its allies accuse Tehran of seeking to develop a nuclear weapon… Nuclear negotiations have been deadlocked for months…

“The name ‘Sajjil’ means ‘baked clay,’ a reference to a story in the Quran, Islam’s holy book, in which birds sent by God drive off an enemy army attacking the holy city of Mecca by pelting them with stones of baked clay… Solid-fuel missiles like the Sajjil-2 are more accurate than the liquid fuel missiles of similar range currently possessed by Iran. They are also a concern because they can be fueled in advance and moved or hidden in silos. Iran previously had a solid-fuel missile, the Fateh, with a far shorter range of 120 miles (200 kilometers).”

The Australian wrote on December 18:

“Israeli officials told Haaretz Mr Obama warned Chinese President Hu Jintao during the US President’s visit to Beijing a month ago as part of the US attempt to convince the Chinese to support strict sanctions on Tehran if it does not accept Western proposals for its nuclear program. The Israeli officials said the US had informed Israel about Mr Obama’s meetings in Beijing on Iran. They said Mr Obama made it clear to Mr Hu that at some point the US would no longer be able to prevent Israel from acting as it saw fit in response to the perceived Iranian threat, the report said.”

How Much Allah Can Europe Bear?

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 11:

“The Swiss decision has shocked Europe and the world because its ramifications go far beyond the building of minarets — they also concern the identity of an entire continent. This was a referendum on Western society’s perception of Islam as a threat. The issue is generating intense debate: Just how much of Islam is predominantly Christian Europe prepared to accept? The decision by the otherwise so tolerant Alpine country reveals the deep-seated fear of an Islam that is becoming increasingly visible…

“Surveys last week revealed that 44 percent of Germans oppose the construction of minarets, followed by 41 percent of the French. Fifty-five percent of all Europeans see Islam as an intolerant religion. Does the Swiss vote reveal an attitude that a majority in Europe would also support if given the opportunity?…

“Can Europe still be Europe if, for instance, in 2050 most young people under the age of 15 in Austria are Muslims? And when Muhammad today is already the most common name for newborn boys in Brussels and Amsterdam, and the third most common in England?…

“Dealing with Islam is perhaps the greatest challenge facing Europe… sometimes fears are stronger than facts, and sometimes a ban on minarets has nothing to do with minarets…”

The Local reported on December 11:

“A poll… for [Germany’s] public broadcaster ARD showed a third of those asked expressed great concern that Islam was growing too quickly in Germany. Thirty-nine percent were… worried about Islam’s impact on society, but to a lesser degree. Only 22 percent said they had no problem with the religion.”

We will see more and more an increased influence of orthodox “Christianity” in Europe, which will ultimately not tolerate the existence of any non-“Christian” competitive religions or convictions.

“Thou Shalt Not Shop!”

Der Tagesspiegel wrote on December 3:

“It was just another Tuesday, but Germany’s Christian churches had a reason to let their bells toll this week. In the name of religious freedom, they won a major victory at the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe against the heathen city of Berlin. It had to be Berlin – a godless place that has ditched compulsory religion classes for schoolchildren and would like to prohibit prayer in school buildings. But the churches now have it from the highest judicial authority in the country – Berlin’s secular push has gone too far. Advent Sundays in the run-up to Christmas are holy and shops must remain closed…

“How is it that Switzerland’s recent prohibition on minarets can be seen as an affront to religious freedom, but in Germany we allow churches rather than a democratically elected government tell us what to do with our Sundays? What happened to the religious freedom of those citizens who don’t believe in the Christian ideal of the Sabbath [the author means Sunday and wrongly identifies it with the Sabbath. The biblical Sabbath is not Sunday, but the time from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset] and would rather go to the shops than church?

“The place to go for answers from now on is Karlsruhe, home to the Constitutional Court. No-one should underestimate the legal gymnastics required to reach this decision. According to the constitution, Sunday is a day to rest and rejuvenate the soul. There’s not a single word about God or Christmas or even the birth of Jesus. And no wonder – Sunday was never holy to the German constitution, which is why no-one could claim it was in the name of religion.

“But that’s all changed now. The Constitutional Court’s decision refers directly to the Christian roots of resting on Sundays, constructing a legal precedent for the churches. If politicians from one of Germany’s 16 federal states want to re-think their retail shopping hours, it might now be a good idea to stop by the local bishop’s place to see if they have his blessing first. But how do you reconcile that with the right to a neutral, secular government? This is the real reason three Constitutional Court judges rejected the ruling. Had it been just one more, Berliners could have kept their Sunday shopping during Advent. The topic of store opening hours might be banal, but the court ruling fundamentally changes the state’s relationship between religion and law…”

The Roman Catholic Church will exert more and more power in Germany and continental Europe, to enforce Sunday worship on unsuspecting people. The Bible warns us of this. To learn more about the connection between Sunday worship and the “mark of the beast,” please read our free booklet, “Is That in The Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.”

“Joining Rome ‘Means Commitment'”

BBC News wrote on December 11:

“Discontented Anglicans who convert must not become a ‘sect’ within the Roman Catholic Church, a senior Catholic clergyman dealing with church unity has warned… Monsignor Andrew Faley, Assistant General Secretary of the English and Welsh Catholic bishops’ conference [said:]… ‘They become members of a Church which has the ministry of the successor of St Peter as its source of unity… unity for Catholics is central to their understanding of the Church’…

“A substantial number of married ex-Anglican priests are already Catholic priests, having crossed to Rome in the years following the ordination of women priests by the Church of England in the 1990s. But the overwhelming majority of Catholic priests in Britain are required to remain unmarried and celibate… But a man in the ordinariate who wishes to be considered as a priest ‘would be ordained as a celibate priest; he wouldn’t be allowed to marry.’ And a married man who has not been an Anglican priest, could he apply? ‘No,’ says Mgr Faley, ‘A married man within the Catholic tradition cannot be ordained; the norm is celibacy.'”

The Church of Rome will not just accept clergy from other churches, with different ideas, without insisting that these ideas will not be practiced, but abolished. It is the position of the Catholic Church that the pope speaks with godly authority and that he is Christ’s representative on earth. With this claim, it is obvious that those who want to become part of that church must submit in all points to that “authority.”

The Celebration of the German “Nikolaus”

The Local wrote on December 4:

“Each year on December 6, Germans remember the [mythological] death of Nicholas of Myra (now the Anatolia region of modern Turkey), who [supposedly] died on that day in 346. He was [allegedly] a Greek Christian bishop known for miracles and giving gifts secretly, and is now the patron saint of little children, sailors, merchants and students. Known as Nicholas the Wonderworker for his miracles, he is also identified with Santa Claus. Beliefs and traditions about Nikolaus were probably combined with German mythology, particularly regarding stories about the bearded pagan god Odin, who also had a beard and a bag to capture naughty children…

“According to the legend, Nikolaus comes in the middle of the night on a donkey or a horse and leaves little treats – like coins, chocolate, oranges and toys – for good children. What do naughty children get? This depends on different family traditions. Sometimes Nikolaus only leaves a switch in the boot, ostensibly for spankings, to show that the child doesn’t deserve a treat. In other families, a man disguised as St. Nicholas will visit the family or the child’s school alone or with his… sinister-looking alter ego Knecht Ruprecht [portrayed as a demon or the devil in many ancient pictures] to question the children about their behaviour.”

Nikolaus–or Santa Claus–and his alter-ego, the demonic “Knecht Ruprecht,” are clearly of pagan origin. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas.”

Who Will Be the Next King of England?

Mail On Line wrote on December 13:

“The Queen is to hand over a substantial part of her public duties to Prince William to help him prepare for the day when he becomes King, according to a confidential document obtained by The Mail on Sunday. Secret papers reveal that plans to ease the strain on the 83-year-old monarch and her 88-year-old husband, Prince Philip, are at an advanced stage. The disclosures come despite months of denials from the Palace that the Queen was planning to step back from her official work in favour of her 27-year-old grandson…

“The leak will add to speculation that the Queen believes William, rather than Charles, represents the best long-term interests of the monarchy… It is bound to lead to new speculation that when the Queen dies, the monarchy could skip a generation, with the Crown bypassing Charles and being handed straight to William, although Royal sources strongly discount this option… Significantly, William will undertake his first official overseas tour in January when he represents the Queen in New Zealand and Australia. He is also expected to attend the World Cup in South Africa.”

According to further press releases, Buckingham Palace denied as “a complete lie” the allegation that Prince Charles was intended to be circumvented by appointing Prince William as the next king.

The Bible shows that the end-time royal house of England will play a prophetic role in these last days. It is therefore interesting to see who will turn out to be the future king.

“Europe’s Secret Nuclear Weapons”

Time magazine wrote on December 2:

“Is Italy capable of delivering a thermonuclear strike? Could the Belgians and the Dutch drop hydrogen bombs on enemy targets? And what about Germany – a country where fear of atomkraft is so great that the last government opposed all civilian nuclear power? Germany’s air force couldn’t possibly be training to deliver bombs 13 times more powerful than the one that destroyed Hiroshima, could it?

“It is Europe’s dirty secret that the list of nuclear-capable countries extends beyond those – Britain and France – who have built their own weapons. Nuclear bombs are stored on air-force bases in Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands – and planes from each of those countries are capable of delivering them. The Federation of American Scientists believes that there are some 200 B61 thermonuclear gravity bombs scattered across these four countries.

“Under a NATO agreement struck during the Cold War, the bombs, which are technically owned by the U.S., can be transferred to the control of a host nation’s air force in times of conflict. Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Dutch, Belgian, Italian and German pilots remain ready to engage in nuclear war.”

The Bible prophesies that a nuclear world war is coming soon–and that a nuclear Europe will be heavily involved.

The Russian View–Europe Needs an Army

The Pravda wrote on November 27:

“The European Union needs the joint all-European army… The US administration is very negative about the idea. The question about the all-European army was pushed into the background after the Balkan war… Things changed in 2009. The European Parliament established the Rapid Deployment Force of the European Union in 2009. Last week, officials of the Italian administration put forward a suggestion to look into the matter of the European Army again. Italy’s Foreign Minister Franco Frattini stated that Europe needed the army to deepen the European integration, optimize the spending on military operation in NATO and repulse possible threats…

“Europe wants to increase its weight in the world and turn into a real center of influence. Europe has not been happy with its role of America’s minor partner, not to mention its position of a subordinate member in NATO…

“Some experts say that the EU does not need the army because it is a political, not a military organization. European countries prefer not to participate in military actions. They would rather subordinate to someone than get ready for war to defend their interests and territories…

“Other experts say that the creation of the common European force is good for Russia. Russia supposedly used its friendly relations with Italy and initiated Frattini’s statement to distract the EU from the USA… Europe needs to get rid of America’s influence because the latter plans to betray its old-time partners for the sake of the new partnership – with China. The Washington-Beijing axis is a real threat, and Europe will be able to handle it only if it joins forces with Russia.”

The Bible clearly shows that Europe will have a very powerful joint army in the very near future. It is also possible, judging from history, that Europe will align at first with Russia, against the USA, but prophecy also reveals that finally Europe and Russia will be warring enemies (as happened so many times before, including under Hitler and Stalin).

Is the EU Escalating War in the Middle East?

  The EUobserver wrote on December 4:

“The EU must put real pressure on Israel to halt settlement growth in East Jerusalem or risk seeing an escalation of the Middle East conflict that could spill into Europe, a Jewish politician on the front line of the peace process has warned. ‘We have reached the last moment when it is still possible to divide and share Jerusalem. If it [decisive action] does not happen this year, it will become impossible to implement any plan like the two-state solution,’ Meir Margalit, a Jerusalem city councilor, told EUobserver in a phone interview on Thursday (3 December).

“‘This is not an internal conflict. You [the EU] are part of this conflict,’ he added. ‘I am talking about terrorism. I am talking about another London, about the clash of civilisations. The clash of civilisations started in Jerusalem and it will end in Jerusalem,’ Mr Margalit said, referring to the tube bombing in the UK capital in 2005…

“Mr Margalit believes the situation has reached such a dangerous point that the EU should consider economic sanctions against Israel. The councilor rejected the argument that Europe cannot influence Israeli policy unless it acts jointly with the US. ‘The EU is not a bunch of boy scouts,’ he said. ‘It is the biggest power here after the US. It must realise that what happens here will impact what happens in Europe much more than what happens in the US.'”

It is prophesied that Europe will intervene militarily in the Middle East in an attempt to bring “peace” to that region.

Europe Pleases Both Sides–Temporarily

The Australian wrote on December 10:

“ISRAEL has expressed relief that the European Union has watered down a resolution that would have declared Jerusalem as the capital of any future Palestinian state. The EU yesterday supported a resolution that Jerusalem should be subject to negotiations as part of any final status agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. The softening of the initial Sweden-sponsored resolution followed lobbying by Israel, which feared the initial proposal would have made it difficult to engage in negotiations.

“It is understood Italy, France, Germany, Poland and Hungary were among the countries that overturned the earlier draft. The statement by the council of foreign ministers was a rare accomplishment for the EU, giving both Israel and the Palestinians something to be pleased with…

“Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat rejected any suggestion that Jerusalem be divided, saying the EU’s resolution was ‘a real danger for the future of Jerusalem that will never work.'”

A Third Temple by 2010?

On December 6, Haaretz reported the following:

“If the 18th-century rabbinic authority the Vilna Gaon was right, on March 16, 2010, construction will begin on the third Temple. His projection states that the auspicious day will coincide with the third completion of the Hurva Synagogue in Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter. The great day is at hand: On March 15, the reconstructed Hurva Synagogue, considered the most important house of prayer in Jerusalem will be rededicated. It was last destroyed in the War of Independence.”

The Bible strongly indicates that a third Temple will be built, and that the Jews will begin to offer sacrifices in that Temple.

Jews and Muslims–an Unlikely Alliance

The Jerusalem Post wrote on December 3:

“Citing religious discrimination, a diverse coalition of Jewish organizations is objecting to Switzerland’s ban of minarets on local mosques… Jewish organizations, realizing that a crackdown on Islam could have repercussions for Jews as well, have come to the defense of Muslim worshipers, arguing that the Swiss’s move was unjustifiable…

“‘This is not the first time a Swiss popular vote has been used to promote religious intolerance,’ said the ADL [Anti-Defamation League] in a press release. ‘A century ago, a Swiss referendum banned Jewish ritual slaughter, in an attempt to drive out its Jewish population’…

“Meanwhile, it appeared that Italy might hold an anti-minaret referendum of its own. Roberto Caldeoli, leader of Italy’s right-wing Northern League party, said, ‘Respect for other religions is important, but we must put the brakes on Muslim propaganda, or else we will end up with an Islamic political party.’

“French Ambassador Christophe Bigot told The Jerusalem Post that ‘Muslims, like Catholics, like Jews, should be allowed to worship the way they wish. So why limit construction of mosques?’…

“Hegumen Filaret (Bulekov), a Moscow Patriarchate representative at the Council of Europe, voiced support for Switzerland’s ban. ‘Accusing Switzerland that it is somehow discriminating against the Islamic minority would be at least lopsided,’ Filaret told Interfax [news] service. ‘The issue of minarets is not an issue of religious freedom, but it is an issue of political presence of people of a certain faith and ethnic background in a country. Taking into account a rapid rate of Islamization, visible signs of Muslims’ presence would have, in particular, a political tint,’ he said.”

The New York Times wrote on December 9:

“Suddenly, people are expressing views that they once would have considered racist or intolerant… 41 percent of French people questioned said they opposed the construction of mosques, up from 22 percent in 2001. On the question of building minarets, 46 percent were opposed… One source of the fear of Muslims… is Europeans’ deep and complicated resentment of an unfamiliar, historically hostile religion that is perceived as a direct challenge to Christianity, Europe’s dominant faith.”

Europe is returning to its historical roots. The historical Holy Roman Empire–a combination of state and church–is being revived. We can expect that the EU will embrace Roman Catholicism as their state religion (as is already the case in Italy and some other EU countries). The EU will become an Orthodox Christian power bloc, which will not tolerate in the end non-Christian religions, including Islam and Judaism. Most non-Catholic “Christian” churches will come under the Catholic Church’s umbrella and accept the pope as their spiritual leader with unquestioned authority in spiritual matters. The next article on the election of a lesbian bishop in the Anglican Church might give us one of the reasons why this might be happening.

Anglican Church–“In Your Face…”

Mail On Line wrote on December 6:

“The worldwide Anglican Church has been plunged into a fresh crisis after a lesbian was chosen as its second gay bishop… Canon Mary Glasspool was elected as an assistant bishop for the diocese of Los Angeles… Rod Thomas, the leader of the conservative evangelical group Reform and a member of the General Synod, said: ‘I feel deeply ashamed that this is happening in the Anglican Church. I think a schism is absolutely inevitable.’

“But St Paul’s Cathedral’s Canon Chancellor Giles Fraser, a leading liberal, said: ‘This is another nail in the coffin of Christian homophobia.’ Canon Glasspool, 55, has openly stated that she has lived with her partner, Becki Sander, since 1988. American Gene Robinson became the first gay Anglican bishop in 2003.”

Times On Line wrote on December 6:

“The Archbishop of Canterbury and a majority of the other 38 Anglican primates had requested a moratorium on gay bishops and same-sex blessings in an attempt to prevent the Communion from splitting between evangelicals and liberals… Kendall Harmon, of the conservative diocese of South Carolina, said that the election of Canon Glasspool was damaging. ‘This decision represents an intransigent embrace of a pattern of life Christians throughout history and the world have rejected as against biblical teaching.’

“However, influential Anglicans spoke up in support of Canon Glasspool’s election… Liberals in England are increasingly frustrated that an Archbishop of Canterbury who was himself elected for his supposedly liberal views on this and other subjects has embraced conservative Christian values in the name of Church unity…

“Canon Glasspool needs approval from a majority of dioceses in the Episcopal Church in the US before she can be consecrated. The US church has become more conservative in the wake of the gay controversy and recently the dioceses voted against the consecration of a bishop who is sympathetic towards the Buddhist tradition. However, it is thought likely that this latest consecration will go ahead.”

It appears that many Anglicans have taken an “in your face”–approach. They don’t only seem to care about the survival of their church; they seem to pursue intentionally and willfully a suicidal road of self-destruction to push their own anti-biblical agenda. In all this discussion, we should not forget that the Bible does not only prohibit the appointment of practicing homosexual or lesbian ministers; it also prohibits the appointment of women–whether lesbian or heterosexual–to the office of a minister.

Britain and France at Odds

The EUobserver wrote on December 4:

“A meeting between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, scheduled to take place in London on Friday (4 December), has been cancelled amid ongoing tensions surrounding recent EU appointments… The French president recently proposed the London visit as a means of defusing angst over last week’s appointment of Frenchman Michel Barnier to the important internal market portfolio inside the European Commission.

“The City of London greeted the job announcement with dismay. But subsequent comments from Mr Sarkozy that he had ‘out-manoeuvred’ Mr Brown and that the appointment was a ‘triumph’ for French ideas on financial regulation only added fuel to the fire and served to enrage Downing Street. Fears that further public comments during Friday’s visit could serve to aggravate the dispute appear to be the reason behind the cancellation, with British civil servants suggesting it was London that put the brakes on the idea.”

The centuries-long feud between Britain and France will continue, and will affect continental Europe. It is very likely that ultimately, Britain will exit the EU.

Is America Betraying Britain?

The Daily Mail wrote on December 9:

“In all the speeches Obama has made since becoming President – indeed, in all the speeches he made when on the campaign trail, too – neither Britain nor the special relationship have merited a single mention. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that while the special relationship may not be dead yet, it’s certainly dying, a fact that should be enormously worrying to politicians – and voters – on both sides of the Atlantic.

“And yet Obama seems strangely oblivious to the dangerous path he has embarked on, becoming the first U.S. President in modern times to place no importance on the historic relationship between the U.S. and Britain…

“This, after all, is a man who, within days of being sworn in as President, ordered that a bust of Winston Churchill – a gift from the British people to the U.S. in the dark days that followed 9/11 – be removed from the Oval Office… Unlike so many of his predecessors, Obama is certainly a man with no close family ties to this country. He never attended a university here and has no great political affinity with Britain either. His Kenyan grandfather, however, was reportedly mistreated under British colonial rule during that country’s Mau Mau rebellion – an event to which he devotes 35 pages of his memoir, Dreams From My Father…

“Obama… seems to be a president with no real grasp of history… By withdrawing plans for a missile shield to be located in Eastern Europe, he not only appeased the Russians, he also betrayed the Poles and the Czechs, people who have only just been released from the yoke of Soviet control and have since become enthusiastic and valuable Western allies. What he did in Eastern Europe, he now seems to be doing to us…

“Time and again, history has shown – most recently, of course, in Iraq and Afghanistan – that when it comes to taking decisive military action, the only country the U.S. has ever been able to rely on is Britain. When the U.S. marches in, it’s only ever the British who can be depended on to march alongside them. And yet all that proud history, all that noble sacrifice, seems to count for nothing in Obama’s eyes. He seems oblivious to the debt of gratitude he, and the American people, owe this country…

“Britain needs America – of that there is no doubt. But recent history shows that America needs Britain, too. Barack Obama needs to wake up to that; before it’s too late.”

It is entirely possible that Britain will find itself in the end abandoned by the USA.

Wartime President Obama Accepts Peace Prize

The Associated Press reported on December 10:

“President Barack Obama entered the pantheon of Nobel Peace Prize winners Thursday with humble words, acknowledging his own few accomplishments while delivering a robust defense of war… A wartime president honored for peace, Obama became the first sitting U.S. president in 90 years and the third ever to win the prize – some say prematurely.

“And yet Obama was staying here only about 24 hours and skipping the traditional second day of festivities. This miffed some in Norway but reflects a White House that sees little value in extra pictures of the president, his poll numbers dropping at home, taking an overseas victory lap while thousands of U.S. troops prepare to go off to war and millions of Americans remain jobless.

“Just nine days after ordering 30,000 more U.S. troops into battle in Afghanistan, Obama delivered a Nobel acceptance speech that he saw as a treatise on war’s use and prevention… In them, Obama refused to renounce war for his nation or under his leadership…

“‘A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida’s leaders to lay down their arms,’ Obama said. ‘To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism, it is a recognition of history.’

“The president laid out the circumstances where war is justified – in self-defense, to come to the aid of an invaded nation and on humanitarian grounds, such as when civilians are slaughtered by their own government or a civil war threatens to engulf an entire region. ‘The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it,’ he said. He also spoke bluntly of the cost of war, saying of the Afghanistan buildup he just ordered that ‘some will kill, some will be killed.'”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 10 that President Obama received the “wrong prize at the wrong time.” But the German reaction overall was mixed, and Der Stern wrote that President Obama’s “furious speech,” explaining when a war is “justified,” has increased his credibility.

However, what this deceived world does not understand is that NO war, fought by humans, is EVER justified. The lesson and recognition of history is that wars fought by humans have NEVER produced lasting peace, and they never will. Christ commanded His disciples to put the sword away (Matthew 26:52) and to rely instead on GOD (verse 53; compare Exodus 14:14). Ancient Israel did not do this, and neither does our “Christian” world today. This is WHY we don’t have peace–and WHY we will NEVER achieve peace with this kind of thinking. Far too many “Christians” are rejecting God and the words of Jesus Christ, while following their own wrong philosophies and reasoning. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Should YOU Fight in War?,” and please listen to our new StandingWatch program, “Lessons from the Afghan War.”

The Return of Syphilis in the UK

The Daily Mail wrote on December 5:

“Syphilis is making a comeback because of promiscuity among middle-aged men who ignore safe sex guidance, warn experts. Cases of the sexually transmitted infection have shot up more than tenfold in the past decade. It was thought the disease – which can cause madness, paralysis and even death in its final stages – had been largely wiped out with the advent of penicillin. But while their great-grandparents were well aware of the dangers of syphilis, adults today are seemingly ignorant about it and aiding its spread, with hotspots in London and the North West… Sexual health clinics say the rise in syphilis in the UK can also be traced back to increased contact with former Eastern Bloc countries such as Russia and Poland, where the disease has remained endemic.”

The Bible shows that many known and unknown diseases and sicknesses will affect this world, and especially countries like the United States and Great Britain, in these end times.

Copenhagen and the Global Warming Debate

This week, the global warming summit in Copenhagen began. It is unparalleled in size and attendance. It has been labeled as the most important summit in the history of man. But what is it all about? The selection of our articles below shows that there is strong disagreement regarding the existence of man-made global warming or climate change–and this debate recently accelerated, of course, with the infamous “climate-gate” occurrences. It is interesting that parallels are drawn by global warming supporters between the theory of evolution and climate change–perhaps without realizing that the theory of evolution HAS BEEN PROVEN to be false. Also interesting is the fact that Europe is turning on the USA and President Obama, insisting that he make more concessions on behalf of the USA–but very few believe that he will.

Belief in Global Warming at All-Time Low — Even BEFORE Climategate

Newsmax reported on December 6:

“A new poll reveals that the percentage of Americans who believe carbon dioxide emissions will cause global warming has dropped dramatically in recent years. And that poll by Harris Interactive was conducted between Nov. 2 and 11 — before the so-called ‘climategate’ controversy erupted, calling into question the validity of some of the science supporting manmade global warming.

“The poll found that the percentage of American[s] who believe in global warming has dropped from 75 percent in 2001 and 71 percent in 2007 to just 51 percent. At the same time, the percentage of those who do not believe in global warming has risen from 19 percent in 2001 and 23 percent in 2007 to 29 percent today, and the percentage who are unsure has climbed from 6 percent to 21 percent since 2001… Opinions differed sharply along party lines — 73 percent of Democrats believe in manmade global warming, compared to 28 percent of Republicans and 49 percent of Independents…

“Six days after the poll closed, on Nov. 17, someone hacked a server used by the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, and disseminated more than a thousand e-mails and other documents… The leaked documents ‘show that prominent scientists were so wedded to theories of manmade global warming that they ridiculed dissenters who asked for copies of their data, plotted how to keep researchers who reached different conclusions from publishing, and concealed apparently buggy computer code from being disclosed under the Freedom of Information law,’ CBS News reported.”

Worst Fears Have Come True

The Financial Times reported on December 7:

“Failure to agree [to] a new global framework on climate change at Copenhagen would squander the world’s best hope of avoiding the worst effects of global warming, officials from close to 190 countries heard on Monday morning.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 7:

“The worst fears of many delegates to the Copenhagen climate negotiations have already come true: It has become clear that the official attempt to replace the Kyoto Protocol will fail to produce a concrete plan to reduce carbon emissions…

“It is often claimed that we could easily stop warming through carbon emission reductions, if only politicians had the willpower. In fact, political willpower is the least of our worries. This policy approach — which we have followed for nearly 20 years — is critically flawed. It is flawed economically, because short-term carbon taxes will cost a fortune and do little. It is flawed politically, because negotiations to reduce CO2 emissions will become ever more fraught and divisive for the actors in Europe, America and Asia. And it is flawed technologically, because it will not ensure that alternative energy is ready to end our reliance on carbon…

“Global energy demand will double by 2050. Alternative sources of energy are far from ready for widespread use… Rather than making fossil fuels more expensive, we need to make alternative energy cheaper.”

“Europe Turns on US and China Over Weak Emission Targets”

Times on Line reported on December 7:

“The European Union today rejected the new carbon emission targets tabled by the United States and China and said they were much too weak to prevent catastrophic climate change. The dispute between the three main players at the Copenhagen climate change summit overshadowed the first day of negotiations and dashed hopes that a deal on emissions was imminent.

“The EU called on President Obama to announce a more ambitious target next week, when he arrives in Copenhagen for the last day of the conference on December 18. But the US insisted that the provisional offer made 10 days ago by Mr Obama was ‘remarkable’ and in line with what scientists had recommended.

“Mr Obama has proposed to cut its emissions by 4 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020, although he has said this is subject to getting the approval of Congress. The EU has made a legally binding commitment to cut its emissions by 20 per cent over the same period. It has also said it would increase the cut to 30 per cent if other countries committed to ‘comparable action’.

“Andreas Carlgren, Sweden’s environment minister and the EU’s main negotiator under the rotating presidency, said the targets proposed by the US and China were too low to qualify as comparable action and therefore the EU would not strengthen its 20 per cent target.”

“Saboteurs” Against Global Warming?

Times On Line wrote on December 6:

“Ed Miliband was furious. His press conference should have highlighted Britain’s role at the Copenhagen climate talks that open tomorrow — but instead he faced questions on whether global warming was even true. ‘We have to beware of the climate saboteurs,’ he barked. ‘The timing of this leak and the questioning of the science [are] not coincidental.’

“Miliband was not just referring to the now infamous leaking of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. His definition of ‘saboteurs’ also included climate sceptics such as Lord Lawson, who recently set up the Global Warming Policy Foundation, and David Davis, the former Conservative frontbencher, who last week challenged the science in a newspaper article… Miliband said [:] ‘The science is, however, clear and settled and we will push on in getting an agreement that is consistent with the science.’

“The day he spoke, his words were being undermined — by the man who has done most to make global warming a global obsession. Jim Hansen, director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said he shared the sceptics’ hope that the Copenhagen talks would fail. ‘The whole approach [at Copenhagen] is so wrong that it is better to reassess the situation,’ he said. What Hansen was complaining about was not the science, but the solutions to be proposed at Copenhagen and, in particular, the proposal to set up global carbon markets, in which permits to pollute are bought and sold.”

Danish Speaker of Parliament Questions Man-Made Global Warming

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 4:

“Denmark’s Speaker of Parliament has expressed serious doubts as to the way in which the climate debate has developed. ‘The problem is that lots of people go around saying that the climate change we see is a result of human activity. That is a very dangerous claim… Unfortunately… scientists say: “We have a theory” – then that crosses the road to the politicians who say: “We know”‘… Thor Pedersen says.

“[He] adds that the temperature has not risen in the past decade… ‘You should say that although we believed in our models, that the temperature would rise from 1998 to 2008, we have to admit that it has not risen. We cannot explain why it has not risen, but we believe we still have a problem. I’m just asking that people say what they actually know,’ Pedersen  [says]… ‘We should all shake hands and agree to do everything possible to create good living conditions. That has nothing to do with the climate debate, in which we try to determine the globe’s temperature. It is common sense…'”

Republicans and Democrats at Odds Over Climate Change

The Associated Press wrote on December 2:

“House Republicans pointed to controversial e-mails leaked from climate scientists and said it was evidence of corruption. Top administration scientists looking at the same thing found no such sign, saying it doesn’t change the fact that the world is warming… House Republicans Wednesday read excerpts from at least eight of the e-mails, saying they showed the world needs to re-examine experts’ claims that the science on warming is settled… ‘These e-mails show a pattern of suppression, manipulation and secrecy that was inspired by ideology, condescension and profit,’ said U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis…

“Defending the scientists, Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said somehow the e-mails aren’t stopping the Arctic from warming, the oceans from getting more acidic, and glaciers from melting…”

When All Else Fails… Blame It on Russian Conspiracy…

Times on Line wrote on December 6:

“UN officials likened the Climategate controversy to Watergate today, claiming that computer hackers who stole thousands of e-mails sent by a senior climate scientist were probably paid to do it by people intent on undermining the Copenhagen summit. Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said… the fact that the e-mails were first uploaded to a sceptic website from a computer in Russia was an indication that the culprit was paid…

“Jonathan Pershing, the senior US climate negotiator, said the controversy surrounding the e-mails came at an unfortunate time ‘but has no fundamental bearing on the outcome’ of the summit…

“Reports today suggest that the Tomcity server based in the Siberian town of Tomsk was used to upload the e-mails on to the web. The server is used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes…”

Is Global Warming as Fake as Evolution?

In an accompanying article, Times on Line wrote on December 5:

“In 1999, National Geographic magazine announced the discovery of a remarkable fossil. Archaeoraptor, as it was named, was claimed to be a dinosaur with feathers, a missing link of evolution that showed these long-extinct creatures were the ancestors of modern birds. A year later, however, the magazine was left with a dinosaur-sized portion of egg on its face. Scientific investigations revealed that Archaeoraptor was a fake — a composite of dinosaur and primitive bird fossils that had been glued together. The episode was seized upon by creationists, yet it has done nothing to dent the fundamentals of evolutionary theory. It survived this fraud — as it survived others such as Piltdown Man — because it is far too broadly attested to be threatened by a single piece of dodgy evidence.

“Research in dozens of disciplines — including genetics, anthropology, palaeontology, geology and medicine, to name but a few — shows evolution to be a scientific fact. It is hard to credit the view that all are wrong. This is worth remembering in the context of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) hacking scandal…

“It is possible that a few scientists might have faked or manipulated evidence, like the fossil-maker behind Archaeoraptor, though there is no proof of this in the CRU emails. But the notion that so many different branches of science have all connived undetected to manufacture a falsehood defies belief.”

Not, if we realize that Satan the devil is the author of many “scientific” postulations and conclusions. Satan, the god and ruler of this world, is called a liar, and the truth is not in him. And it is he who has deceived the whole world, and the Bible says that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.

The fact that Darwin’s evolution theory IS a massive fraud must not be questioned in light of the biblical and archeological fossil records. You might want to read our free booklet, “The Theory of Evolution–a Fairy Tale for Adults?” Whether the notion of man-made global warming is equally a fraudulent fake, invented by scientists under Satan’s tutelage, still awaits a final verdict.

Afghanistan–the Gordian Knot

Der Stern wrote on November 26 about “Obama’s dangerous decision” to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. The paper said that “he does not know a way out” and that the situation appears more and more like the “Gordian knot”–that is, “unsolvable.” It also wrote:

“For eight years, the USA and NATO are fighting, but the Taliban is as strong as never before. For eight years, money flows into the country for reconstruction, but the drug traffic tops all records. For eight years, President Karzai is supported, but he only won the election through massive fraud…”

Afghanistan is a lost cause for the Western World. The attempt to bring democracy to that country–especially with the use of weapons–was destined to failure from the outset. The declared goal to capture Osama Bin Laden and to defeat the Taliban has been a total debacle–the incompetence of Western powers to achieve this goal is utterly astonishing and embarrassing.

Afghanistan–President Obama’s Biggest Test

The Financial Times wrote on November 29:

“Even more than healthcare, the war in Afghanistan will decide whether Barack Obama succeeds or fails… Mr Obama already owns this ‘necessary’ war, as he has called it, contrasting this battle with his predecessor’s supposedly needless war in Iraq… If health reform goes wrong, there will be others to blame. If this war goes wrong, it will be all his fault. It is Mr Obama’s biggest bet by far…

“At the moment the US and its allies are losing. It is that simple. Mr Obama’s options are essentially to pull out altogether, conceding defeat in his necessary war; maintain roughly the existing commitment… or provide the resources his military commanders say are needed…

“A point may come when the US is doing more harm than good, or when the Afghans themselves want us out. The case for gradual withdrawal, starting now, is not obviously wrong. This is not a necessary war. It is a war of choice, and a finely balanced choice at that. This makes Mr Obama’s political difficulty acute.

“Parallels between Afghanistan and Vietnam are impossible to ignore. The most pressing is that the US loses wars like this at home. A bigger effort in Afghanistan can be sustained only as long as the country supports it… As with Vietnam, most Americans are unsure why their sons and daughters are dying in Afghanistan. The administration’s unduly protracted debate over what to do has sent the message that it too is unsure. Shallow support for the war suggests that one spectacular Taliban strike might flip the balance of opinion – and, with or without extra forces, the US would then be back on the path to defeat.

“It gets worse. Mr Obama’s own party opposes the policy he seems to have chosen. Last week leading Democrats called for a war tax to cover the cost of the country’s expanding commitments. Not exactly helpful: but they are right that operations in Afghanistan are enormously costly, in financial as well as human terms. The administration says it costs $1m a year for every extra soldier. An additional 35,000 troops would cost $35bn a year – enough to buy a lot of health reform.

“For his narrow margin of support on extra forces Mr Obama relies on Republicans, with whom he has fallen out bitterly on every aspect of domestic policy. The president’s approval rating continues to slide. The mid-term elections are in sight, and Democrats are anxious. They have reason to be. In short, the test for Mr Obama could hardly be more demanding. Having made his decision, he must get the country behind it, without making promises he cannot keep or sending messages that encourage the enemy…

“Since taking office, Mr Obama has been a less effective leader than many of his admirers, myself included, had hoped. On many issues, he has simply chosen not to try. On Afghanistan, standing aside is not an option. We will see what kind of president he is.”

On December 3, 2009, The Financial Times added:

“Instead of posing as a visionary, Obama played the role of a sober realist in his West Point speech. He no longer spoke of a victory in Afghanistan, rather he talked of bringing ‘this war to a successful conclusion.’ It was a clear recognition of the facts on the ground. Afghanistan is not a classic war in which one can ‘break the enemy’s will’ as Republican Senator John McCain is now demanding.

“The situation in Afghanistan is so confusing and — for foreign powers — so uncontrollable that it will be difficult enough for the Western alliance to achieve even its most modest of aims. NATO has failed to reach the formerly espoused goal of introducing a stable, Western-style democracy to Afghanistan. Obama’s West Point speech was an admission of this failure.”

Afghanistan–President Obama’s Devastating and Untruthful Speech

Der Spiegel Online reported on December 2:

“Never before has a speech by President Barack Obama felt as false as his Tuesday address announcing America’s new strategy for Afghanistan. It seemed like a campaign speech combined with Bush rhetoric — and left both dreamers and realists feeling distraught… Just minutes before the president took the stage inside Eisenhower Hall, the gathered cadets were asked to respond ‘enthusiastically’ to the speech. But it didn’t help: The soldiers’ reception was cool.

“One didn’t have to be a cadet on Tuesday to feel a bit of nausea upon hearing Obama’s speech. It was the least truthful address that he has ever held. He spoke of responsibility, but almost every sentence smelled of party tactics. He demanded sacrifice, but he was unable to say what it was for exactly… US strength in Afghanistan will be tripled relative to the Bush years, a fact that is sure to impress hawks in America. But just 18 months later, just in time for Obama’s re-election campaign, the horror of war is to end and the draw down will begin. The doves of peace will be let free.

“The speech continued in that vein. It was as though Obama had taken one of his old campaign speeches and merged it with a text from the library of ex-President George W. Bush. Extremists kill in the name of Islam, he said, before adding that it is one of the ‘world’s great religions.’ He promised that responsibility for the country’s security would soon be transferred to the government of President Hamid Karzai — a government which he said was ‘corrupt.’

“… the public was more disturbed than entertained. Indeed, one could see the phenomenon in a number of places in recent weeks: Obama’s magic no longer works… In his speech on America’s new Afghanistan strategy, Obama tried to speak to both places. It was two speeches in one. That is why it felt so false. Both dreamers and realists were left feeling distraught. The American president doesn’t need any opponents at the moment. He’s already got himself.”

Most Controversial Promises

On December 1, The Washington Post commented in particular on one segment  in President Obama’s speech. The President said: “I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.”

The paper wrote:

“This is likely to be the most controversial notion in the speech — that the president can flood the zone with troops, and that in the same breath he can talk about removing them from the country… Obama is careful to offer a caveat — ‘we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground’ — but that date is likely to linger in viewers’ minds. This administration has had real trouble meeting deadlines — witness the difficulty with closing the detainee facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba — so it will be interesting to see how much of an albatross this date becomes.

“Obama’s timeline for the start of a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan is likely to stir some concerns in military circles, even though the pace of that eventual drawdown remains vague. Many in the military will recall how both in Iraq and Afghanistan previous predictions about the need for fewer troops proved overly optimistic and destabilizing when drawdowns were undertaken without regard for deteriorating security. In addition, some U.S. military officers may worry that the Obama timeline, while a warning to the Karzai government, could also encourage Taliban insurgents who seek simply to outlast the military offensive.”

The Left Attacks Obama

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 2:

“As expected, US President Barack Obama promised a large increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan. But at the same time, he promised to begin pulling them out already in 2011. His speech offered many details, but little vision. And Obama failed to adequately explain a war that many no longer support…

“This mixture of retreat and advance is also making it more difficult for Obama to convince perhaps the most important group of constituents: his supporters… Controversial film maker Michael Moore… was harsh in his criticism. ‘With just one speech … you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics,’ he wrote… In the letter he asked whether Obama really wanted to be the new ‘war president’… Meanwhile the president’s advisors were busy trying to put a positive spin on the decision, arguing that the trust of the Afghan people would be strengthened through the increased troop numbers. But it’s the trust of Americans that Obama should be most worried about.”

No Substantial Help from Europe

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 2:

“The US government is looking for up to 7,000 additional troops for Afghanistan from its NATO allies. But few countries in Europe are rushing to fill the void. Germany and France want to wait until the Afghanistan conference at the end of January… Indeed, the only countries which immediately offered to up their troop contingent were Britain, Poland and Italy. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that the UK would send an additional 500 troops with Poland likely to up its contribution to 2,600 from 2,000. Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said his country would send more as well, but avoided a concrete pledge, saying only that Rome would ‘do a lot.'”

Germany in Political Upheaval Over Afghanistan

The Financial Times wrote on November 27:

“Angela Merkel was forced to reshuffle her cabinet less than one month into her second term as German chancellor on Friday after Franz Josef Jung resigned his portfolio as labour minister. Mr Jung, defence minister in Ms Merkel’s first government, stood accused of playing down the high number of civilian casualties caused by a German-ordered Nato air strike in Afghanistan in September. The controversy could undermine already fragile support for the German mission in the country. Mr Jung’s departure… is the latest and most serious setback for the new centre-right coalition, which has spent much of its first weeks in office squabbling over economic policy… this week’s revelations about the controversial air strike could have more negative repercussions for the government.”

Der Spiegel Online added on November 29:

“The furore centers on Jung’s immediate claims following the Sept. 4 airstrike that no civilians had been killed. At the time, he announced that it was only members of the Taliban who had been killed when a German colonel called in a US air strike on two tankers that had been seized by the insurgents in Kunduz, near a German military base. However, it has subsequently emerged that civilians were most likely among the victims, with estimates ranging from 17 to 142 casualties.

“Jung said on Thursday that he had told the public and parliament what he knew at the time regarding the events in Afghanistan. But a Thursday report in the tabloid Bild suggested that reports about civilian casualties had reached his ministry by the evening of Sept. 4, reports that he then forwarded to NATO headquarters. He claimed on Thursday that he did not read the report before sending it further and had not knowingly lied to the German public and parliament…

“The debacle has made things difficult for Germany’s new Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg. He is reported to have ‘exploded’ when he first learned of the report… He immediately called in the General Inspector Schneidhan to see if he was aware of the report. Once it was clear that he had known about it, there was little choice but for him to resign. Peter Wichert, the deputy defense minister, was also fired.

“Guttenberg was in effect left hanging by his staff. After coming into office, the young minister had quickly said he regretted any civilian casualties but stated that, having seen the NATO report into the incident, the air strike had been ‘appropriate militarily.’ He now says he may have to reassess that statement. It now appears that the Bundestag’s defense committee will establish a parliamentary investigation into the affair.”

EU Provokes Israel

The EUObserver wrote on December 1:

“EU plans to call for East Jerusalem to be the capital of a future Palestinian state have been described as a ‘provocation’ of Israel’s right-wing government by a key figure in the history of the Middle East Peace Process. Israeli daily Haaretz on Tuesday (1 December) published a leaked copy of a draft statement on Israel to be adopted by EU foreign ministers next week.

“The text – which is likely to undergo changes during internal EU discussions in the run-up to the ministerial meeting – said that peace talks should lead to: ‘an independent, democratic, contiguous and viable state of Palestine, comprising the West Bank and Gaza and with East Jerusalem as its capital.’ ‘The European Union will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 borders,’ it added, in reference to Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank following the so-called Six Day War…

“The Israeli foreign ministry reacted angrily to the Haaretz leak on Tuesday… But a number of EU officials voiced surprise that the provisional statement evoked such a hostile reaction. ‘Jerusalem should be the shared capital of two states. I think this is a position which has been stated often enough,’ Lutz Gellner, the spokesman of the EU’s new foreign relations chief, Catherine Ashton, said.”

Israel and Iran

Der Spiegel wrote on December 2:

“Iran’s leaders continue to reject compromises over their nuclear program and are rebuffing the IAEA. The West is likely to respond with tighter sanctions, but that is unlikely to satisfy Israel, which has attack plans already drawn up…

“Netanyahu has said often enough that he will never accept an Iranian nuclear bomb. He doesn’t believe Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he insists that Iran’s nuclear program is intended solely for civilian purposes. But he does take Ahmadinejad — a notorious Holocaust denier — at his word when he repeatedly threatens to wipe out Israel. Netanyahu draws parallels between Europe’s appeasement of Hitler and the current situation. ‘It’s 1938, and Iran is Germany,’ he says. This time, however, says Netanyahu, the Jews will not allow themselves to be the ‘sacrificial lamb’…

“A narrow majority of the Israeli population currently favors bombing the Iranian nuclear facilities, while 11 percent would consider leaving Israel if Tehran acquires nuclear weapons.”

How Iran Defies the World

BBC News reported on November 29:

“Iran’s government has approved plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants… The government told the Iranian nuclear agency to begin work on five sites, with five more to be located over the next two months. It comes days after the UN nuclear watchdog rebuked Iran for covering up a uranium enrichment plant… Sunday’s announcement is a massive act of defiance likely to bring forward direct confrontation over Iran’s nuclear programme.”

With the exception of Israel, the Western World has demonstrated its unwillingness to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The time is drawing nearer when we can expect an Israeli attack on Iran. 

Switzerland Votes to Ban Minarets

AFP wrote on November 29:

“Over 57 percent of Swiss voters on Sunday approved a blanket ban on the construction of Muslim minarets… A final tally of 26 cantons indicates that 57.5 percent of the population have voted in favour of the ban on minarets… Only four cantons rejected the proposal brought by Switzerland’s biggest party — the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which claims that minarets symbolise a ‘political-religious claim to power.’

“The SVP had forced a referendum under Swiss regulations on the issue after collecting 100,000 signatures within 18 months from eligible voters. The Swiss government was firmly against the call, arguing that accepting a ban would bring about ‘incomprehension overseas and harm Switzerland’s image.’ Switzerland has an uneasy relationship with its Muslim population of some 400,000 in a country of 7.5 million people. Islam is the second largest religion here after Christianity.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 30:

“Switzerland’s decision to ban the construction of minarets in a referendum on Sunday has drawn condemnation from politicians across Europe and from Muslim leaders, but far-right politicians have welcomed it as a courageous step that should be copied by other countries. Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, the country’s top cleric, called the ban an ‘insult’ to Muslims across the world… The right-wing populist Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who is famous for his anti-Islam views, called the result ‘great’ and said he would push for a similar referendum in the Netherlands.

“… mass circulation Bild, which can claim to have its finger on the nation’s pulse more than other newspapers, said Germans would probably vote the same way if they were allowed a referendum on the issue: ‘The minaret isn’t just the symbol of a religion but of a totally different culture. Large parts of the Islamic world don’t share our basic European values: the legacy of the Enlightenment, the equality of man and woman, the separation of church and state, a justice system independent of the Bible or the Koran and the refusal to impose one’s own beliefs on others with “fire and the sword.” Another factor is likely to have influenced the Swiss vote: Nowhere is life made harder for Christians than in Islamic countries. Those who are intolerant themselves cannot expect unlimited tolerance from others’…

“The left-wing Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘… the collapse of Swissair and other objects of Swiss national pride was also painful, as was the humiliating treatment by Libya’s dictator Moammar Gadhafi who has been holding two Swiss nationals as hostages for more than a year. The global economic crisis has also left clear marks on Switzerland. The perfectly devised campaign for a ban on minarets provided a suitable bogeyman for those who were unsettled by this general uncertainty and whose self-confidence has been shattered…'”

BBC News wrote on November 30:

“In Switzerland the soul-searching has begun following Sunday’s nationwide referendum in which voters surprisingly backed a plan to ban the construction of minarets… What many Swiss politicians are beginning to realise this morning is that they underestimated the concern among their population about integration of Muslims in Switzerland, and about possible Islamic extremism…

“Swiss cabinet ministers who had advised, and confidently expected, voters to reject a ban, have woken up to newspaper headlines calling the referendum a slap in the face for the government, and a ‘catastrophe’ for Switzerland. They are now facing the delicate task of explaining the voters’ decision to Muslim countries with whom Switzerland has traditionally good trade relations. Within government circles, there is the expectation that these relations will be damaged and that the Swiss economy may suffer as a result.

“So concerned is the government by the decision that Swiss Justice Minister Eveline Widmer Schlumpf, watching the results come in on Sunday afternoon, apparently told her advisers there ought to be some restrictions on what the general public can actually vote on. This, for Switzerland, is political dynamite. The country’s system of direct democracy is sacrosanct. The people are allowed to vote on any policy and to propose policy themselves, which is what they did on minarets… The real issue is that there was clearly unease among the Swiss population, particularly among rural communities, about Islam.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 1:

“Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Switzerland’s vote to ban the construction of minarets was a ‘sign of an increasing racist and fascist stance in Europe’… Islamophobia was a ‘crime against humanity,’ just like anti-Semitism, Erdogan said. Turkish President Abdullah Gül… said the vote was a ‘disgrace’ for the people of Switzerland and showed how far Islamophobia had advanced in the Western world… In Cairo, Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, the country’s top cleric, said the ban was an attack on freedom of religion and an attempt to ‘hurt the feelings of the Islamic community inside and outside Switzerland.'”

The EU will develop into a “Christian” power bloc–returning to its very “roots” of “orthodox Christianity.” Islam will be perceived more and more as a “foreign” institution which should have no legitimate place in Europe.  

No German Shopping on Sunday

Following a law suit by Germany’s main churches, the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Church, Germany’s highest constitutional court has upheld the ban against Sunday shopping–at least in general–while at the same time ignoring the religious beliefs of those who don’t want to keep Sunday. In addition, the main tragedy is that the Bible nowhere demands Sunday worship–in fact, it condemns it.

Der Spiegel wrote on December 2:

“Germany’s highest court has ruled that Sunday should be kept as a day of rest and has overturned a Berlin law easing restrictions on Sunday shopping…

“Yet many of Germany’s 16 states have already made some exceptions, allowing stores to open a few Sundays a year. And in Berlin the city government had gone the furthest in chipping away at the ban on Sunday trading. In 2006 the German capital gave the green light for retailers to open on 10 Sundays a year, including the four Advent Sundays preceding Christmas.

“However, Germany’s Constitutional Court has now upheld a complaint made by the country’s Catholic and Protestant churches, based on a clause in the German constitution that Sunday should be a day of rest and ‘spiritual elevation.’ The court on Tuesday decided in favor of the churches, saying that Sunday opening should not take place four weeks in a row. The ruling will not affect shopping this December, but would come into force next year. However, the ruling did not overturn completely the principle of limited Sunday store opening.

“The labor unions had joined the churches in their campaign to ring-fence Sunday as a day off for the nation. However, their focus was not on protecting the right to practise religion, but rather on protecting workers in the retail sector from having to work on Sundays, sometimes the only day they might get to spend with other members of their family…

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘The churches have argued correctly that employees in the retail sector are not given the possibility of organizing their Advent Sundays according to Christian principles: going to church, being involved in the community, singing and reading aloud. It is part of religious freedom to be able to do these things…’

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘… It may sound old fashioned but it is still correct: Sunday is Sunday because it is unlike other days. This is not about tradition or religion or a social heritage… It is a day to synchronize society, that is what makes it so important…’

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘The ruling by the Constitutional Court has revived the emotional debate about opening hours of shops on Sundays. That alone is annoying. But even more annoying is that with its strong emphasis on the religiously based day of rest on Sunday, it is interfering in individual and economic freedom. Without a doubt the freedom to practise religion is of great value… In the public debate there is too little mention of the freedom of shop owners to keep customers through opening on Sundays, who would otherwise order online. And the freedom of towns to use Sunday opening hours to attract tourists. Or the freedom of customers to decide for themselves if they would rather spend Sundays amidst the crowds in the shopping malls or walking in the forest…’

“The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung, which is based in Berlin, writes: ‘Sunday as a day off is a great gift. The treadmill is closed for 24 hours. The court has given relaxation, rest and ‘spiritual elevation’ precedence over the thirst for profit and the right to a consumer fix. However, it made it clear in its ruling that Sunday was not just for those who wanted to practise their religion undisturbed. It is also to play cards, go for a walk or simply to laze around. After all even the strictest atheist needs the switching off that Sundays allow.'”

Deutsche Welle wrote on December 1:

“Sunday is enshrined in Article 140 of Germany’s Basic Law as a day of rest and ‘spiritual edification’… The idea that traders need particularly stringent regulation remains firmly anchored in German law, according to Berlin Retail Association head, Nils Busch-Petersen. ‘Boozing and waging war is allowed on Sundays, but retailers are looked on very critically. Shining through this ruling is an unfortunate tradition with Occidental-Christian roots that discriminates against traders,’ he commented…”

The Local wrote on December 1:

“Citing the so-called Weimar Church Article of the German Reich’s constitution from 1919, [which is now part of Germany’s basic law, Art. 140], the justices said that Sunday had a special protected status to ensure Germans could rest from work and have time for spiritual rejuvenation. Shops in Berlin will now only be allowed to open a few Sundays a year deemed in the ‘public interest’ by the city government, as well as a handful [of] other days for special events such as street festivals or anniversaries.

“Both church and trade union officials welcomed the verdict as a victory for families and workers. Katrin Göring-Eckardt, head of Germany’s main Protestant lay organisation, called it a ‘gift to society from Christians’… But Berlin Mayor Klaus Wowereit called the ruling a ‘real step backwards’ that did not take into consideration modern lifestyles.”

The reaction to the ruling by readers is interesting. Here are a few excerpts, as published by The Local:

“Yes, the Church is protecting us from ourselves… Unfortunately we don’t live in a free world. Religious beliefs still continue to dictate to the rest of us what we can or can’t do… How can the church expect to get any money in their collection baskets on Sunday when people are out buying food instead?… This is supposed to be a secular state, so the church ‘shouldn’t’ have a say – but religion is nothing more than fancy dressed politics… I work away from home so only have the weekend available to me to do shopping, see friends, do housework… etc I might have to do. Wouldn’t it be great if I could choose to do some of those things on a Sunday instead of being dictated to that I have to do those on a Saturday?… Strange isn’t [it] how some people accept this law on grounds of religion and social unity, yet are outraged at the thought of a minaret because Islam and sharia law may have similar laws restricting freedoms… As if Jesus would not like to buy his bread, fish and wine supplies on a Sunday!… after laws against home schooling, this is one of another crazy law i have ever seen,,,churches attendance in Germany is already so low, how could this help?”

More News on EU President Herman Van Rompuy

WorldNetDaily wrote on November 24:

“Jerome Corsi, senior WND staff writer and author of the New York Times best-seller ‘The Obama Nation,’ has issued an alert… The report cited a speech from Herman Van Rompuy, as he was appointed the first permanent president of the European Council of the European Union, saying he believes a new world order will be dominated by international organizations that will seek to destroy the last vestiges of nation-states.

“The speech was captured by BBC and posted on YouTube. In it, Van Rompuy proclaimed ‘2009 is the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis.’ He continued, ‘The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step toward the global management of our planet.’

“In another widely viewed YouTube video, Mario Borghezio, a member of Italy’s Lega Nord, who is also a member of the European Parliament, pointed out in a speech to the European Parliament that Van Rompuy is a frequent attendee at Bilderberg Group and Trilateral Commission meetings.”

EU Commissioners Nominated

The EU published the nominations of their 27 commissioners. If approved in January by the European Parliament, they don’t include any spectacular candidates. But some tendencies seem to emerge–especially the involvement of Eastern nations (including the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria) in potential relationships with Russia; the roles of France, Germany and Spain; and the diminished influence of an “Anglo-Saxon voice.”

BBC News reported on November 27:

“France will take charge of the key internal market post in the new 27-strong European Commission… Former French agriculture minister Michel Barnier got the job… Joaquin Almunia from Spain will become EU Competition Commissioner – another much-coveted post in the EU’s executive arm… Timothy Kirkhope MEP, the UK Conservative leader in Brussels, said that ‘the loss of an Anglo-Saxon voice in the commission’s top economic team is of concern, given the recent spate of over-prescriptive economic and financial legislation to come from Brussels’…

“A Czech politician, Stefan Fuele, will take charge of the EU’s enlargement job. He will also be in charge of the EU’s neighbourhood policy concerning Ukraine and other former Soviet states. Germany’s Guenther Oettinger was named Energy Commissioner, a reflection of the policy’s growing importance for the EU…

“The biggest countries in Eastern Europe also got plum jobs – budget for Janusz Lewandowski from Poland and agriculture for Romania’s Dacian Ciolos… [The post for] International Co-operation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response was assigned to Rumiana Jeleva [from Bulgaria].” 

Britain Unhappy with Nomination of French Michel Barnier

The Daily Mail wrote on November 28:

“The power to oversee the City of London was yesterday given to a Frenchman known for his dislike of the free market and love of a strong EU. The unveiling of former French foreign minister Michel Barnier was seen as a severe blow for Gordon Brown. Mr Barnier is expected to push hard to give Brussels the power to regulate financial institutions here instead of the British authorities. He helped draw up the original European constitution and has called for an end to Britain’s EU budget rebate…

“French government officials are on record as saying they want Paris to become ‘a rival’ to London, which is Europe’s dominant financial market and vital for the UK economy. City insiders fear tighter regulations could drive British-based finance firms offshore or push them to list on the New York stock market instead…

“The Commissioner has significant leeway to set the EU agenda for financial services and is responsible for drafting new legislation. The EU is already creating a single regulator of financial markets with the power to overrule national regulator.”

Brussels is tremendously unpopular in Britain, and the perception that a Frenchman will decide on British economic issues will only pour oil onto the fire. It is very likely that Britain will exit the EU. 

Britain on the Brink of Bankruptcy?

The Daily Mail wrote on November 27:

“A year ago, the world reacted with astonishment as Iceland technically went bust. It seemed inconceivable that a modern democratic nation could have such parlous finances that only an emergency $6billion bail-out from the International Monetary Fund enabled its economy to keep functioning. This week, we witnessed a similar crisis in the Middle East but on a far, far more dangerous scale, as Dubai effectively defaulted on £48billion of loans… Which leads us to a haunting question: as the country in the world hardest hit by the credit crunch, with gross domestic product (GDP) projected to decline by almost five per cent in 2009, could Britain be next?…

“Even before the financial crisis, the British Government spent roughly £30billion more per year than it earned in tax revenues. This money, of course, had to be borrowed from international investors. Today, the Government needs up to £200billion a year for at least the next three years in order to meet its spending commitments… There may be other, hidden, liabilities. After this week’s shocking revelation of secret loans of £62billion made by the Bank of England to the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS at the height of the credit crunch, who knows how many other skeletons remain in the Treasury’s closet? It is wise to assume that the true size of Britain’s debts could be much bigger than we all think…

“If international lenders begin to doubt the creditworthiness of UK plc, they will downgrade our credit rating and dramatically increase the rates of interest they charge. UK banks will have to follow suit to match these rates, putting unsustainable pressure on our struggling economy. Thousands of businesses already hit by the recession will go bust. Trapped by soaring unemployment and welfare benefits, the Government will have to borrow more. And so the vicious debt cycle will continue to spiral down towards national insolvency – and, potentially, social anarchy…”

If Britain should go bankrupt, continental Europe might ultimately not react in friendly terms. The Bible strongly indicates an outright war between continental Europe and Great Britain in the not-too-distant future. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

Flagellation in the Catholic Church

Newsmax wrote on November 24:

“As Pope John Paul II’s beatification cause moves forward, more is coming to light about the late pontiff’s life… John Paul II often put himself through ‘bodily penance,’ said Sister Tobiana Sobodka, a Polish nun who worked for the Pope in his private Vatican apartments and at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo near Rome. ‘We would hear it,’ said Sister Sobodka, who belongs to the Order of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. ‘We were in the next room at Castel Gandolfo. You could hear the sound of the blows when he would flagellate himself. He did it when he was still capable of moving on his own.’ Emery Kabongo, a secretary of John Paul II, also backed up the claim. ‘He would punish himself and in particular just before he ordained bishops and priests,’ he said…

“The Catholic Church’s tradition of corporal mortification is founded on the Christian belief that Jesus Christ, out of love for mankind, voluntarily accepted suffering and death as the means to redeem the world from sin. The church teaches that Christians are called to emulate Jesus and join him in his redemptive suffering… John Paul II used to whip himself, according to the recent testimonies…

“Many of the church’s greatest saints flagellated themselves, including St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Ignatius of Loyola, Blessed Mother Teresa, and St. Thomas More…”

The practice of flagellation is a horrible perversion of the teaching of the Bible. Christ died and suffered for us; He never sinned, but He paid the penalty for our violating physical and spiritual laws of God. We read that we can obtain forgiveness of sins and healing of our sicknesses because of His sacrifice for us. To voluntarily inflict oneself with bodily harm is a wrong attempt to usurp authority and responsibilities which were only given to Christ, and it is in total contradiction to God’s expressed love for us. 

Despicable Methods of Scientists to Support Global Warming

Whether one believes in man-made global warming or climate change, or not, the following article’s description of methods by leading scientists to support their claim would be outright despicable. If the allegations in the article are correct, then lying and cheating and attacking and suppressing the opinions of others constitute a terrible indictment against “academic freedom.” Totalitarian governments are famous for their willingness to brainwash and control the minds of their subjects. Now leading scientists are accused of the same “crime”! Of course, similar methods have been used for decades by some scientists desirous to support their idle belief in Darwin’s false theory of evolution–and we suspect, this may be true in many other areas of life which most people take for granted.  

The Telegraph wrote on November 28:

“A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term ‘Climategate’ to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

“The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated. What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

“[Professor Philip Jones’] global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it… Since 2003, however, when the statistical methods… were first exposed as fundamentally flawed by an expert Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre, an increasingly heated battle has been raging… [calling] into question the entire statistical basis on which the IPCC and CRU construct their case…

“There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious… is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws. They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.

“This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones’s refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got ‘lost’. Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offence.

“But the question which inevitably arises from this systematic refusal to release their data is – what is it that these scientists seem so anxious to hide? The second and most shocking revelation of the leaked documents is how they show the scientists trying to manipulate data through their tortuous computer programmes, always to point in only the one desired direction – to lower past temperatures and to ‘adjust’ recent temperatures upwards, in order to convey the impression of an accelerated warming. This comes up so often… that it becomes the most disturbing single element of the entire story…

“The third shocking revelation of these documents is the ruthless way in which these academics have been determined to silence any expert questioning of the findings they have arrived at by such dubious methods – not just by refusing to disclose their basic data but by discrediting and freezing out any scientific journal which dares to publish their critics’ work. It seems they are prepared to stop at nothing to stifle scientific debate in this way, not least by ensuring that no dissenting research should find its way into the pages of IPCC reports…

“In light of the latest revelations, it now seems even more evident that these men have been failing to uphold those principles which lie at the heart of genuine scientific enquiry and debate… Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash of what has become the greatest scientific scandal of our age.”

The Daily Express wrote on December 2:

“THE scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a ‘load of hot air underpinned by fraud’. Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby… In a controversial talk just days before the start of a climate summit attended by world leaders in Copenhagen, Prof Plimer said Governments were treating the public like ‘fools’ and using climate change to increase taxes. He said carbon dioxide has had no impact on temperature and that recent warming was part of the natural cycle of climate stretching over ­billions of years.

“His comments came days after a scandal in climate-change research emerged through the leak of emails from the world-leading research unit at the University of East Anglia. They appeared to show that scientists had been massaging data to prove that global warming was taking place. The Climate Research Unit also admitted getting rid of much of its raw climate data, which means other scientists cannot check the subsequent research. Last night the head of the CRU, Professor Phil Jones, said he would stand down while an independent review took place.

“… mining geology professor Plimer said there was a huge momentum behind the climate-change lobby. He suggested many scientists had a vested interest in promoting climate change because it helped secure more funding for research. He said: ‘The climate comrades are trying to keep the gravy train going. Governments are also keen on putting their hands as deep as possible into our pockets.'”

REPORT ON EUROPE

Even though Europe’s elections of their new leaders do not constitute the final configuration of the United States of Europe (the “ten toes” in Daniel 2 and the “ten horns” in Revelation 17), these developments show how quickly altogether unknown personalities can arise on the world scene. Virtually nobody had seriously considered so-called “nobodies” such as Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton as candidates for their respective positions–and here they are, bursting on the world scene over night.

Similar developments can be expected when the proverbial “beast”–Europe’s final political-military leader, mentioned in the Book of Revelation–will manifest himself in the public arena. For more information, please read our free booklet, Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.

The election of the new EU President and Foreign Minister has been met–overwhelmingly–with consternation, unbelief or outright condemnation. Because of their perceived self interests, Angela Merkel, Nikolas Sarkozy and Gordon Brown are labeled as the main “villains” and are blamed for the “debacle.” And still, as the expectations are so incredibly low, the new European officials might end up surprising quite a few observers–not to mention the fact that especially Herman Van Rompuy has been described as a “shrewd manipulator,” who “will do all in his power to further EU integration (except for including the Muslim country of Turkey),” who is “consumed with Catholic piety,” and who has compromised and “sold his soul.”

At the same time, a British paper wrote that the outcome of the European elections “has made a profound clash between Britain and Brussels more inevitable than ever,” and the question is being posed whether Britain will leave the EU.

The world, if it listened, received perhaps a small foretaste of what might be in store, when Mr. Van Rompuy said the following during a press conference on November 19, after his appointment as EU President:

“I also think that going back to our roots in the European Council could help us to discuss from time to time in an informal and open way the big questions of the European project… 2009 was the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis. The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards global management of our planet.”

The following articles present an overview regarding the world’s reaction to Europe’s elections, and they introduce in more detail the new leaders of Europe.

“Europe Chooses Nobodies!”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 20:

“Europe’s leaders are relieved that the wrangling over the EU’s new positions of president and foreign minister is finally over. But they have no reason to be proud. Once again, the EU has missed an opportunity to boost its standing on the global stage… The appointments confirm all the prevalent prejudices about the EU. Both jobs are going to candidates who are unknown in Europe. Ashton is not even well known in Britain…

“In addition, both candidates were merely acting as placeholders in their previous positions. The political career of the 62-year-old Herman Van Rompuy was already on the decline when, almost a year ago, he stepped in as interim prime minister to sort out the political chaos in Belgium. And the only reason that Ashton, 53, became the EU’s trade commissioner in 2008 was because her predecessor Peter Mandelson was desperately needed in London to save the Labour government.

“It’s no wonder, then, that the news disappointed many observers… the bloc’s leaders have now chosen two nobodies to represent the EU… Nobody seems to care about the fact that neither of them has any significant foreign policy experience… Germany had even decided from the outset to not put forward any candidates for the two jobs. It was hoping to get the presidency of the European Central Bank, which will fall vacant in 2011, in return for disclaiming interest in the two EU top positions…

“Chancellor Angela Merkel reacted by saying graciously that the two would ‘grow’ into their new positions. Indeed, expectations are so low that Van Rompuy and Ashton can only be a positive surprise.”

Keep your eyes on Germany, which will play a most important role in future European developments.

Europe’s Politics…

Deutsche Welle reported on November 20:

“As Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton blink in the unfamiliar glare of media attention, world leaders have been trying to foresee the impact of the new pair on international politics. If there is one…

“Many Europeans outside the Brussels bubble will see their worst prejudices of the EU confirmed. Namely, that the organization’s appointments tend to be less about democracy, transparency and merit than about political deals designed to balance the competing interests of the bloc’s various centers of power… Once again, observers will be concluding that the EU’s most powerful countries are merely looking out for their own interests.

“French President Nikolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel chose someone who would not threaten their authority. Meanwhile, Britain, always that awkward partner in Europe’s economic triumvirate, was appeased with a high-profile appointment, though not with the candidate it was hoping for, the still-contentious Tony Blair.”

The Telegraph wrote on November 21:

“Behind the scenes, the Eurocrat elite had already established a detailed template for the two top jobs. One would be a man, the other a woman; one from the Left, the other from the Right. One would hail from the EU’s inner realm, the other from the mutinous outer territories. Above all, both would be relatively unknown, and preferably nonentities, whose new powers – formidable under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty – would not go to their heads.

“These parameters were essentially fashioned by the French president Nicolas Sarkozy and the German chancellor Angela Merkel, whose flourishing alliance is founded upon the sharing of real control between Paris and Berlin, and are the reason why Tony Blair, an early front-runner for the top job, never really had a chance. Blair was too big a name, too controversial, too keen to take it on.

“So, instead, we have Van Rompuy, known to hardened Eurosceptics as ‘the Belgian waffler’, a mild-mannered economist, consumed with Catholic piety, who spends one day a month in a monastery among an order of silent monks.”

“Europe Disgraced Itself”

Bild Online wrote the following biting commentary on November 20:

“Europe is seeking to build a reputation and increase its standing and voice on the world stage, yet it has disgraced itself by putting a pair of political no-names in charge… Unfortunately this isn’t a bad joke. It is a methodology. The worst thing is that the selection of the two was no accident, quite the opposite – they were conscious appointments.

“The continent’s big bosses – Angela Merkel (Germany), Nicolas Sarkozy (France), Gordon Brown (United Kingdom) – did not want a strong, shining duo of leaders at the top of newly formed EU. They did not want rivals, but rather their silence. They will get dead silence. A blackout in Brussels. It is disastrously short-sighted. Almost everything which the EU has to be proud of – the engine of prosperity of the single European market; the Euro, an anchor of stability – it owes to strong leadership guiding from the top in Brussels… After this evening it is clear what the unifying factors in Europe are – timidness and paralysis.”

We know how terrible the mood must be in Germany, when even a conservative, Merkel-supporting tabloid like Bild sharply criticizes the German chancellor.

“Brussels’ Anti-Democratic Maneuverings”

The Daily Mail wrote on November 20:

“At last we approach the final act of the squalidly anti-democratic Brussels farce that began when the idea of a European Constitution was first mooted. Last night, after meetings behind closed doors, the European Union chose a President and a High Representative  –  an unthreatening title for someone who will preside over Europe’s foreign policy, superseding our own government… But the entire exercise  –  from the jobs themselves to the way they have been filled to the people who have filled them  –  is a slap in the face for the fundamental principles of British democracy.

“First, the UK electorate never wanted a President or a High Representative, but its views became irrelevant when our government went back on its promise of a referendum on the Constitution. And although there might be those who take heart that the two jobs have been filled by non-entities  –  one of them British  –  that would be a profound mistake.

“President van Rompuy may be largely unknown, but the one certainty about him is that he is a rabid federalist, who believes in rapidly transferring more powers to Brussels  –  including the right for the EU to impose direct taxes  –  and will use his new job to further these aims. And Baroness Ashton, a lady for whom no one has voted, but whose appointment is supposedly a British victory, has been selected precisely because those in Brussels know that she has neither the political influence nor the determination to stand up for our interests… this grubby stitch-up has made a profound clash between Britain and Brussels more inevitable than ever.”

Who Is Van Rompuy?

On November 20, Der Spiegel Online presented the following profile of Europe’s first President, Herman Van Rompuy:

“Herman Van Rompuy is a practicing Catholic who belongs to the conservative wing of the Flemish Christian Democrat party… The 62-year-old politician likes to project an image of modesty. In a recent interview he admitted he still can’t bring himself to call the German chancellor by her first name. ‘I just can’t do it. I’m too timid,’ he said. Now this shy politician will preside over meetings between Angela Merkel and the 26 other government leaders of the EU bloc… As prime minister, Van Rompuy brought back calm to Belgium, after what was the worst political crisis in the country’s 180-year history.

“Much is unknown about the new EU president, including what his ideas about Europe are. In the past few weeks an old statement by Van Rompuy about Turkish entry into the EU was unearthed. In December 2004 Van Rompuy… said: ‘Turkey is not a part of Europe and will never be part of Europe (…) The universal values which are in force in Europe, and which are also fundamental values of Christianity, will lose vigor with the entry of a large Islamic country such as Turkey’…

“Even though Thursday’s European summit was only the sixth he has attended, he is no stranger to the EU. As budget minister (1993-1999) he prepared the ground for Belgium’s adoption of the euro…”

Did Mr. Van Rompuy “Sell His Soul”?

The Daily Mail added on November 20:

“Devoid of patriotism and contemptuous of democracy, Herman Van Rompuy perfectly embodies the culture of the EU. His sole political ideal is the creation of a federal superstate, destroying national identities across Europe.

“As someone who has known him since the mid-1980s, I recognise Van Rompuy as a man of powerful intellect and deep cynicism. Although diffident in manner, it would be a great mistake to underestimate this Belgian. A shrewd manipulator, he will do all in his power to further EU integration…

“Van Rompuy is a product of the debased, corrupt political life of Belgium… Because of… lack of real nationhood, Belgians despise their own state. But this unpatriotic attitude is precisely the reason why Belgian politicians have been so enthusiastic about the EU, in which they see the mirror image of their own fraudulent, unprincipled country.

“The tragedy of Van Rompuy’s political career is that he used to have a very different outlook. When I first met him in 1985, he was much more skeptical about European federalism. A conservative Catholic… Van Rompuy wrote elegantly about the importance of traditional values and the need to maintain the Christian roots of Europe.

“He was so disgusted by the Belgian establishment’s rejection of these principles he told me he was thinking of leaving politics. But his bosses the Flemish Christian-Democrat Party were appalled at the thought of losing this bright young star. So he was offered rapid advancement up the political ladder. Van Rompuy accepted, and embarked on a series of shabby compromises which brought him high office but proved he had sold his soul.

“In one telling deal, for instance, he helped push through one of Europe’s most liberal abortion bills, even though, as a Catholic, he had once written in defence of the rights of the unborn child. He will feel very at home at the top of the EU.”

Who Is Catherine Ashton?

On November 20, Der Spiegel Online presented the following profile of Europe’s first Foreign Minister, Catherine Ashton:

“… the big surprise came with the appointment of Catherine Ashton as the EU’s new foreign representative… Ashton will now have to set to work earning the respect of the world… the 53-year-old Ashton is a foreign-policy blank slate… She does not, however, lack in self confidence…

“Ashton, though, has never stood for election. In 1999, she was appointed as Labour Party leader in the House of Lords, Britain’s upper house of parliament, by then-Prime Minister Tony Blair. As part of the appointment, she received the title of Baroness. During her time in the upper house, her greatest achievement was getting a majority vote on the Lisbon Treaty…

“Her affable but tough personality has strengthened her reputation as a tough negotiator. The skills served her well as Commerce Commissioner when she quietly put together a trail-blazing free trade agreement with South Korea…

“Part of her new role will be to create a new European diplomatic force that could involve as many as 7,000 people, thus pioneering a genuine European foreign policy… Ashton and van Rompuy are facing expectations so low, they can only exceed them.”

Will Britain Leave the EU?

BBC News wrote on November 16:

“Up to 55% of those asked in recent British opinion polls say they would support… Britain leaving the European Union.

“After all the constitutional wrangling and embarrassing referendum results within the EU in recent years, reluctance to talk about this among the EU mainstream may be greater than ever. But look carefully at the focus of all that wrangling, the Lisbon Treaty. It contains a shock for those used to the EU talking of ‘ever-closer union’. Buried deep in the treaty is a kind of anti-integration time-bomb, a clause which sets out clearly for the first time how an EU member state could ‘withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements’…

“But what would a divorce between Britain and the EU mean in practice? It’s hard to know precisely. Like any such separation, much would depend on the mood in which it was done, co-operative or acrimonious…

“There are many… intriguing aspects of a UK exit… Britain leaving the EU would be an unpredictable process. But the idea that all this is simply inconceivable and irrelevant is no longer credible.”

Bible prophecy strongly indicates that Great Britain WILL leave the EU in the not-too-distant future.

REPORT ON AMERICA’S DOWNWARD SLOPE

We begin with reports on the U.S. Senate’s shameful health care maneuverings, followed by reports on the Fed’s and Mr. Geithner’s controversial actions and the desperate economic situation of the USA, and concluding with a biting analysis of President Obama’s disappointing trip to Asia. All these articles show one thing: The impending FALL of America. For more information, please do not neglect to read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

The New $300 Million Louisiana Purchase–How Politicians Can Be Bought

ABC News reported on November 19:

“What does it take to get a wavering senator to vote for health care reform? Here’s a case study.

“On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for ‘certain states recovering from a major disaster.’ The section spends two pages defining which ‘states’ would qualify, saying, among other things, that it would be states that ‘during the preceding 7 fiscal years’ have been declared a ‘major disaster area.’

“… the section applies to exactly one state:  Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill. In other words, the bill spends two pages describing [what] could be written with a single word:  Louisiana…”

And so the deal was fixed, as were many more deals in the political arena, as the next article explains.

Senate Votes Yes to Reid’s Health Care Bill — Nothing to be Proud Of!!!

The Washington Post wrote on November 22:

“On the eve of Saturday’s showdown in the Senate over health-care reform, Democratic leaders still hadn’t secured the support of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), one of the 60 votes needed to keep the legislation alive. The wavering lawmaker was offered a sweetener: at least $100 million in extra federal money for her home state.

“And so it came to pass that Landrieu walked onto the Senate floor midafternoon Saturday to announce her aye vote — and to trumpet the financial ‘fix’ she had arranged for Louisiana. ‘I am not going to be defensive,’ she declared. ‘And it’s not a $100 million fix. It’s a $300 million fix’…

“After Landrieu threw in her support… the lone holdout in the 60-member Democratic caucus was Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. Like other Democratic moderates who knew a single vote could kill the bill, she took a streetcar named Opportunism, transferred to one called Wavering and made off with concessions of her own. Indeed, the all-Saturday debate, which ended with an 8 p.m. vote, occurred only because Democratic leaders had yielded to her request for more time.

“Even when she finally announced her support, at 2:30 in the afternoon, Lincoln made clear that she still planned to hold out for many more concessions in the debate that will consume the next month…

“The health-care debate was worse than most. With all 40 Republicans in lockstep opposition, all 60 members of the Democratic caucus had to vote yes — and that gave each one an opportunity to extract concessions from Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid… And the big shakedown is yet to occur: That will happen when Reid comes back to his caucus in a few weeks to round up 60 votes for the final passage of the health bill…

“Landrieu… went to the floor during the lunch hour to say that she would vote to proceed with the debate — but that she’d be looking for much bigger concessions before she gives her blessing to a final version of the bill… That turned all the attention to the usually quiet Lincoln, who emerged from the cloakroom two hours later to announce her decision… she made clear that Democratic leaders would have to give more if they want her to vote yes as the health-care debate continues…

“By the time this thing is done, the millions for Louisiana will look like a bargain.”

Whether one chooses to view this as political “extortion” or political “bribery,” this current state of affairs, “business as usual,” is disgraceful and ungodly.

Fed and Mr. Geithner Under Fire

On November 20, the Wall Street Journal wrote the following:

“The House Financial Services Committee voted, 43-26, to approve a measure sponsored by Texas Republican Ron Paul, vociferously opposed by the Fed, that would direct the congressional Government Accountability Office to expand its audits of the Fed to include decisions about interest rates and lending to individual banks. The Fed says the provision threatens its ability to make monetary policy without political interference…

“The vote was the latest blow to the central bank, which has… become a lightning rod for politicians responding to popular anger that Wall Street was bailed out while the public wasn’t. The Fed faces a stinging backlash from legislators from both parties who argue that [it] has too much power and too little oversight. On Thursday, the Senate Banking Committee began debating legislation that would largely remove the Fed from bank supervision over the objections of the Fed and the Obama administration…

“At the Joint Economic Committee, a couple of House Republicans called for the resignation of Mr. Geithner… Although several Democrats defended Mr. Geithner at the hearing, some liberal Democrats have been complaining that the Obama administration isn’t doing enough to combat unemployment…”

America’s Declining Prosperity

CNBC wrote on November 19:

“As experts debate the potential speed of the US recovery, one figure looms large but is often overlooked: nearly 1 in 5 Americans is either out of work or under-employed. According to the government’s broadest measure of unemployment, some 17.5 percent are either without a job entirely or underemployed… The number dwarfs the statistic most people pay attention to… which most recently showed unemployment at 10.2 percent for October, the highest it has been since June 1983.

“The difference is that what is traditionally referred to as the ‘unemployment rate’ only measures those out of work who are still looking for jobs. Discouraged workers who have quit trying to find a job, as well as those working part-time but looking for full-time work or who are otherwise underemployed, count in the [rate of 17.5 percent].”

The New York Times wrote on November 23:

“The United States government is financing its more than trillion-dollar-a-year borrowing with i.o.u.’s… With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically.

“Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher… In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

America’s imminent fate is one of a constant and inevitable downfall. The reasons are spiritual in nature. God says that He will turn His back on His people when they turn their back on Him. Sadly, this applies today to the overwhelming majority of the American people [modern descendants of the ancient House of Israel]–all the way from the top to the bottom. True genuine change or “repentance” might at least delay the coming disaster–but in light of our materialistic, greedy and politically corrupt society, that possibility appears more than remote.

President Obama’s Asian Trip an Utter Failure

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 23:

“When he entered office, US President Barack Obama promised to inject US foreign policy with a new tone of respect and diplomacy. His recent trip to Asia, however, showed that it’s not working…

“The mood in Obama’s foreign policy team is tense following an extended Asia trip that produced no palpable results. The ‘first Pacific president,’ as Obama called himself, came as a friend and returned as a stranger. The Asians smiled but made no concessions… The Asia trip revealed the limits of Washington’s new foreign policy…

“In Tokyo, the new center-left government even pulled out of its participation in a mission which saw the Japanese navy refueling US warships in the Indian Ocean as part of the Afghanistan campaign. In Beijing, Obama failed to achieve any important concessions whatsoever. There will be no binding commitments from China to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A revaluation of the Chinese currency, which is kept artificially weak, has been postponed. Sanctions against Iran? Not a chance. Nuclear disarmament? Not an issue for the Chinese.

“The White House did not even stand up for itself when it came to the question of human rights in China. The president, who had said only a few days earlier that freedom of expression is a universal right, was coerced into attending a joint press conference with Chinese President Hu Jintao, at which questions were forbidden. Former US President George W. Bush had always managed to avoid such press conferences…”

America is losing all respect in the world–something that the Bible prophesied would happen in these last days.

The Catholic Church in the News

The Bible shows that the Roman Catholic Church will soon play a predominant role on the world scene. In the past, Europe has seen a constant love-hate relationship between “church” and “emperor,” and this relationship is bound to continue in our days.

Still, the book of Revelation shows that the EU and the Catholic Church will work together–to an extent–and that its European political and religious leaders will work hand-in-hand; therefore, a close connection between the EU and the Roman Catholic Church is to be expected; and we also read in the Bible that most “Christian” religions will embrace Roman Catholicism and accept the pope as their spiritual leader. The following two articles hint at the beginnings of the fulfillment of these prophesied events. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Continuing Economic Relationship Between Catholics and Anglicans

Times On Line wrote on November 21:

“The Archbishop of Canterbury met privately with the Pope today in an effort to ease tensions over the Vatican’s move to ‘poach’ Anglican clergy… Referring to a potential rift over the Vatican’s invitation to disillusioned Anglicans [a statement from the Vatican] said the talks reiterated ‘the shared will to continue and to consolidate the ecumenical relationship between Catholics and Anglicans’…

“Pope Benedict is offering Anglican clergy the chance to transfer to the Roman Catholic Church, while maintaining many of their traditions and practices, including the right to marry…

“Addressing the ecumenical conference at the Gregorian Pontifical University conference in Rome, yesterday, Dr Williams reaffirmed his stance on women bishops. He said: ‘For many Anglicans, not ordaining women has a possible unwelcome implication about the difference between baptised men and baptised women.’

“The Vatican signalled they were changing their Apostolic Constitution… Pope Benedict XVI said this would allow Anglicans to preserve ‘elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony’ while entering ‘full communion’ with the Catholic Church.”

CNN added on November 20:

“The process will enable groups of Anglicans to become Catholic and recognize the pope as their leader, yet have parishes that retain Anglican rites, Vatican officials said. The move comes some 450 years after King Henry VIII broke from Rome and created the Church of England…”

The Catholic Church will make “concessions” to non-Catholics to gain a following, as long as the pope is going to be recognized as their spiritual leader.

Europe’s New President and Foreign Minister

Deutsche Welle reported on November 20:

“EU leaders have agreed [unanimously] to appoint Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy as EU president and Britain’s Catherine Ashton as its foreign affairs chief [i.e., “foreign minister”]…

“During the mid-to-late ‘90s, Van Rompuy (62) held the post of budget minister under the Christian Democrat-led government of Jean-Luc Dehaene. He was regarded as a budgetary hardliner and has been critical of governments spending their way out of recession. Prior to entering politics Van Rompuy held a position in the Belgian central bank. He is also known as having strong religious convictions…

“Catherine Ashton, 53 and formally a Baroness, has been a close ally of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown since joining the UK Labour Party. Ashton had held a number of mid-level positions in the UK government related to education, justice and human rights before being promoted to the position of EU trade commissioner a year ago. During her time in Brussels Ashton has been a central figure in trade negotiations with nations such as China and Russia…

“[Gordon] Brown admitted that he would have preferred seeing former British Prime Minister Tony Blair in the top EU job… But Brown acknowledged that it soon became clear that the European conservative alliance wanted to have one of their own members as president of the European council.”

Reuters added on November 19:

“European Union leaders named Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy, who is little known outside his own country, as the bloc’s first president on Thursday… They also chose Baroness Catherine Ashton, a Briton little known even in her own country, as EU foreign affairs chief…

“Van Rompuy, 62, and Ashton, 53, are compromise candidates… Agreement on the positions took weeks, undermining efforts to present the bloc as a united force, partly because Britain had demanded Blair should be president… EU leaders had sought a political balance to satisfy member states and the European Parliament, whose approval is needed for Ashton. This was achieved by appointing a center-right president and a center-left high representative for foreign affairs…

“Blair had long been the front-runner but many other states wanted a candidate more likely to lead by consensus, and Germany and France joined forces to block his candidacy. They remain powerful forces in the EU although they have none of the top jobs which also include a Portuguese, Jose Manuel Barroso, as European Commission President.”

We can safely say that this appointment of compromise candidates does not constitute the final configuration of the biblically prophecied united Europe. Especially Germany will continue to heavily influence the EU, and the final European leader–called the “beast” in the book of Revelation–will still have to manifest himself on the world scene.

Obama to Congress: Don’t Investigate Fort Hood Massacre

The Associated Press reported on November 14:

“President Barack Obama on Saturday urged Congress to hold off on any investigation of the Fort Hood rampage until federal law enforcement and military authorities have completed their probes into the shootings at the Texas Army post, which left 13 people dead. On an eight-day Asia trip, Obama turned his attention home and pleaded for lawmakers to ‘resist the temptation to turn this tragic event into the political theater.’ He said those who died on the nation’s largest Army post deserve justice, not political stagecraft. ‘The stakes are far too high,’ Obama said in a video…

“Several members of Congress, particularly Michigan Rep. Peter Hoekstra, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, have… called for a full examination of what agencies knew about Hasan’s contacts with a radical Muslim cleric in Yemen and others of concern to the U.S. Hoekstra confirmed this week that government officials knew of about 10 to 20 e-mails between Hasan and the radical imam, beginning in December 2008.

“A joint terrorism task force overseen by the FBI learned late last year of Hasan’s repeated contact with the cleric, who encouraged Muslims to kill U.S. troops in Iraq. The FBI said the task force did not refer early information about Hasan to superiors because it concluded he wasn’t linked to terrorism. Lawmakers, however, already have announced they want their own investigations and were frustrated with what they view as a less-than-forthcoming administration.

“Rep. Howard McKeon, R-Calif., said he wanted to go ahead with an investigation from the House Armed Services Committee, where he is the top Republican. He said he wanted an investigation that wouldn’t compromise law enforcement or military investigations that were continuing on separate tracks. In the Senate, Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, said his Homeland Security Committee was opening an investigation.

“Obama said he was not opposed to hearings — eventually…”

But there may be more behind this request to Congress not to investigate. However, Mr. Liebermann and others announced that they will not abide by President Obama’s request. For further information, please view our new StandingWatch program, Why the Fort Hood Massacre?

Too Scared to Learn the Truth?

The Financial Times wrote on November 13:

“Ten days ago, Major Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly shot a dozen people dead at the Fort Hood army base in Texas, reportedly shouting ‘Allahu Akbar” – God is great – as he fired. Since then, the question of what motivated him has sat in the middle of the American public debate. The public is increasingly certain that the killings are a case of terrorism. Government and military leaders argue that we must not leap to conclusions… A lot hinges on whether we think of Maj Hasan as a mental case or a soldier of jihad.

“Maj Hasan had been radicalised in the name of Islam as he understood it… Public doctrine insists on a distinction between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion… Islamism is a violent political ideology… Maj Hasan was… an Islamist… And those who had the authority to monitor him more closely were either unable or unwilling to.

“It is hard to see what Maj Hasan could have done to make his ideology more obvious. In June 2007, he gave a medical lecture at the Walter Reed army medical centre that turned into a harangue, on Koranic grounds, about how Muslims in the US military should be exempted from killing other Muslims. The most troubling conduct ascribed to Maj Hasan is the correspondence he initiated with the Yemeni-American jihadist imam Anwar al-Awlaki… Mr al-Awlaki is not merely a ‘radical imam’. He is probably the most cogent exponent of the view that US Muslims should wage jihad against their country…

“There was a deadly shooting rampage at an Arkansas recruiting station last June that was very similar to the Fort Hood episode. The Arkansas perpetrator – an American who had converted to Islam and changed his name to Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad – had himself visited Yemen. The FBI knew about Major Hasan’s contacts with Mr al-Awlaki. So did the Joint Terrorism Task Force. Why did they lack the will or inclination to act on it?… Maj Hasan’s colleagues, the Economist writes, say he thought the war on terror was a war on Islam…

“General George Casey Jr spent much of last weekend on national television engaging in… wishful thinking. ‘A diverse Army,’ he said, ‘gives us strength.’ Does it? Or is that a platitude? Diversity can be a strength. But diversity as an ideology produced, in Maj Hasan’s case, bureaucrats who were too scared of giving offence to speak their minds – and to act on the information they had. There was, it seems clear, no balancing act between protecting soldiers from harm and protecting minorities from prejudice. Protecting soldiers was simply made priority number two. That is what makes the Hasan case so explosive.”

This development does not say much for our government’s willingness to identify or fight against radical Islam and terrorism.

9-11 Terrorists to be Tried in Civilian Court

The Washington Post wrote on November 14:

“Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and four co-conspirators will be tried in Manhattan federal courthouse less than a mile from Ground Zero, the Justice Department announced Friday…

“But the effort to criminalize the events of Sept. 11 and accord Mohammed the full panoply of rights enjoyed in a federal trial has infuriated and dismayed Republicans, as well as some organizations of victims’ families. They argued that military commissions at Guantanamo Bay offered a secure environment, a proper forum for war crimes, and adequate legal protections for a ruthless enemy.

“‘The Obama Administration’s irresponsible decision to prosecute the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks in New York City puts the interests of liberal special interest groups before the safety and security of the American people,’ said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) in a statement. ‘The possibility that Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his co-conspirators could be found “not guilty” due to some legal technicality just blocks from Ground Zero should give every American pause’…

“While in CIA custody, Mohammed was subjected to a series of coercive interrogation techniques, culminating in waterboarding. Asked about the prospect that defense attorneys could use the acknowledged waterboarding to derail the case, [Attorney General Eric] Holder said he would not have authorized the prosecutions if he were not convinced the outcome would be successful.

“Prosecutors must still present evidence before a New York grand jury, and while the specific charges they will seek remain unclear, Holder said Friday he was all but certain to order the death penalty against the five Sept. 11 conspirators…

“Excluding those detainees destined for transfer or trial still leaves as many as 75 inmates who will probably be held in some form of prolonged detention because they are too dangerous to release but cannot be prosecuted…”

McCain Stands Up to Obama…

Newsmax.com wrote on November 13:

“Sen. John McCain issued the following statement Friday on his Web site regarding the Obama administration’s decision to try five Sept. 11 suspects in New York City:

“‘I am extremely disappointed with the Obama administration’s decision to try in U.S. civilian courts the al-Qaida terrorists who planned, supported, and conducted the September 11th attacks. These terrorists are not common criminals. They are war criminals, who committed acts of war against our citizens and those of dozens of other nations.

“‘Terrorists who have declared war against our country should be treated as war criminals and tried for their crimes through military tribunals. In a letter sent to Congress just last week, hundreds of families of victims of the September 11th attacks urged the Administration to try these terrorists in military tribunals, and I fully respect and agree with their position…

“‘If military tribunals are suitable for the terrorists who attacked our sailors aboard the USS Cole, as the Obama administration has decided, then military tribunals are certainly the right venue to try the al-Qaida terrorists, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who murdered thousands of innocent civilians on Sept. 11, 2001.

“‘Today’s decision sends a mixed message about America’s resolve in the fight against terrorism. We are at war, and we must bring terrorists to justice in a manner consistent with the horrific acts of war they have committed.'”

Of course, others have also criticized President Obama and his administration for the highly controversial and unpopular decision to try enemy combatants in a civilian court. The Bible predicts that the USA–and especially its leadership–will be losing the pride of its power and the willingness to address and solve its problems. You might want to watch our recent StandingWatch program, Why Aren’t We SOLVING Our National and Global Problems?

Obama Being Attacked by the Ultra-Left

You know it must be bad when MSNBC’s ultra-left hosts, such as openly gay host Rachel Maddow, or liberal or so-called “progressive” hosts such as Keith Olbermann or Chris Matthews, attack President Obama. For them, Obama’s left-liberal changes don’t go far enough.

The left-liberal New York Times wrote on November 15:

“[Rachel] Maddow pretended to celebrate the passage of a health care overhaul bill in the House, calling it ‘potentially a huge generational win for the Democratic Party’ — but then halted the triumphant music and called it an ‘electoral defeat.’ The Stupak amendment, she said, was ‘the biggest restriction on abortion rights in a generation.’ Then she wondered aloud about the consequences for Democrats ‘if they don’t get women or anybody who’s pro-choice to ever vote for them again.’ She returned to the subject the next four evenings in a row.

“This is how it looks to have a television network pressuring President Obama from the left. While much attention has been paid to the feud between the Fox News Channel and the White House, the Obama administration is now facing criticism of a different sort from Ms. Maddow, Keith Olbermann and other progressive hosts on MSNBC, who are using their nightly news-and-views-casts to measure what [Maddow] calls ‘the distance between Obama’s rhetoric and his actions.’

“While they may agree with much of what Mr. Obama says, they have pressed him to keep his campaign promises about health care, civil liberties and other issues… MSNBC — sometimes critically called the ‘home team’ for supporters of Mr. Obama — has even hit upon the theme with a promotional tagline, ‘pushing back on the president,’ in commercials for ‘Hardball,’ Chris Matthews’s political hour.”

Incredible–President Obama Bows Again…

The Los Angeles Times published the following photographs and wrote in an accompanying article on November 14:

“How low will the new American president go for the world’s royalty? This photo will get Democrat President Obama a lot of approving nods in Japan this weekend, especially among the older generation of Japanese who still pay attention to the royal family living in its downtown castle. Very low bows like this are a sign of great respect and deference for a superior. To some in the United States, however, an upright handshake might have looked better…

“Obama could receive some frowns back home as he did for his not-quite-this-low-or-maybe-about-the-same-bow to the Saudi king not so long ago.

“Akihito, who turns 76 next month, is the eldest son and fifth child of Emperor Showa, the name given to an emperor and his reign after his death. Emperor Showa is better known abroad by the life name of Hirohito. He became emperor in 1925 and died in 1989, the longest historically known rule of the nation’s 125 emperors. Hirohito presided over his nation’s growth from an undeveloped agrarian economy into the expansionist military power and ally of Nazi Germany of the 1930’s… after Democrat President Harry Truman ordered the two atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the summer of 1945… Akihito’s father went on national radio… and… pronounced that the country must ‘accept the unacceptable.’ It did.

“As the conquering Allied general and then presiding officer of the U.S. occupation, Gen. Douglas MacArthur, decided to allow Japan to keep its emperor as a ceremonial unifying institution within a nascent democracy. Tojo, on the other hand, was hanged. MacArthur treated Emperor Hirohito respectfully but… was not particularly deferential…

“Akihito assumed the throne on Jan. 7, 1989. Within weeks he began a series of formal expressions of remorse to Asian countries for Japan’s actions during his father’s reign… In 1959, Akihito married Michiko Shoda, the first commoner allowed to enter the Japanese royal family. That was two years before the birth of Akihito’s future presidential guest, Barack Obama.”

Obama Strongly Criticized for Inappropriate Bow

ABC News wrote on November 15:

“An old friend — an academic with expertise about the Japanese Empire, and in general a supporter of President Obama — sends me the following note, relating to photographs of President Obama bowing to Emperor Akihito of Japan…

“‘The bow as he performed did not just display weakness in Red State terms, but evoked weakness in Japanese terms….The last thing the Japanese want or need is a weak looking American president and, again, in all ways, he unintentionally played that part.'”

AFP added on November 16:

“Outrage in Washington over Obama’s Japan bow… Bill Bennett said on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ program: ‘It’s ugly. I don’t want to see it. We don’t defer to emperors. We don’t defer to kings or emperors. The president of the United States — this coupled with so many apologies from the United States — is just another thing,’ said Bennett.

“Some conservative critics juxtaposed the image of Obama with one of former US vice president Dick Cheney, who greeted the emperor in 2007 with a firm handshake but no bow… Some said the gesture was particularly grating coming after Obama’s bow to Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah at a G20 meeting in April… 

“The gesture appears to have touched a particularly raw nerve among Obama critics who said the president has hastened America’s decline as a world superpower by being too apologetic and too deferential in his dealings with other world leaders.”

Rather than showing to the world, that America is still willing to lead, its leader gives the clear impression that he is rather willing to bow before others. For more information as to the reasons, please read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

“Obama on the Loose Embarrasses All of Us”

On November 17, The Washington Times published this biting article:

“Barack Obama on the loose in a foreign land is enough to frighten protocol officers and embarrass the rest of us… No president before him so abused custom, traditions, protocol (and the country he represents)… the bow to the Japanese emperor was… a sign of a really deep sense of inferiority… This is not the way an American president impresses evildoers that he’s strong, tough and decisive.

“… it’s true that this president seems never to have studied much American history. Not bowing to foreign potentates was what 1776 was all about… Can anyone imagine George Washington, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson making a similar gesture of servile submission? Or Harry Truman? Or FDR…? John F. Kennedy, on the eve of a trip to London, sharply warned Jackie not to curtsy to the queen…

“But Mr. Obama, unlike his predecessors, likely knows no better… He was sired by a Kenyan father, born to a mother attracted to men of the Third World and reared by grandparents in Hawaii, a paradise far from the American mainstream. He no doubt wants to ‘do the right thing’ by his lights, but the lights that illumine the Obama path are not necessarily the lights that illuminate the way for most of the rest of us. This is good news only for Jimmy Carter, who may yet have to give up his distinction as our most ineffective and embarrassing president.”

“Climate Change”–Obama’s Admission of His “Massive Failing”

We most certainly do NOT agree with many of the assertions in the following article, but the tragic truth is that President Obama AND the American society are blamed for a global economic crisis and for global warming. The article also includes this frightening accusation: “The US hardly has a claim any more to the leadership of the Western world… [It is] indirectly, a major threat to world peace in the 21st century.”

Will Europe “preemptively” strike the USA militarily to ensure “world peace”? The Bible gives the startling answer, which is repeatedly explained in many of our free booklets and our weekly Updates.

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 17:

“US President Barack Obama came to office promising hope and change. But on climate change, he has followed in the footsteps of his predecessor, George W. Bush. Now, should the climate summit in Copenhagen fail, the blame will lie squarely with Obama… George W. Bush… was too busy waging war on Iraq and searching for a legal basis for extraordinary renditions to pay much attention to the real threat facing humanity…

“But few people expected that Barack Obama, of all people, would continue his predecessor’s climate change plan. When he took office at the beginning of 2009, it was clear that the success of the UN Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen in December depended almost entirely on the US — that America needed to take a clear leadership role on a problem that could shake civilization to its very core…

“On the weekend, Obama announced that there would be no agreement on binding rules in Copenhagen. It was the admission of a massive failing — and the prelude to a truly dramatic phase of international climate policy… Barack Obama cast himself as a ‘citizen of the world’ when he delivered his well-received campaign speech in Berlin in the summer of 2008. But the US president has now betrayed this claim. In his Berlin speech, he was dishonest with Europe…

“Obama’s announcement at the APEC summit that it was no longer possible to secure a binding treaty in Copenhagen is the result of his own negligence… And he has left it to the Europeans to take the lead… If the Copenhagen summit, which energy strategists and environmentalists have been preparing for two years, is a failure, then it will mainly be Obama’s fault.

“Many Americans clearly also believe that real climate change is just something dreamt up by the entertainment industry. Obama has proven himself to be unable to put an end to the lies that modern American society is based on. He is unable to overcome the entrenched lobbyists of the oil and coal industries and make the reality clear to his compatriots: They are the worst energy wasters on the planet — and are thus, indirectly, a major threat to world peace in the 21st century. Although they do not enjoy a higher quality of life than Europeans, Americans consume twice as much fossil fuel per capita.

“… if the worst-case scenario becomes reality at Copenhagen and at the follow-up conferences — if, in other words, world leaders ignore the findings of the global scientific community — then the US will find itself in a very uncomfortable position. America will be seen as the primary culprit of global warming — and this after the US, with its rampant real estate speculation, has given us a global economic crisis that has not only destroyed assets, but pushed 100 million people worldwide into hunger.

“With that kind of track record, the US hardly has a claim any more to the leadership of the Western world — let alone a Nobel Peace Prize for its leader… The Nobel Committee should postpone the award ceremony for the Nobel Peace Prize from Dec. 10 to Dec. 20. Only if Obama has achieved a convincing deal at the Copenhagen conference will there be a real reason to honor him.”

Global Warming — or Not?

Der Spiegel Online wrote the following on November 19:

“Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years… meteorologist Mojib Latif… one of Germany’s best-known climatologists, says that the temperature curve has reached a plateau. ‘There can be no argument about that,’ he says. ‘We have to face that fact.’… [This] does raise doubts about the predictive value of climate models, and it is also a political issue. For months, climate change skeptics have been gloating over the findings on their Internet forums.

“This has prompted many a climatologist to treat the temperature data in public with a sense of shame, thereby damaging their own credibility. ‘It cannot be denied that this [is] one of the hottest issues in the scientific community,’ says Jochem Marotzke, director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg. ‘We don’t really know why this stagnation is taking place at this point.’

“Just a few weeks ago, Britain’s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research added more fuel to the fire with its latest calculations of global average temperatures. According to the Hadley figures, the world grew warmer by 0.07 degrees Celsius from 1999 to 2008, and not by the 0.2 degrees Celsius assumed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And, say the British experts, when their figure is adjusted for two naturally occurring climate phenomena, El Niño and La Niña, the resulting temperature trend is reduced to 0.0 degrees Celsius — in other words, a standstill…

“The controversy sends confusing and mixed messages to the lay public. Why is there such a vigorous debate over climate change, even though it isn’t getting warmer at the moment? And how can it be that scientists cannot even arrive at a consensus on changes in temperatures, even though temperatures are constantly being measured?… no one really knows what exactly the world climate will look like in the not-so-distant future, that is, in 2015, 2030 or 2050.”

America’s Unemployment and Recession–The Worst Is Yet to Come

The New York Daily News wrote on November 15:

“Think the worst is over? Wrong. Conditions in the U.S. labor markets are awful and worsening. While the official unemployment rate is already 10.2% and another 200,000 jobs were lost in October, when you include discouraged workers and partially employed workers the figure is a whopping 17.5%…

“The long-term picture for workers and families is even worse than current job loss numbers alone would suggest. Now as a way of sharing the pain, many firms are telling their workers to cut hours, take furloughs and accept lower wages. Specifically, that fall in hours worked is equivalent to another 3 million full time jobs lost on top of the 7.5 million jobs formally lost.

“This is very bad news but we must face facts. Many of the lost jobs are gone forever, including construction jobs, finance jobs and manufacturing jobs… Other measures tell the same ugly story: The average length of unemployment is at an all time high… it is most likely that the unemployment rate will peak close to 11% and will remain at a very high level for two years or more. The weakness in labor markets and the sharp fall in labor income… increases the risk of a double dip recession.

“As a result of these terribly weak labor markets, we can expect weak recovery of consumption and economic growth; larger budget deficits; greater delinquencies in residential and commercial real estate and greater fall in home and commercial real estate prices; greater losses for banks and financial institutions on residential and commercial real estate mortgages, and in credit cards, auto loans and student loans and thus a greater rate of failures of banks; and greater protectionist pressures.”

China a New Global Leader?

The Wall Street Journal wrote on November 13:

“Now, at the dawn of the 21st century, the world is looking to China to assume an unfamiliar role of global leadership. At a time when American prestige is fading, China’s status is rising. President Barack Obama arrives in China next week seeking help on everything from climate change to North Korea’s nuclear threat. At meetings of the Group of 20 nations, China’s opinions are urgently sought on issues such as banking reform and executive pay… History has done little to prepare this country for the kind of leadership that an anxious international community seems so ready to thrust on it…

“Now, as the global economy emerges shakily from the worst recession since World War II, China is attracting admiration from new corners.While the Western world hurtled towards the financial abyss, China was moving ahead cautiously. It has emerged from the crisis with an economy growing powerfully. Its banks are unpolluted by toxic assets; hardly a ripple disturbs its vast pools of national savings. This year, property markets in Beijing and Shanghai are sizzling…

“Critics say that China’s record in the world’s trouble spots, from North Korea to Iraq and Darfur, suggests that it defines its responsibilities in ways that enhance its economic interests. On North Korea, China… is hesitant to threaten the flow of Chinese oil and food that keeps the regime alive. Skeptics in the U.S. say that China holds back because it fears a collapse of North Korea that would not only unleash a flood of refugees across its border but also place U.S. forces face-to-face with its own.

“Similar tensions between China’s economic interests and international obligations play out in Africa, where Chinese companies are investing massively in energy and raw materials to fuel China’s growth. The ‘no-strings’ investments from Nigeria to Ethiopia fly in the face of Western efforts to link investment with improvements in human rights and the environment. In Sudan, China has sent peacekeepers to the war-torn region of Darfur, while bolstering the government by buying oil and selling arms.

“Iran may provide the biggest test to date of China’s willingness to lead. Washington and its European allies see China’s role as critical in the effort to pressure Tehran over its nuclear program. So far, China has resisted tougher sanctions against a country that is its second-largest oil supplier after Saudi Arabia…

“China is rapidly modernizing its military forces… A military parade last month to mark the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China sent a powerful message to China’s 1.3 billion people… [It] signaled that China not only was at last a strong country, but also could project power beyond its shores.

“… it has passed America as the world’s largest auto market. No emerging nation on earth has seized the opportunities of global trade more enthusiastically than China… Surpluses from foreign trade—particularly with the U.S.—have helped China rack up more than $2 trillion in foreign-exchange reserves.

“So what does China want to do with the enhanced status that it craves, and which the world seems equally anxious to concede to China? Last month, the Frankfurt Book Fair offered the world a glimpse into the internal workings of the Chinese state… China was invited to the fair as the guest of honor. The Chinese government had invested millions of dollars in the event, lining up some 2,000 Chinese writers, publishers and artists to attend. All went well until organizers invited two Chinese dissidents to a prefair symposium titled ‘China and the World—Perception and Reality.’ Furious Chinese officials threatened to boycott the event and backed down only when organizers withdrew the invitations. ‘We did not come to be instructed about democracy,’ Mei Zhaorong, China’s former ambassador to Germany, icily declared.”

The Bible shows that in the end time, kings from the East will combine their efforts, get involved in a war with Europe, and invade the Middle East. Similar powers from the Far East will launch another attack on the descendants of the ancient House of Israel, shortly after Christ’s return, when these descendants have been brought back to the Promised Land (compare Ezekiel 38). China will play a dominant role in all of these actions.

Israel Defies USA

On November 17, The Financial Times wrote:

“Israel on Tuesday defied US pressure when it gave preliminary approval to a plan to construct 900 new housing units in a suburb of Jerusalem built on occupied Palestinian land in a move that could stoke regional tensions. Washington said it was ‘dismayed’ by the plan to build 900 new units in Gilo, south of Jerusalem. ‘At a time when we are working to relaunch negotiations, these actions make it more difficult for our efforts to succeed,’ said Robert Gibbs, President Barack Obama’s spokesman.

“In a strongly worded statement, he added: ‘The US also objects to other Israeli practices in Jerusalem related to housing, including the continuing pattern of evictions and demolitions of Palestinian homes.’

“Washington has urged Israel not to expand settlements in the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem, which have been under Israeli occupation since 1967… Israeli officials have long insisted building in East Jerusalem must continue, claiming the entire city is Israeli territory. Israel annexed its eastern neighbourhoods after 1967 – a move never endorsed by the international community.

“The settlements plan was approved on Tuesday by an interior ministry committee. It will be put to public consultation pending a final decision, and it may be years before construction actually starts…

“Last week, Palestinian negotiators suggested that they could instead unilaterally declare independence based on 1967 borders – a proposal condemned on Tuesday by both the US and the European Union… Carl Bildt, foreign minister of Sweden, which holds the rotating EU presidency, added: ‘The EU has said [in the past] we will be ready to recognise a Palestinian state but the conditions are not there as of yet.’…The EU is the biggest aid donor to the Palestinians.”

New EU Foreign Minister Needs “Superhuman” Strength

The EUObserver wrote on November 16:

“The tasks of the proposed new EU foreign minister look relatively clear-cut and powerful on paper but analysts and politicians in Brussels suggest the person will need to be superhuman to manage all that is foreseen under the Lisbon Treaty… [The] position puts foreign policy clout and the financial means to implement it into the hands of one person…

“Spanish centre-right MEP Inigo Mendez de Vigo, who was an influential member of the convention that drew up what would eventually become the Lisbon Treaty, said the foreign minister is the ‘crucial one’ when it comes to the EU’s external actors. He noted that [we must make sure that the EU foreign minister was] ‘no longer the obedient servant of the council.’ He pointed out that getting it agreed that the foreign minister would chair the monthly foreign minister meetings was a make-or-break point…, [guaranteeing that] the person [was not] ‘subordinate’ to other foreign ministers.”

The book of Revelation shows that the ultimate leader of Europe WILL have “superhuman” strength. For more information, please read our free booklets, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord,” and “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.”

New Europe Needs a European Army

Times On Line wrote on November 15:

“Italy is to push for the creation of a European Army after the ‘new Europe’ takes shape at this week’s crucial EU summit following the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty. Franco Frattini, the Italian Foreign Minister, said that the Lisbon Treaty had established ‘that if some countries want to enter into reinforced co-operation between themselves they can do so’.

“This was already the case with the euro and the Schengen accords on frontier-free travel, and could now be applied to ‘common European defence’… The Lisbon Treaty, which comes into force in December, will be sealed on Thursday with an EU summit to choose an EU President and Foreign Minister…

“It was a ‘necessary objective to have a European army’, Mr Frattini said. ‘Take Afghanistan: at present President Obama asks Poland, or Italy, or Great Britain for more troops. If there were a European army, he would have a “toolbox” to draw from. He might need 30 aeroplanes: he would be able to ask if the European army was in a position to provide them’…

“There was also a case for joint naval patrols in the Mediterranean, Mr Frattini said. ‘Europe could deploy a joint naval fleet or air force in the Mediterranean: why not? We could say, look, one group of nations is ready at once, and leave the door open for others to join, as with the euro.'”

Europe will have their army in due course; and especially core Europe–ten European nations or groups of nations–will become a powerful military alliance. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Germany Considering Withdrawing All Troops from Afghanistan

Deutsche Welle reported on November 16:

“In a shift, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg have been speaking frankly about devising a plan to get German troops out of Afghanistan… Germany has some 4,250 soldiers in Afghanistan, the third-largest number of troops in the NATO contingent. Based near the northern city of Kunduz, soldiers have had to strike back against an increasingly fierce campaign by Taliban insurgents… Guttenberg said that Germany needed to re-assess why it was in Afghanistan and how long it wanted to be there…

“German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, leader of the Free Democrats (FDP), went further during a television appearance. ‘We need to get to the point during this four-year legislative term that we are ready to talk about a potential exit strategy in Afghanistan. We don’t want to be there forever,’ said Westerwelle…

“The FDP, the CDU and the SPD are all beginning to talk exit strategy… The withdrawal debate in Germany is changing, and could be on a course that sees Germany getting out of Afghanistan earlier than many had thought.”

If Germany will do this, and wavering Britain is also considering the withdrawal of their troops, then America will soon be left all alone, assuming that there is even American willingness to continue their war in Afghanistan–a war which the West cannot and will not win.

Russian Orthodox Church Upset With Female German Bishop

Deutsche Welle reported on November 13:

“Russian Orthodox clergy are outraged by the election of a divorced female as the head of the EKD. The Russian Orthodox church does not allow women to become priests, let alone take on leadership roles. Russian Orthodox Reverend Georgy Zaverershinsky says the election now makes dialogue between the two churches impossible…”

The Local wrote on November 13:

“The Russian Orthodox clergy is threatening to cut ties with Germany’s Protestants for electing a divorced woman, Margot Käßmann, as the head of their church. Dialogue between the churches, which has been strong and steady for the past 50 years, was no longer possible because of Käßmann’s election, said Rev. Georgy Zavershinsky, spokesman for the Russian church’s office of external relations in Moscow. The church permitted no ordination nor even leadership roles for women, he said. ‘This question is very serious,’ said Zavershinsky. Ultimately, the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Cyril I, would have to rule on the matter, he said.

“In late October, Käßmann, 51, was elected to lead Germany’s Protestant church, or Evangelische Kirche Deutschland (EKD), for the next six years. She is the mother of four children but was divorced from her husband in 2007. However, it appears to be the fact of her being a woman, rather than a divorcee, that the Russians object to.

“The leader of the Russian church’s foreign office, Hilarion Alfeyev, Archbishop of Volokolamsk, said the planned celebration of 50 years of dialogue between the two churches, scheduled for late November, would be the last contact between them… The end of co-operation between the churches appeared to have the backing of Russian media on Thursday, with one paper, Vremya Novostei, writing that ‘the Patriarch must not deal with the new leader of the German Lutherans.’

“Many conservative Protestants in Russia also supported the decision. Alexander Prilutski, the leader of the Protestant church of Ingria – a Christian denomination based around St Petersburg – called Käßmann’s election a ‘sign of crisis in Western society.'”

The Bible prohibits women to preach in church, let alone being ordained to the ministry. As the Bible predicts a unification of most “Christian” churches under the umbrella of the Roman Catholic Church, it is interesting to see how this conflict of women preachers will be solved.

Frightening Ignorance of British Schoolchildren

Bild On Line wrote on November 6:

“Many British schoolchildren think Adolf Hitler was a German FOOTBALL COACH, a shocking new study has revealed. The study of 2,000 kids found that 64 years after the end of the Second World War, one in twenty believes the Nazi dictator was merely a sporting figure. And the same number of students also thought the Holocaust was a celebration marking the end of the war.

“The survey was conducted by the British war veteran charity Erskine to mark Remembrance Day, which is observed in the UK on November 11 in memory of all the victims of both World Wars. But it seems a few British teenagers may not have been paying attention in their history lessons because the results were unbelievable. Some 40 per cent of the pupils questioned didn’t know what Remembrance Day was for, and a quarter didn’t care about the fallen soldiers.

“Another particularly disturbing finding was that one in six students thought Auschwitz was an amusement park rather than a concentration camp. And every twelfth student believed the German ‘Blitz’ bombing campaign on London from 1940 was actually part of the clean-up effort in 1945.”

This is indeed frightening. What a generation of young people are we witnessing! Future leaders who have no concepts of history! When Neville Chamberlain met with Adolph Hitler, he pronounced “peace in our time,” being totally unable to recognize Hitler’s true ambitions. Is Great Britain doomed to repeat the same mistakes of the past, unwilling or unable to learn from history?

The U.S. Healthcare Debacle

The Wall Street Journal wrote on November 8:

“The House narrowly passed its sweeping health bill late Saturday, marking the biggest victory yet for Democrats in their drive to create near-universal health insurance. The bill passed by a 220-215 margin after fractious debate and garnered the unexpected backing of only one Republican… Thirty-nine Democrats voted against the measure…

“One of the day’s most dramatic scenes came when lawmakers sparred over an amendment that would exclude coverage of abortion for those gaining new health insurance under the overhaul…

“The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops threatened to withhold its support from the entire legislation unless House leaders took up the amendment. Short of votes, the leaders ultimately had little choice but to add Rep. Stupak’s amendment to Saturday’s schedule…”

Here we see a tremendous example of politics in action. The lesson is clear: To achieve something, politicians compromise. And they “must” listen to all the different interest groups which brought them to, or keep them in power. If they want to pass legislation, they “must” also yield to the Catholic Church’s stance on abortion. But compromise will NEVER lead to godly justice. Please listen to our new StandingWatch program, Why Aren’t We SOLVING Our National and Global Problems?

We cannot or should not expect to receive objective and balanced information from the mass media. Lou Dobbs–CNN’s lonely conservative voice–just announced his resignation. As Newsmax wrote on November 11, Dobbs ” was particularly persistent in bringing the immigration issue to the fore, winning him both higher ratings and enemies. Latino groups had an active petition drive seeking his removal. His presence became awkward for CNN… He angered management this summer by pressing questions about President Barack Obama’s birth site after CNN reporters determined there was no issue.”

However, as we point out in our StandingWatch program, mentioned above, ignoring or suppressing problems–including the problem of the uncertainty of Mr. Obama’s birth place– does not solve the issue.

Where from Here?

The Associated Press wrote on November 8:

“The glow from a health care triumph faded quickly for President Barack Obama on Sunday as Democrats realized the bill they fought so hard to pass in the House has nowhere to go in the Senate… The problem is that the Senate won’t run with it. The government health insurance plan included in the House bill is unacceptable to a few Democratic moderates who hold the balance of power in the Senate.
 
“If a government plan is part of the deal, ‘as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote,’ said Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut independent whose vote Democrats need to overcome GOP filibusters… Lieberman said he opposes the public plan because it could become a huge and costly entitlement program. ‘I believe the debt can break America and send us into a recession that’s worse than the one we’re fighting our way out of today,’ he said.”

The New York Post wrote on November 9:

“Not so fast. President Obama’s victory dance yesterday for the House-passed health-care bill came as Senate foes — mainly Republicans with one key Democrat moderate — pronounced the measure mortally wounded… Democrats have no margin for error: They control exactly 60 seats in the 100-member Senate.”

Will healthcare reform succeed? Will there be more compromise? Will some who speak of their conscience still falter in the end? President Obama’s reputation and perhaps even his entire political career seem to be on the line.

Jail or No Jail for the Uninsured?

ABC News wrote on November 9:

“President Obama said that penalties are appropriate for people who try to ‘free ride’ the health care system but stopped short of endorsing the threat of jail time for those who refuse to pay a fine for not having insurance.

“’What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don’t, you’re subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it’s affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there’s a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are — are burdened by because of the fact that people don’t have health insurance, you know, there’s nothing wrong with a penalty’…

“The President said that he didn’t think the question over the appropriateness of possible jail time is the ‘biggest question’ the House and Senate are facing right now.”

But it should be. President Obama’s faulty reasoning would be bound to create undue hardship for many Americans and might very well be unconstitutional. Of course, it would take a US Supreme Court bold and quick enough to even address this issue. To penalize those who choose not to have health care insurance would be a unique procedure within the entire civilized Western world. If this becomes law, then the old derogatory saying will have gained more credence: “Only in America…”

The Fort Hood Massacre–“Insensitive” President?

Times on Line wrote on November 9:

“President Obama came in for growing criticism over the weekend for his ‘insensitive’ handling of the bloody shoot-out in Fort Hood, Texas, where 13 people were killed by a Muslim officer in the US Army. Mr Obama is not scheduled to arrive at America’s largest military base until tomorrow to attend a memorial service for victims of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist who opened fire on a group of unarmed soldiers.

“The President’s jarring absence from Fort Hood — in contrast to a low-key visit by the former president George Bush on Friday — is not the only element of his response to the tragedy that is bothering his critics, Democrats and Republicans alike.

“In particular, much has been made of a transcript of the press conference where Mr Obama first gave his official response to the mass shooting. The President opened his remarks — he was attending a Tribal Nations Conference for America’s 564 federally recognised Native American tribes — with jocular ‘shout-outs’ to various people in the audience. Only later did he turn his attention to the attack, saying: ‘I planned to make some broader remarks. But as some of you have heard, there has been a tragic shooting.’

“'(Obama) did not appreciate the gravity of what he represents,’ Brad Blakeman, a former deputy assistant to George Bush, told Fox News. ‘He should have begun his official remarks with the tragedy…’

“Unusually, the liberal Boston Globe agreed. In an editorial at the weekend the newspaper said: ‘It takes more than scripted eloquence for Presidents to connect with fellow Americans. It requires a visceral ability to grasp the scope of tragedy, calculate its impact on the national psyche, and react swiftly. Obama missed the first moment to show he understood how much it hurt.'”

We also recall, of course, that President Bush initially failed to connect with the American people when the news of September 11 reached him, while attending a public school. But later, he did connect–until he lost again enormous popularity when the unsuccessful Iraq war kept dragging on…

The Fort Hood Massacre–a Terrorist Attack?

ABC News reported on November 9:

“U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News…

“People who knew or worked with Hasan say he seemed to have gradually become more radical in his disapproval of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. On Sunday, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) called for an investigation into whether the Army missed signs as to whether Hasan was an Islamic extremist…

“A fellow Army doctor who studied with Hasan, Val Finell, told ABC News, ‘We would frequently say he was a Muslim first and an American second. And that came out in just about everything he did at the University… And we questioned how somebody could take an oath of office and be an officer in the military and swear allegiance to the constitution and to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic and have that type of conflict…'”

If warning signs were indeed ignored by the U.S. intelligence and the army, then this could mean a catastrophic development for quite a few responsible officials.

Did Political Correctness Prevent Pre-Emptive Action?

Fox News wrote on November 11:

“Investigators would have been ‘crucified’ over First Amendment rights if they had launched a full-scale probe into e-mails Fort Hood massacre suspect Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly sent to a radical imam, a government investigator told Fox News…

“But even after the attacks, some have been reluctant to cite religion as a factor, as evidence has mounted that the alleged gunman’s Muslim faith was at least a partial factor in the decision to mount the attack…

“Witnesses report hearing Hasan yell ‘Allahu Akbar’ — ‘God is Great’ — during the rampage. Hasan once gave a presentation justifying homicide bombings, according to a witness. In one presentation, he also urged the military to let Muslim members leave the service to avoid ‘adverse’ effects…

“Privately, top Army officers have acknowledged that the massacre may have been a terrorist act… Publicly, however, the army’s chief of staff seemed reluctant to acknowledge what appears to be the dominant factor in Hasan’s world view: his turn toward Islamist views as he turned against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq…

“Fox News contributor Monica Crowley [said]:… ‘Political correctness is turning out to be the death of this country’…”

“America Cannot Win in Afghanistan”

Bloomberg wrote on November 10:

“Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, drawing on his experience of military failure in Afghanistan in the 1980s, said the U.S. can’t win the conflict there and should begin pulling out its soldiers. Afghanistan, where U.S. and NATO forces are battling a Taliban-led insurgency, is too fragmented between clans to be controlled militarily, Gorbachev, 78, said in an interview today in Berlin.

“While he said President Barack Obama would be unlikely to take his advice, Gorbachev said he saw no chance of success even with more U.S. troops… Obama is considering a military request to send as many as 40,000 more U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan, on top of the 68,000 due to be stationed there by the end of the year.”

Of course, Gorbachev is right in this regard. America cannot and will not win the war in Afghanistan. The main reason is that biblical prophecy shows that America has indeed won its last war (World War II) many years ago. The true facts are that America has won NO war since World War II.

More Banks Fold…

The Associated Press reported on November 6:

“Regulators on Friday shut banks in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, and California, bringing the number of bank failures this year to 120 amid the struggling economy and a cascade of defaults on loans…

“As the economy has soured, with unemployment rising, home prices tumbling and loan defaults soaring, bank failures have cascaded and sapped billions out of the federal deposit insurance fund. It has fallen into the red… If the economic recovery falters, defaults on the high-risk loans could spike…

“The number of banks on the FDIC’s confidential ‘problem list’ jumped to 416 at the end of June from 305 in the first quarter. That’s the most since June 1994. About 13 percent of banks on the list generally end up failing, according to the FDIC. The 120 failures this year compare with 25 last year and three in 2007.

“To replenish the insurance fund, the FDIC wants the roughly 8,100 insured banks and savings institutions to pay in advance about $45 billion in premiums that would have been due over the next three years.”

A grim picture indeed. Again, the concept that the recession “is over” is rejected by the article of the Associated Press, and more devastating developments must be anticipated.

Israeli Strike on Iran “Inevitable”?

Sky News in Australia wrote on November 8:

“Israel’s threat of military action against Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons programme is not a bluff, the country’s deputy foreign minister [Danny Ayalon] has told Sky News… The minister also refused to rule out the use of military options by Israel or other nations against Iran if other measures fail…

“Israeli analysts say the country is finalising its plans to attack Iran if necessary. Dr Ronen Bergman, author of The Secret War With Iran, said if current trends continue, an Israeli strike will be inevitable…

“The challenges of carrying out such a strike 1,000 miles from home against well-defended, deeply-buried nuclear facilities are considerable. But so are the risks – Israel could expect a counter attack from Iranian allies, Hizbollah and Hamas, and terrorist attacks worldwide. It would incur the wrath of America and the condemnation of European allies.

“It would also risk handing Iran the moral high ground and giving the Islamic Republic an excuse for pursuing the bomb in earnest. But observers in the Middle East believe all those considerations are secondary to the Israeli government’s top priority. ‘Israel is a tiny country. Israel cannot even sustain even one nuclear blast,’ said Dr Bergman. ‘Therefore from the Israeli point of view the only way to combat it is not by a balance of deterrence but by preventing the other side from having it in the first place.'”

It appears that Israel might very well attack Iran in the near future. If this happens, European condemnation could be one of the consequences. The Bible says that ultimately, the state of Israel will be isolated and ALL nations will be gathered to fight against Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:2). Regarding Israel’s ongoing isolation in the world, please notice the next article.

“Israel Stands Alone”

The Huffington Post wrote on November 10:

“Eight months into President Barack Obama’s administration, his Middle East peace ‘road map’ is crystal clear. First, he dialed down the pressure on Iran, whose nuclear weapons program presents an existential threat to Israel. Second, he shifted the blame for Islamic extremism to Israel and solely blamed it for the Palestinian’s plight. Then he unilaterally ratcheted up the pressure on Israel to cease building settlements and to ease its self-defense blockade of Gaza. Now, Obama has upped the ante even further, framing lasting peace in the Middle East as requiring Israel to retreat to its 1967 borders. Although he blandly claims that there are ‘no preconditions’ to relaunching negotiations, in truth he has doomed the peace talks before they even start. Obama has set up Israel as the fall guy for negotiations that will ultimately fail and is the architect of that failure.

“When Obama was elected — with 78 percent of the Jewish vote — there was concern about what his administration would mean for the 60 years of unwavering support America had provided Israel. Unlike his Republican opponent, John McCain, or his predecessor, George W. Bush, both longstanding supporters of Israel, Obama had no such track record and was championing a different course, one of détente with such hard-line regimes as Iran and Syria. Jews took heart when then-President-elect Obama selected a Jew, Rahm Emanuel, as his chief of staff, and Hillary Clinton, previously a staunch supporter of Israel from her days as senator from New York, as his secretary of state.

“An examination of the first 250 days of President Obama’s administration convincingly demonstrates that the earlier concerns were well founded and the mitigating cabinet appointments mere window dressing. From his first telephone call as president to a head of state — Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian National Authority — and his first one-on-one television interview with any news organization — Al Arabiya TV — to his bowing to Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, then embracing the Muslim world at Cairo University and, most recently, rebuking Israel in an address to the United Nations General Assembly, Obama has shown far more concern for strengthening ties with authoritarian regimes on the Arabian Peninsula than to maintaining the historically close alliance with the region’s only true democracy.

“His Cairo speech scaled back his support of Israel in favor of establishing new diplomatic channels in the Arab world. He also equated the suffering of the Palestinians with the loss of 6 million Jewish lives in the Holocaust. Worse yet, Obama’s affirmation of the Arab propagandist idea that Israel was created as a response to the Holocaust greatly undermined its legitimacy as a state and ignored Jews’ forced diaspora and Judaism’s historical ties to the Middle East that predate all other religions…

“Islamic extremists are at war with the spread of Western culture, and the United States is the chief exporter of Western beliefs, so it is a pipe dream to assume that America can achieve détente with ‘anti-American militant jihadists’ by, in effect, offering up Israel as a sacrificial lamb… The United States is proving to be a fair-weather ally, abandoning Israel in the face of an impending existential threat from a nuclear Iran…

“Iran and Syria rank as the leading state sponsors of terrorism, yet the president has removed a longstanding export ban on American technology to Syria, allowing the transfer of spare aircraft parts, information technology and telecommunications equipment, all material that could also benefit the air force of Syria’s close ally, Iran. At the same time, Obama actually suspended the sale of military equipment to Israel — holding up the shipment of Apache helicopters after Israel moved to defend its citizenry against daily Hamas-enabled rocket barrages earlier this year — equipment necessary to safeguard Israel’s security against overwhelming odds… Yet, it is only Israel that stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States as America’s most important and dependable ally in combating terrorism…

“President Obama’s new, ‘evenhanded’ policy in the Middle East is anything but fair and balanced. His policies increasingly endanger and isolate Israel. At the United Nations, Obama forcefully stated that ‘the United States of America will never waiver in our efforts to stand up for the right of people everywhere to determine their own destiny,’ that is, of course, unless the people are Israelis. Without the Jewish state of Israel as a standard bearer for Western ideals of democracy in the Middle East, the world will be a far more dangerous place…”

One should perhaps consider President Obama’s religious and cultural background to appreciate his support for the Muslim world and his apparent lack of support–comparatively speaking–for the Judeo-Christian culture and religion. In a widely-circulated video of clips from his own speeches, which is posted on YouTube, Mr. Obama referred repeatedly to the “HOLY Koran,” emphasized that “we are NO LONGER a Christian nation,” and stated, after explaining that there are Muslims within his family, that “I am one of them.” He also said this: “John McCain did not talk about MY MUSLIM FAITH.” It remained unclear whether this was a slip of the tongue; whether he was responding to those who say that he is a Muslim; or whether he was actually commenting on his religious preferences.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall–“Insensitive” U.S. President?

Fox News wrote on November 8:

“President Obama squeezed in a trip to Copenhagen last month to lobby, unsuccessfully, for Chicago to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. He plans to travel to Oslo next month to accept the Nobel Peace Prize, an award that even Obama has said he does not deserve. And this coming week, he sets out on a weeklong tour of Asia.

“But the president does not plan to travel to Germany to attend the 20th anniversary celebration Monday of the fall of the Berlin Wall, drawing heated criticism from those who say he’s ignoring a shining triumph of American-inspired democracy… Some question whether the decision not to go was… just another attempt to play down the perception of the United States as an exceptional superpower.

“For its part, the administration is citing a scheduling conflict. The White House says the president simply does not have the time to go, with the trip to Asia starting Wednesday… noting that a ‘very senior delegation’ of U.S. officials would attend. That delegation is led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton…

“Obama acknowledged the anniversary of the fall of the wall last week during his meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel… But some saw Obama’s decision not to travel personally to Berlin as a snub to Merkel, Germany and the history behind the anniversary. ‘Barack Is Too Busy,’ Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine declared in a headline last month, writing that Obama had declined Merkel’s invitation…

“On several of the stops he has expressed regret for past American behavior, but the Berlin Wall anniversary was seen as an opportunity for the president to honor an American and Western victory for which the U.S. need feel no regret…

“The National Review’s Rich Lowry wrote that the decision speaks to Obama’s ‘dismissive view of the Cold War as a relic distorting our thinking. John F. Kennedy famously told Berliners, “Ich bin ein Berliner.” On the 20th anniversary of the last century’s most stirring triumph of freedom, Obama is telling them, “Ich bin beschaftigt” — i.e., “I’m busy,”‘ he wrote. “‘Obama’s failure to go to Berlin is the most telling nonevent of his presidency. It’s hard to imagine any other American president eschewing the occasion.'”

The picture given is indeed regrettable. Most leaders of the free Western world assembled in Germany to recount and to celebrate the events of the fall of the Wall, including Messrs. Gordon Brown, Sarkozy, Berlusconi and Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev, as well as former President George H. W. Bush Sr., former President Mikhail Gorbachev and former Chancellor Helmut Kohl.

But President Obama is too busy–even though he has the time to attend a Tribal Nations Conference for America’s 564 federally recognized Native American tribes (see our article,”The Fort Hood Massacre–“Insensitive” President?”). Instead, he sends Mrs. Clinton, giving the impression, that her attendance in Germany was more important than his own. This does not look good and greatly diminishes once again the role that the American President should be playing in the world.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall–Germany Today

This article and the next one show that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the unification of Germany were indeed inevitable and unstoppable. From a biblical perspective, we know that this is also true for the additional reason that without a unified Germany, Europe would and could not have united. But the Bible has prophesied the unification of Europe in our days thousands of years ago–and that the most important player within a unified Europe will be Germany. The two articles below show the role which Germany is playing today–20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The New York Times wrote on November 9 about the “German Reunification: From Rejection to Inevitability.” The paper pointed out:

“Willy Brandt was uncomfortable with the idea, Günter Grass — who in those days spoke from the summit of Mount Morality — considered it an abomination, and Gerhard Schröder, maneuvering for political position as a Social Democratic underling, eventually voted against it. François Mitterrand resisted as long as he could, and Margaret Thatcher, in her fierce opposition, held out even further.

“From the day after the Berlin Wall fell, and for the next month or two, the prospect of reunifying Germany met with extensive rejection, while the Cold War’s leaders nurtured the notion that it could be negotiated and stalled into a still distant future…

“History accelerated in the next weeks. Barely two months later, as East Germany disintegrated as a state, plainly incapable of matching West Germany’s immediate promise of freedom and economic well-being for all Germans, reunification seemed inevitable. And by New Year’s Eve 1989, Helmut Kohl, who on Nov. 28 irritated the Americans and Soviets, British and French, with a surprise 10-point road map for unity in a Western framework, had the look of a sage.

“In late summer 1990, reunification was virtually a done deal — the chancellor had gotten the acceptance of a tottering Soviet Union for the new Germany’s full integration into NATO. But he also moved to ease Western Europe’s concerns about German economic dominance, indicating that the deutschemark could be melded into a single Common Market currency.

“All of this arrived with extraordinary speed. And extraordinary acceptance… So what now, almost 20 years after George H.W. Bush, to express his pleasure with reunification, offered Germany a ‘partnership in leadership’?…

“Germany’s reality has been one ‘of increasing egoism whenever its national interests are concerned’… Today is 20 years to the day since the Berlin Wall came down. For all its democratic strengths, energy, vast intelligence and successful reunification, Germany remains a difficult, not entirely settled place.”

The Fall of the German Wall–“German Unification Unstoppable”

The Telegraph wrote on November 9:

“The mantras of the Berlin revellers in 1989 were ‘Freiheit’ or freedom, and ‘We are one people’, a demand for reunification. The paradox of the events was that the then Mrs Thatcher, a pre-eminent champion of freedom, was adamantly opposed to a rapid drive to German unification..

“Twenty years later Germany is… Europe’s indispensable nation, eclipsing the French in continental affairs… Frankfurt is home to the European Central Bank and master of the euro. Germany’s economic clout is such that countries in the single currency must take their cues from it.

“… It is now clear Chancellor Angela Merkel has a pivotal role in the choice of a new European Union president… She has not imposed her man but has a veto and Mrs Merkel’s refusal to support Tony Blair for the job appears to have doomed his candidacy.

“Mrs Thatcher came very close to raising a far more fundamental alarm over a united Germany in early 1990. ‘All Europe is watching this, not without a degree of fear, remembering very well who started the two world wars,’ she told the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. The British prime minister’s position infuriated the West German government…

“The old game of continental supremacy had gone global. The combination of Mr Bush, Mr Gorbachev and Mr Kohl at the helm of the most powerful countries and the momentum for unification on the streets of the east was unstoppable.”

November 9–a “Fateful Date” for Germany

This article shows that certain key developments are providential–and that they might even occur on a very precise and pre-ordained date. It cannot be any coincidence that the following important –and to an extent, totally unrelated and “unplanned”–events all occurred on November 9. For more information on the timing of certain biblically-prophesied occurrences or developments, please read our free booklet, “Are YOU Predestined to Be Saved”?

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 9:

“November 9 is a key date in Germany’s chequered 20th century history…

“Berlin is staging a massive public festival on Monday to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, the event that heralded the end of communism in Europe and the unification of Germany.

“But November 9 is also the 71st anniversary of Reichskristallnacht, a nationwide Nazi pogrom against Jews in 1938. Two other historical events fell on that date in 1918 and 1923 respectively…

“It was 71 years before the fall of the Berlin Wall when November 9 first attained significance in German history. It was on that day in 1918 that the monarchy came to an end in Berlin.

“The end had been a long time in coming. The German army had all but lost World War I. Indeed, Emperor Wilhelm II knew in August that the situation was largely hopeless and that his own position was in danger… In Munich, revolutionaries deposed King Ludwig III, the king of Bavaria, on Nov. 7… On the afternoon of Nov. 9, Philipp Scheidemann, deputy chairman of the Social Democrats, stepped out onto a balcony of the Reichstag parliament building in Berlin and called out the establishment of the republic…

“Karl Liebknecht, leader of the left-wing socialist Spartakusbund, likewise announced the establishment of a republic on that day… The rival proclamations resulted in days of civil-war like fighting on the streets of Berlin, ultimately resulting in the defeat of the Spartakusbund and the murder of both Liebknecht and his political ally Rosa Luxemburg. When the dust cleared, Germany founded the Weimar Republic, the interwar period of democracy ultimately brought to an end by Adolf Hitler…

“By the fall of 1923, revolution was in the air in Bavaria and Hitler was feeling strong. By early November, he was actively seeking to unite all Bavarian right wing groups under his leadership, but was concerned that he was being outflanked. He got wind of a Nov. 8 speech to be held by Gustav Ritter von Kahr, the state commissioner of Bavaria at the Bürgerbräu beer hall — and he immediately jumped to the conclusion that von Kahr was planning on starting a revolution of his own… on the evening of Nov. 8, [Hitler] had the beer hall surrounded with hundreds of armed SA men. Hitler stormed into the packed beer hall, fired his revolver into the roof and proclaimed a putsch against the Weimar Republic, ultimately planning to march on Berlin and overthrow the government.

“But it didn’t work. Hitler had been banking on the Bavarian military immediately throwing its support behind him. Instead, when his henchmen Ernst Röhm and Hermann Esser began storming army barracks in the city concurrently with Hitler’s storming of the beer hall, they encountered armed resistance. The putsch rapidly lost momentum until Hitler, having spent the night in the beer hall, elected to go for broke on the morning of Nov. 9. He and 2,000 followers straggled out of the hall and began marching through the city, swastika flags flying.

“They didn’t get far. Just north of the city center, the marching Nazis encountered a police barricade and shots were fired. In the ensuing shootout, 14 Nazis lost their lives with two others killed elsewhere in the city. Hitler, injured while throwing himself to the ground to avoid the bullets, escaped, but was arrested just days later. He was ultimately tried and convicted for his role in the putsch attempt, but received an astoundingly lenient sentence [and] was out of jail just a year later…

“The [next] event has gone down in history as ‘The Night of the Broken Glass,’ or Kristallnacht in German — a name that is shorthand for one of Germany’s darkest, most horrifying nights. On Nov. 9, 1938, Nazi henchmen perpetrated a far-reaching pogrom, an orgy of violence directed against the country’s Jewish population that resulted in tens of thousands of arrests, over 2,000 deaths, dozens of synagogues destroyed and hundreds of Jewish shops demolished, the shattered shop windows giving the event its name… On Nov. 7, 1938, Herschhel Grynszpan, a German-born Polish Jew, walked into the German embassy [in France] and shot diplomat Ernst vom Rath three times. The diplomat died two days later…

“The Führer received word of Vom Rath’s death on the evening of Nov. 9 in Munich, where he was celebrating the anniversary of the 1923 Beer Hall Putsch, the Nazis’ first attempt to take over power in Germany. Immediately, he gave orders interpreted to mean that the SA should organize countrywide ‘demonstrations.’ Anti-Semitic violence, of course, was the desired outcome.

“Throughout the night, the SA, Nazi party members and members of the Hitler Youth destroyed Jewish property and businesses using sledgehammers and axes. The rioters also destroyed Jewish homes and dozens were killed. In total, the storefronts of approximately 7,500 Jewish stores and businesses were destroyed. More than 200 synagogues went up in flames. Some 30,000 Jews were arrested that night and taken to concentration camps at Dachau, Buchenwald and Sachsenhausen with 2,000 losing their lives in the camps before they were released three months later.”

Merkel: “I Want to Lead Germany to New Strength!”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 10:

“Speaking in her first address to parliament since being sworn in for a second term two weeks ago, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said leading Germany back to growth is her top priority but warned that the nation faces a difficult 2010 as well as its biggest economic challenge since its 1990 reunification…

“‘Creating growth is the goal of our government. The central question is whether Germany will emerge stronger from this recession. I want to lead Germany to new strength,’ Merkel said…”

Bible prophecy shows that Germany–and Europe–will rise to unprecedented economic heights, while America will not substantially recover from its present economic crisis.

The Vatican in Search of Alien Life

The Telegraph wrote on November 10:

“The Pontifical Academy of Sciences is holding a conference on astrobiology, the study of life beyond Earth, with scientists and religious leaders gathering in Rome this week. For centuries, theologians have argued over what the existence of life elsewhere in the universe would mean for the Church: at least since Giordano Bruno, an Italian monk, was put to death by the Inquisition in 1600 for claiming that other worlds exist.

“Among other things, extremely alien-looking aliens would be hard to fit with the idea that God ‘made man in his own image’. Furthermore, Jesus Christ’s role as saviour would be confused: would other worlds have their own, tentacled Christ-figures, or would Earth’s Christ be universal?

“However, just as the Church eventually made accommodations after Copernicus and Galileo showed that the Earth was not the centre of the universe, and when it belatedly accepted… Darwin’s theory of evolution, Catholic leaders say that alien life can be aligned with the Bible’s teachings.

“Father Jose Funes, a Jesuit astronomer at the Vatican Observatory and one of the organisers of the conference, said: ‘As a multiplicity of creatures exists on Earth, so there could be other beings, also intelligent, created by God. This does not conflict with our faith, because we cannot put limits on the creative freedom of God.'”

The Bible predicts that the armies of the beast and the false prophet, as well as the armies of the kings of the east, will try to fight the returning Christ. Why? The possibility exists that they are all deceived in believing that He is the “Antichrist.” But another possibility is that they are convinced that Christ, together with the armies of heaven following Him, are hostile aliens determined to take over the earth. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.”

The Afghan Debacle–“We’re Waiting, Mr. President…”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on October 29 that President Obama “Must Provide Better Leadership on Afghanistan.”

The article continued:

“Afghanistan and Pakistan are being shaken by attacks, and the Taliban is dictating the course of the war. US President Obama has been silent about the situation for far too long and European countries like Germany and France are correct to demand better American leadership on the issue of Afghanistan. The most important piece of news from the most recent meeting of NATO defense ministers was that there was no news…

“The mission in Afghanistan is seen as a toxic issue in all Western nations, and every government that has provided troops has come under sharp criticism at home. What the US’s NATO allies now find far more irritating is US President Barack Obama’s silence on the issue. The world has been waiting for clear words from the White House for months…

“Wednesday’s attacks underscore that things have been progressing in the opposite direction for some time. The Taliban is in control of the military initiative, and it is increasingly dictating the course of the war. Whether Obama can even regain the political initiative in the Hindu Kush is now questionable…

“‘I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy,’ US Marine Corps Captain Matthew Hoh wrote recently. As part of Holbrooke’s team, Hoh was responsible for coordinating civilian reconstruction in the dangerous Zabul Province, but he recently resigned.

“His resignation, he said, had less to do with the way the war is currently being fought. Instead, he said, he simply no longer knows ‘why and to what end’ the war is being fought in Afghanistan… It’s alarming news when even former Marines like Hoh, men with combat experience in Iraq, can no longer believe in their mission because politicians cannot answer their questions…

“So far Obama has only made it clear that he doesn’t intend to withdraw any troops and that he hasn’t decided yet whether to add more soldiers. But this smells more like a lazy compromise than a clear statement of intent…

“Obama’s silence stands in contrast with the impassioned rhetoric that carried him into the White House… why should countries like Germany and France believe the verbose promises of a president who is not even sending a clear message at home, even though he has a majority in both houses of Congress?

“There is no doubt that hardly a day passes in Europe without criticism of US policy. This has become a trans-Atlantic ritual. But despite this ritual, Europeans are still looking for one thing from the White House: leadership.

“We’re waiting, Mr. President.”

Apart from the fact that the world is losing more and more patience WAITING for U.S. LEADERSHIP, the USA is becoming more and more unable to PROVIDE such leadership. 

According to Wikipedia and the Associated Press, the U.S. War in Afghanistan has been going on, so far, for 8.1 years. This means that it is already the second-longest war in the history of the USA. Only the Vietnam war was (slightly) longer, so far, lasting 8.4 years. The American Revolutionary War lasted 6.7 years, followed by the Iraq war which has been lasting (so far) for 6.6 years. By comparison, the American Civil War lasted for 4 years, America’s participation in World War II lasted for 3.7 years, and the Korean War lasted for 3.1 years.

The big difference is, too, that America has won its wars in the past, but has been unable to win any war since World War II, including the Vietnam war, the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. We can see that America is no longer blessed in ANY of its endeavors, domestically or abroad.

Rather, America is in domestic turmoil–as our articles below on the economy prove–and it is in no position to achieve success abroad. For the reasons as to why this is, please read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

The Afghan Debacle–USA To Be Blamed

On November 2, Der Spiegel Online quoted numerous German magazines and newspapers, opinionating that the USA or NATO are responsible for the terrible situation and “fiasco” in Afghanistan. The magazine wrote:

“The Afghan election fell apart on Sunday after Abdullah Abdullah pulled out of the run-off poll, leaving President Hamid Karzai as the sole candidate. Now the election commission has cancelled the vote and declared Karzai the winner. German newspapers on Monday question whether the government in Kabul can still have any credibility…

“The first round of the election on August 20 turned into a debacle after it became obvious that there had been widespread election fraud… [The] Election Complaints Commission found that around one-third of the votes cast were invalid. Massive international pressure forced Karzai to accept a run-off poll against his nearest challenger, Abdullah, scheduled for Nov. 7.

“However, Abdullah said on Sunday that he would not go ahead with the run-off vote because key election officials had not been removed from their posts. He said he believed that the poll would be neither free nor fair. The international community’s role in the elections has also come in for tough criticism…

“The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: ‘President Karzai did not enjoy a great reputation before the election and now he has lost even more authority. His country is politically crippled…’

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘The US and NATO are responsible for the fiasco that is the presidential election. They have never made a secret of the fact that they considered Afghan President Hamid Karzai to be a scoundrel, but he was their scoundrel — one who was supposed to help with building the much-trumpeted civil society. But instead of holding on tightly to the strings of their puppet, the international overseers allowed Karzai to blatantly falsify the elections and was about to do the same for the planned run-off on Saturday…

“‘The consequence is dramatic: Instead of the coveted democratically legitimate government, Afghanistan is getting a government that has already lost all credibility before taking office. It makes little difference that Karzai would in all likelihood have won the run-off election. For the US and its allies the establishment of a functioning state with a government accepted by the population was at the top of their list of strategic goals in Afghanistan. Without such a government it is almost impossible to convince the Afghan people that they are better off under the care of the Kabul government than of the tribal leaders and warlords…’

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘”Mission Afghanistan” is increasingly losing credibility. The thought of having to rely on a government that is discredited by election fraud for the reconstruction and pacification of the country over the next five years is depressing.'”

America is being blamed–rightly or wrongly–for the Afghan fiasco. The times when America is looked upon as a true leader in this world have passed. The next article shows that America is accused of failing to provide a leadership role in the Middle East.

Mr. Obama’s Difficult Role re Afghanistan

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 3:

“The Afghan president is becoming an especially serious problem for the US. After the fiasco in the Afghan election… and Abdullah’s withdrawal, how is President Barack Obama supposed to explain to his people that he now wants to send more troops to Afghanistan to support precisely this government? ‘It won’t be easy,’ the New York Times comments dryly in its own analysis.

“The mood of the US public is becoming more and more critical for Obama. Washington has already spent close to a quarter-trillion dollars in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, all the news coming out of the crisis region these days seems to be bad. In October, more US soldiers died in the Hindu Kush than in any previous month — an alarming signal for the home front…

“Obama is caught in a trap that he is going to have great difficulty freeing himself from. In the coming weeks, he is expected to present his new plan for Afghanistan. Once again people are expecting to see the light at the end of the tunnel: the withdrawal of US troops. Before that can happen, though, the country must be stabilized. That’s why Obama wants to send several thousand additional soldiers to Afghanistan. But the current chaos surrounding the election farce will merely serve to strengthen skeptics…

“The United States isn’t the only country left perplexed by the election. In Germany, the mandate for the deployment of the Bundeswehr, the country’s armed forces, in Afghanistan must be renewed by parliament in December. Members of parliament are viewing the latest developments with concern…

“Disastrous as the situation already is, Karzai will soon deliver the icing on the cake. At the very latest, this will happen when the new president presents the names of the members of his new cabinet — names which are unlikely to please the West. In order to secure a majority, Karzai has recruited several brutal warlords to his team, including the notorious Mohammed Fahim. From a Western point of view, Fahim should be answering to the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague. In Kabul, though, he’s poised to become vice president.”

Mrs. Clinton Tries to Back-Pedal from Back-Pedaling…

The Guardian wrote on November 2:

“Amid mounting concern that Barack Obama’s much-heralded engagement with the Middle East peace process is going nowhere fast, Arab leaders expressed their fury at Clinton’s endorsement of Israel’s argument that it is not required to halt settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as the administration had previously demanded…

“Speaking in Marrakech she qualified her remarks to say that Netanyahu’s offer of ‘restraint’ on settlements fell short of US expectations but would still have a ‘significant and meaningful effect’ on limiting the growth of Jewish outposts on land the Palestinians want for their own state. But she clearly faced an uphill struggle in convincing Arab states that Washington has not changed tack in favour of Israel.

“Earlier today Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the Arab League, said: ‘I am telling you that all of us, including Saudi Arabia, including Egypt, are deeply disappointed … with the results, with the fact that Israel can get away with anything without any firm stand that this cannot be done’…

“There were harsher comments from Nabil Abu Rudeineh, spokesman for Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas: ‘The negotiations are in a state of paralysis, and the result of Israel’s intransigence and America’s backpedalling is that there is no hope of negotiations on the horizon’…

“Israelis on the left joined in criticism of Clinton’s remarks. ‘The secretary of state, I assume with the full support of the president, has turned around after 10 months of negotiating the precondition of freezing settlements,’ said Akiva Eldar in the Haaretz newspaper.”

The USA is perceived as being unable to help in creating peace in the Middle East. The Bible shows that it will be a united Europe to take over the role of “peace-keeper”–but they won’t do so with peaceful means. Europe will create a confederation with Middle Eastern states against Israel. Israel will find itself totally isolated–the false idea that Europe will make a peace treaty with Israel can nowhere be found in Scripture.

The Lisbon Treaty Ratified

Deutsche Welle reported on November 3:

“The head of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, has welcomed the signing by the Czech president, Vaclav Klaus, of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty.  He said it removed ‘the last hurdle.’ Klaus announced that he had signed the Lisbon Treaty just a few hours after a ruling by the Czech constitutional court on Tuesday that the treaty did not break Czech law. He criticized the court’s decision, saying that ‘the constitutional court’s ruling is not a neutral legal analysis but a biased political defense of the Lisbon Treaty on the part of its supporters.’ But he said he had expected the verdict and would respect it.

“The treaty allows the EU to speed up decision making, increase the power of the European Parliament and appoint a longer-term president and a more powerful foreign representative. The Swedish prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, whose country currently holds the rotating EU presidency, said he would call a summit shortly and begin ‘name consultations’ over the two new posts. ‘The treaty enters into force on 1 December and all the details must now be put into place,’ he said.

“The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, has also welcomed the development; she noted during a speech to the US Congress in Washington that, with the new treaty, the EU ‘will become stronger and more capable of acting, and so a strong and reliable partner for the United States.'”

However, the relationship between an increasingly stronger EU and an increasingly weaker USA will not remain friendly. Certain signs can already be seen when considering the next two articles.

GM and Opel Debacle

The Wall Street Journal wrote on November 4:

“The timing is what diplomats might call unfortunate. The German chancellor was in Washington yesterday for talks with President Obama, and to deliver an historic address to the U.S. Congress. In her speech she thanked America, saying its support had been invaluable in ensuring German reunification. Yes, she said, America and Europe have ‘had their share of disagreements’. But… ‘I am convinced that we will not find a better partner than America.’

“Within hours, with Merkel heading back across the Atlantic, General Motors sensationally switched course and announced that it would not, after all, be selling Opel, its huge German subsidiary. The German government had made much of backing a deal for it to to be bought by Magna – thus protecting jobs. This throws all that up in the air, and is extremely problematic politically for Merkel.

“Couldn’t G.M. have chosen a better time for their decision and its announcement? That is just one of the many questions one imagines the chancellor will be insisting her officials ask their counterparts in Washington.”

Reuters added on November 4:

“Bitterness, anger and disbelief mixed with betrayal and even resignation are just some of the emotions boiling within Germany following Tuesday’s news that General Motors Co. will scrap its sale of Opel to Magna International Inc.

“Opel labor leader Klaus Franz said workers would not go along with GM’s ‘blackmail’ of European governments and staff… Other workers directed venom at GM’s American board for reversing course on plans to sell Opel, a decision that many fear will lead to thousands more job losses and plant closures than if Magna [had] taken control. Half of Opel’s 50,000 workers are based in Germany.

“‘I can only say that in GM’s executive offices in America sit the biggest liars that the world has ever seen,’ one Opel worker raged in a German radio interview…

“Chancellor Angela Merkel and key allies in her conservative party lobbied heavily in Magna’s favor ahead of the parliamentary elections on Sept. 27, thinly veiling a threat that no German aid would flow should any other decision be taken.”

Der Spiegel Online reported on November 5:

“The decision by General Motors to hold onto its German subsidiary Opel has unleashed a wave of shock and despair on this side of the Atlantic, with politicians railing against American corporate duplicity and unions striking…”

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung wrote on November 5:

“‘Without the billions of dollars in aid that the Obama administration gave to GM, the company would not exist. And the GM board members who decided not to sell Opel this week were almost all appointed by President Obama. But apparently the American leader knew nothing of this decision by GM when he was hosting Angela Merkel only a few hours earlier. Perhaps at that time the US president really didn’t know anything — which doesn’t say much for him. Perhaps he did know something was up but he chose not to tell the German chancellor about it — that also doesn’t say much for him and his administration.'”

Britain Concerned

The Telegraph wrote on November 3:

“So the deed is done. Eight years after EU leaders attending a summit in the Belgian town of Laeken agreed to the idea of drawing up a European constitution, the final obstacle to its implementation was removed at about 3pm yesterday when President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic signed on the dotted line. Of course, it is no longer called a constitution. Those original, grandiose plans were scuppered by the voters of France and the Netherlands. Instead, we were invited to believe that the treaty signed in Lisbon in 2007 was somehow a different beast altogether (thereby obviating the need for a referendum) when it was, in fact, identical in all significant respects.

“There were lingering hopes among those dismayed by the profoundly undemocratic way in which the treaty has been foisted upon the people of Europe that Mr Klaus would hold out, somehow, until after a Conservative government was elected in Britain, committed to a referendum that could yet stop ratification. But it was not to be. He waited just a few hours after the Czech courts ruled that his agreement would not be unconstitutional to add his signature to those of 26 other heads of government. The Treaty of Lisbon now becomes PART of the Treaty of ROME and its provisions embedded in EU law.”

EU Infighting on the Horizon?

The EUObserver wrote on November 3:

“Leaders of the countries next in line to take on the day-to-day running of the European Union have made it clear that they do not wish to be sidelined by any future EU president. Gathered in Brussels last week to present a common logo for 18 months of co-operation beginning in January, the prime ministers of Spain, Belgium and Hungary were keen to emphasize the importance of ‘institutional balance’ – an oblique way of saying they do not wish to get elbowed out of the political picture by a powerful new president of the European Council, a post created by the… ratified Lisbon Treaty…

“[Focus] has turned to the uncertainties contained in the document [of the Lisbon Treaty]. One of these includes how the six-month rotating presidencies and the national leaders of the moment will rub along with the permanent president. While the president, who can hold office for up to five years, is supposed to drive forward the political agenda of the EU through the regular meetings of EU leaders, the rotating presidency will manage the daily policy-making including chairing monthly ministerial meetings in all areas, bar foreign policy. The set-up, with its undefined hierarchy, could lead to damaging turf wars.

“The problem of the proliferation of chiefs with potentially overlapping job descriptions under the Lisbon Treaty – it also introduces a beefed up foreign policy post – has practical implications too, such as who will take part in EU summits with third countries…

“Who will be the first president of the European Council is still unclear, with member states unsure about whether they want a powerful global figure, or someone with a more administrative job description. The EU parliament will discuss the role of the new president on 11 November, while the appointment itself is expected to be decided at an extraordinary summit later this month. The type of person who gets the job is set to strongly influence how the EU will make a go of the new Lisbon Treaty system…”

The Bible says that the leading member states of a unified Europe will be partly strong and partly weak.

Searching for the EU President

The Telegraph wrote on October 30:

“… speaking to journalists late last night at the summit, Jean-David Levitte, Mr Sarkozy’s foreign policy adviser, said that it was unlikely that France would support a presidential candidate from the UK. Britain’s position outside the euro and the Schengen agreement on free travel meant that a British president would face difficulties, Mr Levitte said. So would the UK’s various opt-outs from some EU policies, including justice and home affairs…

“Mr Sarkozy and Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, discussed the presidency at dinner on Wednesday, where they are said to have agreed that the president should come from a right-of-centre political party which would rule out Mr Blair.”

It will be interesting to see who the first EU President will be. But before the last European military leader, called the “beast” in the book of Revelation, will emerge, we need to await  the development of a core Europe of ten nations or groups of nations, within a united Europe, which will then give their power and authority to the “beast.”

United Europe Has Come a Long Way…

The Wall Street Journal wrote on November 2:

“In 1989, the EU had just 12 members. Now its has 27, stretching from the sun-drenched shores of the Algarve to the Polish border with Belarus… The EU’s powers have also mushroomed in sensitive areas—such as defence and immigration—that lie at the heart of sovereignty. And remember the franc, the deutschmark, the lira, and the drachma? Currencies that once symbolised national power are now curious relics of the past.

“But perhaps the most dramatic change over the last 20 years has been the gradual removal of border controls between EU states. Over the centuries, millions of Europeans have died fighting over sometimes illogical, often arbitrary and almost always unnatural frontiers. Now that they are gone, the prospect of war between EU states has become unthinkable. It is also increasingly difficult to argue that a person on one side of a border should be taxed, taught and ruled differently from a person on the other side, when the line separating them no longer exists…

“I was brought up believing that Europe’s east-west division was permanent, and that the threat of conflict in Europe would always exist. Then came Berlin, 11/9. Within a year Germany was reunited, the dissident playwright Vaclav Havel was president of Czechoslovakia and a union activist named Lech Walesa was Poland’s head of state. Two years later the Soviet Union had splintered and the map of central and eastern Europe had been completely redrawn…

“The EU, which emerged from the ashes of a world war that left Europe shattered, humiliated and sidelined, is now the world’s biggest economic power, exporter, trading bloc, aid donor and foreign investor… Europe has become one. Europe has been reborn.”

“Europe Must Stop Being So Submissive to the USA”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 2:

“… a study by an influential Brussels think tank suggests the EU is going about things the wrong way. The Europeans must stop being so submissive, they must present a united front on foreign policy and they must work toward a ‘post-American’ state of affairs, the study says…

“[The] European Council on Foreign Relations… released a study on Monday called ‘Toward a Post-American Europe,’ based on wide-ranging interviews and research conducted in the 27 EU member states. In it, the authors make a clear appeal to European leaders:

“This ‘fetishization’ of the trans-Atlantic relationship must stop… It is high time that Europe declare a new, ‘post-American’ age and do away with old myths about the trans-Atlantic relationship. Myths like the idea that the continent’s security is dependent on American protection… Or the one about American and European interests being the same at heart…”

How German Unification Came About…

A united Europe would have been impossible without a united Germany. On November 3, 2009, Der Spiegel Online published an interview with Rudolf Seiters, an aide of then German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and a key negotiator during Germany’s reunification. His reflections on the events in 1989 and 1990 are quite interesting and prove that higher powers are involved in key political events, which are necessary to fulfill biblical prophecy:

“Without a doubt, we were also lucky. Solidarity, the Polish trade union, contributed in a major way. We are also grateful to the Hungarians, who were the first to open their borders to East German refugees. And Bush provided unlimited support. It was also important that Helmut Kohl was able to systematically build a close, trusting relationship with Mikhail Gorbachev in 1989 and 1990…

“Margaret Thatcher’s stance is well-known, as are her considerable doubts about and objections to reunification. Giulio Andreotti, the Italian politician, also remarked: ‘We love Germany so much that we would prefer to have two of them.’ At a later point, Mitterrand was also one of our closest friends and supporters, but in 1989 he still had doubts about the project…

“In the West, there were fears and worries regarding the prospect of German reunification. Many Europeans believed that, if reunified, Germany would change its political orientation. In his memoirs, Kohl later wrote that he never attended a European summit with such an icy atmosphere as the meeting on Dec. 9 in Strasburg, which was held 14 days after he presented his 10-point plan for overcoming the division of Germany and Europe…

“For Helmut Kohl, it was always clear that a reunified Germany needed to be intertwined within the broader European process. He viewed German unity and European unity as two sides of the same coin, and that something he was convinced of deep down. Likewise, he strongly believed that, for Europe to move forward, France and Germany had to cooperate closely. He also knew that the smaller European countries needed to be part of it, as well…

“In the autumn and winter of 1989, I was surprised by the helplessness of the GDR [East German] leadership and its rapid loss of authority. The SED was helpless when it came to the issue of refugees. It was helpless when the Berlin Wall came down, which was not even meant to happen when it did. And it was also helpless in Dresden. Everything happened amazingly fast. When I became head of the Chancellory in Bonn in April 1989, no one knew or even suspected that, in a few months, the Wall would fall and that Germany would be reunified one and a half years later. That was more than surprising; that was practically a miracle.”

No More German Support for China and India?

Deutsche Welle reported on October 30 that Germany’s new development minister, Herr Niebel, said that aid to China and India should be cut completely. The article continued:

“Niebel (FDP) told a German newspaper that economic powers like China and India, commonly referred to as ‘developing nations,’ no longer met the criteria of that distinction. ‘Battling poverty is more important than ever. That means we have to concentrate our resources effectively in the most needy areas. Economic giants like China and India don’t belong to these,’ he told the mass-circulation daily Bild Zeitung. Niebel, meanwhile, did not provide any details on when the 70 million euros ($103 million ) of annual aid to China would be discontinued…

“Claudia Warning, head of the German federation of non-governmental organizations active in development cooperation, VENRO, has said the new government’s international policy disregards commitments Germany has already made regarding development aid… Warning said the new government’s program put too much emphasis on ‘promoting German economic interests abroad.’ The ministry’s task was to ‘contribute to the international fight against poverty, and not the promotion of German business interests,’ she said.”

This article, and the next one, begin to indicate that the relationship between Europe and the Far East will deteriorate, and why Europe may be prompted to attack Russia and other Asian nations, as it will be troubled by rumors from the “east and the north” (Daniel 11:44).

Rumors from the East…

The Telegraph reported on November 1 on Russian war games directed against Poland:

“The armed forces are said to have carried out ‘war games’ in which nuclear missiles were fired and troops practised an amphibious landing on the country’s coast. The manoeuvres are thought to have been held in September and involved about 13,000 Russian and Belarusian troops. Poland, which has strained relations with both countries, was cast as the ‘potential aggressor’…

“The operation also involved the simulated suppression of an uprising by a national minority in Belarus – the country has a significant Polish population which has a strained relationship with [the] authoritarian government of Belarus.

“Karol Karski, an MP from Poland’s Law and Justice, is to table parliamentary questions on Russia’s war games and has protested to the European Commission… His colleague, Marek Opiola MP, said: ‘It’s an attempt to put us in our place. Don’t forget all this happened on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland.’ Ordinary Poles were outraged by news of the exercise and demanded a firm response from the government…

“After spending 40 years under Soviet domination few in Poland trust Russia, and many Poles have become increasingly wary of a country they consider as possessing a neo-imperialistic agenda… With a resurgent Moscow now more willing to flex its muscles, Central and Eastern Europeans have warned of Russia adopting a neo-imperialistic attitude to an area of the world it still regards as its sphere of influence. In July, the region’s most famed and influential political figures, including Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel, wrote an open letter [to] Barack Obama warning him that Russia ‘is back as a revisionist power pursuing a 19th-century agenda with 21st-century tactics and methods.’”

That Russia is trying to re-establish itself in that part of the world cannot be denied. Europe and especially countries like Poland eye this development with suspicion, and will finally engage in a “pre-emptive strike,” as the Bible clearly prophecies.

The Terrible Curse of Halloween

On October 29, LiveScience wrote the following:

“Like Halloween itself, the display and carving of pumpkins – from the lanterns placed inside to the scary faces we pick – has pagan origins that morphed with the passage of time as well as the crossing of an ocean. The modern traditions of Halloween have roots in a Celtic holiday called Samhain, which was celebrated throughout Western Europe (but especially Ireland) every Oct. 31 to mark the end of the summer and the final harvest…

“As the tipping point that also ushered in the beginning of the ‘dark season,’ it was believed that the night opened a kind of door to the Otherworld, letting spirits roam the Earth… Nicholas Rogers, a historian at York University in Toronto, [said]… ‘It was also a period of SUPERNATURAL INTENSITY, when the FORCES OF DARKNESS and decay were said to be abroad…

“To combat the threat, ancient Celts often held raging bonfires – fire being a common way to ward off evil spirits. Later, in towns, the fires shrank and were placed instead within turnips or gourds, which were inexpensive, readily available and safe ‘containers.’

“‘Originally they were simply pierced to emit light, and were carried to scare away the spirits from the Otherworld who could enter the mortal realm,’ said Verlyn Flieger, a mythology specialist at the University of Maryland… ‘Designed to ward off scary faces, they gradually TOOK ON the aspects of the very foes they were supposed to forestall,’ she told LiveScience… The holiday exploded in the United States and Canada with the wave of Irish that came over during that country’s potato famine in the mid 19th century.”

The Roman Catholic Church Condemns Halloween, But…

The Telegraph added on October 30 that the “Vatican has condemned Hallowe’en as anti-Christian, saying it is based on a sinister and dangerous ‘undercurrent of occultism.'” The article continued:

“The Holy See has warned that parents should not allow their children to dress up as ghosts and ghouls on Saturday, calling Hallowe’en a pagan celebration of ‘terror, fear and death’. The Roman Catholic Church has become alarmed in recent years by the spread of Hallowe’en traditions from the US to other countries around the world.

“As in Britain, it is only in recent years that Italian children have dressed up in costumes, played trick or treat on their neighbours and made lanterns out of hollowed out pumpkins. The Vatican issued the warning through its official newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, in an article headlined ‘Hallowe’en’s Dangerous Messages’.

“Last year a newspaper controlled by the Italian bishops, Avvenire, called for a boycott of Hallowe’en, calling it a ‘dangerous celebration of horror and the macabre’ which could encourage ‘pitiless [Satanic] sects without scruples’. Earlier this week the Catholic Church in Spain also condemned the growing popularity of Halloween…”

But millions of people celebrated this horrible demonic feast, including hundreds of thousands of confessing and practicing Catholics.

In addition, Der Spiegel Online wrote on October 31 about the practice of the Catholic Church to “christianize” pagan holidays, as follows:

“In the Middle Ages, the pagan practice was ‘christianized.’ In 837 A.D., Pope Gregory IV declared November 1 as ‘All Saints Day.’ Now Christians were able to celebrate the pagan festival Samhain, without sinning.”

But the Bible is mightier than human inventions. And the Bible makes it very clear that we SIN when we celebrate Halloween–or other pagan festivals such as Christmas or Easter. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” and “Is That in The Bible–Man’s Holidays and God’s Holy Days.”

Vatican Woos Anglicans

USA Today wrote on November 1:

“The Vatican said Saturday that married Anglican priests will be admitted to the Catholic priesthood on a case-by-case basis as Rome makes it easier for disillusioned conservative Anglicans to convert… The Roman Catholic church requires its priests to be celibate, except in the case of the Eastern rite Catholics, who are allowed to be ordained if married. But over the last decades, it has also quietly allowed married Anglican clergy to stay priests when converting to Catholicism. In no case could a married man become a bishop, and the new rules would exclude any married Anglican bishop from retaining that post…

“Anglicans split with Rome in 1534 when the Vatican refused to give English King Henry VIII a marriage annulment. The Anglican communion includes the Episcopalian Church in the United States. Some Anglican faithful, unhappy over progressive reforms in their church, consider themselves Catholics although they have not yet officially joined the Roman Catholic church.

“Anglicans have been divided over such issues as admitting women to the priesthood. The rift was torn wide open in 2003, when the Episcopal Church in the United States consecrated V. Gene Robinson, as the first openly gay bishop. Also disenchanting Anglican conservatives has been the blessing of same-sex marriages.”

The Bible indicates that much of the “Christian” and perhaps even non-Christian world will place itself under the “religious umbrella” of the Catholic Church.

… And the Horror Saga of Failed U.S. Banks Continues…

U.S. Bank failures continue. But did not the U.S. government indicate that the recession was over? What blatant nonsense–as is so clearly pointed out by the following article:

The Associated Press wrote on October 30:

“[Bank] Failures have been especially concentrated in California, Georgia and Illinois. While the pounding from losses on home mortgages may be nearing an end, delinquencies on commercial real estate loans remain a hot spot of potential trouble, regulators say. If the RECESSION DEEPENS, defaults on the high-risk loans could spike. Many regional banks, especially, hold large concentrations of these loans.”

More US Banks Fail…

The Los Angeles Times wrote on October 31:

“Regulators seized Los Angeles-based [68-branch] California National Bank on Friday night in the country’s fourth-largest bank failure this year…

“Eight smaller banks owned by FBOP, a privately held Oak Park, Ill., company, were also taken over by regulators and acquired by U.S. Bank. They include San Diego National Bank, with 28 offices, and San Francisco’s Pacific National Bank, which has 17… Before Friday, 106 U.S. banks had failed this year.”

This Is BIG–CIT Bankrupt

Bloomberg wrote on November 1:

“CIT Group Inc., a 101-year-old commercial lender, filed for bankruptcy to cut $10 billion in debt after the credit crunch dried up its funding and a U.S. bailout and debt exchange offer failed. CIT listed $71 billion in assets and $64.9 billion in debt… The U.S. Treasury Department said the government probably won’t recover much, if any, of the $2.3 billion in taxpayer money that went to CIT…

“CIT… filed the fifth-largest bankruptcy by assets… The failure… is the biggest measured by assets since regulators seized Washington Mutual banking unit in September 2008… CIT’s largest unsecured claim holders were Bank of America Corp., as collateral agent for a $7.5 billion claim, and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., as a trustee for retail bonds with a claim of $3.2 billion. Canadian senior unsecured notes have a claim for $2.1 billion, and Citigroup Inc. also has a $2.1 billion claim as an administrative agent to bank debt due 2010…

“CIT has said it’s the third-largest U.S. railcar-leasing firm and the world’s third-biggest aircraft financier. It also finances trade in Canada, Europe and Asia by lending to small manufacturers that sell to retailers. CIT accounts for about 70 percent of all short-term U.S. financing known as factoring, worth about $40 billion a year…”

USA Today wrote on November 2 that CIT is “the leading provider of financing to retailers and their vendors,” and its failure “is one of the largest in U.S. history.”

U.S. State Elections

The Wall Street Journal wrote on November 4:

“It’s a grumpy nation. We probably all knew that, but Tuesday’s election results underscore the point.

“It wasn’t a good election for Democrats, of course. They lost the two biggest races, the governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia, the first a blue state they should own and the second now a swing state Democrats liked to think they had turned in the last two elections.

“But Democrats can argue they won in the race that is most relevant to what is going on in Washington, the special [election] for the 23rd congressional district in New York. That represents a victory in a traditionally Republican district, and a sign that GOP conservatives probably overplayed their hand by forcing a liberal Republican out of the race.

“The broader lesson in all this, however, may simply be the signs of grumpiness all around. In each case, independent voters appear to have swung against the party holding the seat. And in New York, a wildly over-funded and universally known incumbent mayor, Michael Bloomberg, barely won against a wildly under-funded and unknown Democratic challenger. In the midst of an economic mess, voters don’t seem to like over-spending and over-reach, but more than that they seem unhappy with the status quo in general.

“‘Change’ was a good theme for Barack Obama in 2008. It still might best capture the mood of voters.”

Sweeping Powers of EU’s New Foreign Minister

The EUObserver wrote on October 23:

“The EU’s new foreign minister will have sweeping powers to conduct foreign policy, propose his own budget and name his own staff independently of other EU institutions, according to the latest EU presidency blueprint… The new institution is to manage general foreign relations as well as EU security and defence projects, such as the police missions in Bosnia, Kosovo, Georgia and Afghanistan or any future peacekeeping operations in, for example, Africa…”

The First European President

Der Spiegel Online wrote on October 28:

“For weeks, many have speculated that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair was in line to become the European Union’s first president. But now, Jean-Claude Juncker from tiny Luxembourg may have torpedoed the plan. EU logic indicates that a third candidate may emerge victorious… The duel between Juncker and Blair comes as the 27 EU heads of state and government prepare to gather in Brussels at the end of this week for the bloc’s fall summit. In addition to the post of president, the EU also must name 27 commissioners and choose a Foreign High Representative, often referred to as the EU foreign minister.

“Still, discussions about the EU’s two highest posts are not likely to be made public. The European Union will only get a president and a foreign minister once the Lisbon Treaty has been completely ratified — and Czech President Vaclav Klaus continues to withhold his signature. He says he is waiting for the results of a case pending before the Czech constitutional court; the court said on Tuesday it would reconvene on Nov. 3, at which time it will likely hand down its verdict…

“While climate change and the EU’s plan for the Baltic Sea region are at the top of the summit agenda, the main topic in the hallways is likely to be Blair and the presidency… The fact that Juncker has now entered the fray does not come as a surprise. It is well known that Juncker — the longest-serving head of government in the EU and a man who carries the nickname ‘Mr. Europe’ with pride — would love to be the first EU president in history. His chances, though, are seen as being close to zero. Both Great Britain and France, two of the EU’s largest member states, are opposed to his candidacy.

“Juncker is almost surely aware of that, which is why many speculate that his motive is a different one — that of preventing Blair from getting the office. It is a classic move on the Brussels chessboard: one creates a dichotomy of extremes — in this case a prominent politician from the country of euro-skeptics versus a European-by-conviction from a small member state — and immediately, the EU culture of consensus almost demands a compromise candidate. In this scenario, neither Blair nor Juncker would be appointed president, but a third candidate. German government sources see this scenario as being the most likely.

“Juncker’s motivation is not hard to guess at… The idea of a Briton speaking for the European Union is difficult for him to accept. Furthermore, Blair’s alliance with former US President George W. Bush during the invasion of Iraq has not been forgotten. Both points are often underestimated in London… At the moment, it looks as though Juncker’s strategy will pay off. Few in Brussels are still betting on Blair, with most guessing that a third candidate will pop up… There are many in Great Britain who would likewise breathe a sigh of relief were Blair to fall short…

“Should it become clear at this week’s summit that backing is lacking for Blair, then the deck will be reshuffled — and German Chancellor Angela Merkel could find herself in the role of kingmaker. So far she has been waiting to see which direction the wind is blowing, as the chancellor has a tendency to do. On Wednesday evening, she is expected in Paris for a working dinner with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and the subject of EU top slots is almost sure to be a topic of discussion. But in contrast to Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Sarkozy and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Merkel has made no indication as to who she might prefer. Once she does make up her mind, her word is likely to carry all the more weight.”

It is very interesting that it is again Germany which seems to be playing a major role in deciding who the first European President will be.

Will France-German Axis Rule Europe?

The Economist reported on October 22:

“… the French have been laying the ground for their next big idea: a deepening of the Franco-German axis to entrench their dual leadership and make Europe ‘one of the principal players of the 21st century.’

“In a speech to his ambassadors in August, President Nicolas Sarkozy declared that he wanted ‘Europe once again to make history instead of enduring it’. His model was ‘Franco-German understanding’ built on his friendship with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. His Europe minister, Pierre Lellouche, is zealously spreading the message. ‘More than ever, the relationship between France and Germany will form the heart of what I would call the third phase of post-war European history,’ he recently wrote in Le Monde…

“The French realise that the British are likely to be unhelpful friends if the Eurosceptical Conservatives win the election next spring… Another factor is the view that, when the French and the Germans agree, Europe makes its voice heard.

“… the French are not blind to the need for other ties in Europe. They still hope to draw the British into a common European defence policy, even under a Conservative government. It is far harder for two countries to steer an EU of 27 members than one of 12. Yet the French expect the most from Germany—and it is not clear they will get much.”

Ultimately, Europe will be ruled by ten core nations or groups of nations, and it appears certain that France and Germany will be powerful players within that group.

France vs. USA

Reuters reported on October 23:

“French President Nicolas Sarkozy, initially dubbed Sarko the American for his pro-U.S. stance, is finding it much tougher to deal with Washington than he had anticipated and is recalibrating his policies accordingly. Stung by perceived snubs from U.S. President Barack Obama and encouraged by the growing importance of the G20, Sarkozy is increasingly reaching out to non-aligned states in an effort to extend France’s international influence.

“He has forged especially close ties with Brazil, is seeking alliances in central Asia and is intensifying his activities in the Middle East, using multi-billion dollar military and civilian nuclear trade deals as his calling card. These initiatives are being played out against a discordant tone in Franco-American relations…

“Analysts say Obama clearly prefers dealing with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Sarkozy is visibly frustrated by the situation… Officials say the disconnect is centred on real issues, such as Obama’s attitude to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which has been less hardline than Sarkozy’s hawkish stance… There are also real differences of opinion over how to deal with the lingering financial crisis, with a close Sarkozy aide accusing Washington this week of risking global inflation by printing money and ‘flooding the world with liquidity’.

“The French government spokesman said on Wednesday that Sarkozy would propose ‘a new international monetary organisation which better reflects today’s world’ when France holds the presidency of the Group of 20 wealthy nations in 2011. Roughly translated, this means France wants to challenge the supremacy of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.”

The Bible reveals that ultimately, the relationship between the USA and Europe–including France–will become extremely hostile.

Germany to Provide Israel with Warships and Submarines

Deutsche Welle reported on October 23:

“Israel would like… two [German] warships, worth an estimated 400-500 million euros ($600-750 million), free of charge… The ships’ weapons would be supplied by the United States. The two state of the art corvettes, which are hard to detect by radar, are said to be larger than Israel’s current flagship Hanit.

“The Israeli navy wants to install a ‘Barak 8’ missile defence system on the two vessels along with sophisticated radar so as ‘to be prepared for potential wars’, according to the Israeli daily newspaper Ma’ariv. The move would allow Israel to shift a part of its missile defense system to the sea, rendering it less vulnerable to potential rocket attacks.”

The Local added on October 23:

“The [Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung] reported that the government has not yet reacted to Israel’s request. But ‘influential politicians from northern Germany,’ where the shipbuilding industry is suffering from the global economic downturn, are apparently supportive in the interest of keeping German shipyards in business. The shipbuilding contract would go to Hamburg company Blohm + Voss… But the internal weapons system would come from the United States, with the end result being a missile defence system on water.

“Israeli naval forces have already received help from the German government. Between 1999 and 2000, three submarines completed by Kiel shipyard Howaldtswerken Deutsche Werft were delivered. Meanwhile the government is reportedly paying for two-thirds of two more submarines with fuel-cell power plants priced at €500 million. They are currently under construction in Kiel with plans to deliver them to Israel in 2012.”

Even though Germany entertains at this point friendly relationships with the state of Israel, this will dramatically change in the not-too-distant future.

Clashes at Temple Mount

AFP wrote on October 25:

“Clashes erupted on Sunday between Israeli police and Palestinians in and around the Al-Aqsa mosque compound in the latest violence to shake Jerusalem’s flashpoint site holy to Muslims and Jews… Police twice entered the compound itself after Palestinian demonstrators threw stones at visitors to the holy site, known to Muslims as Al-Haram Al-Sharif (the Noble Sanctuary) and to Jews as the Temple Mount…

“Kamal Khatib, a spokesman for the Israeli Arab Islamic Movement, which has been at the forefront of recent demonstrations at the compound, blamed [Israeli] police for the violence… The office of Western-backed Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas warned of ‘dangerous consequences’ and called on Israel to ‘halt all provocative acts’… and called on the international community to intervene to ‘put pressure on the Israeli government’…

“The Palestinian calls for protests came amid rumours that right wing Jewish activists were planning to gather at the … mosque compound and the adjacent Western Wall…”

Haaretz wrote on October 26:

“After two weeks of relative quiet in the Jerusalem area, disturbances again broke out in the city and its periphery yesterday morning. Shortly after the Temple Mount was opened up to tourists and other non-Muslim visitors, several dozen Palestinians began throwing stones at both police and tourists. The police attempted to disperse the stone throwers and the Temple Mount was closed to visitors…

“Yesterday’s disturbances appear to have been sparked, as in the past, by printed announcements by Jewish groups seeking to gain access to the Temple Mount to pray. The northern branch of the Islamic Movement and other parties, including Abdel Kader, called on the Palestinian public to come to the Temple Mount to defend it…

“Over the weekend, the Jerusalem police raised their level of alert following calls by Muslim leaders to “defend the Temple Mount from conquest by Jews” alongside calls from right-wing Jewish activists for Jews to come to the Temple Mount in large numbers… Police Commissioner David Cohen said the Islamic Movement was directing and fomenting large numbers of East Jerusalem residents and Israeli Arabs on the Temple Mount… Jerusalem police also pointed a finger at Hamas as a source for the unrest…

“MK Talab al-Sana (United Arab List-Ta’al) warned that “Israel was provoking a billion Muslims who would not hesitate to defend the Al-Aqsa mosque with their bodies.” A leading Sunni Muslim religious figure, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, called on the Arab League and the kings of Saudi Arabia and Morocco to intervene immediately over the situation on the Temple Mount.”

“Syria: Israel Wants to Destroy al-Aqsa Mosque”

YNetNews.com wrote on October 26:

“The Syrian Foreign Ministry has denounced Israel’s ‘blatant violation of the sanctity of al-Aqsa Mosque,’ following the recent wave of riots in Jerusalem. In an official statement released Monday, the ministry said that ‘(Damascus) believes the Israeli security forces’ invasion of al-Aqsa was part of Israel’s scheme to Judaize Jerusalem and destroy the mosque.’ A Syrian news agency further quoted the official as saying Israel’s actions were ‘a crime against Arab history and heritage and against Muslims’ holy places.’ The official expressed his support and gratitude to the ‘brave men’ who rallied to the compound’s defense, and urged the international community to denounce Israel’s actions.

“Syria’s censure joins that of Jordan: On Sunday, Amman urged Israel to prevent both security forces and extreme rightists from entering the Temple Mount compound. The Hashemite Kingdom’s State-run news agency warned Jerusalem that such ‘provocations’ were hazardous to the peace process.”

It is interesting to see an increased call for “international” intervention regarding problems surrounding the Temple Mount.

Westerwelle–Germany’s New Vice Chancellor and Foreign Minister

Deutsche Welle wrote on October 24:

“… with only out-of-government experience, and a political career that has barely, if ever, involved foreign relations, what can Westerwelle bring to the table for Germany? The 47-year-old has little direct experience of foreign policy… His party is pro-American… On Saturday, Oct. 24, Westerwelle said nuclear non-proliferation and the removal of US atomic warheads from German soil would be a priority for his ministry…

“But that won’t necessarily mean that Germany will give in to US wishes to commit more troops to Afghanistan. While Westerwelle has been vague on many foreign policy points, he has stated clearly his aversion to any expansion in German army operations under NATO…

“But Westerwelle will be bound to make waves for being Europe’s first openly gay foreign minister, having publicly ‘come out’ at Merkel’s 50th birthday bash. The trained lawyer dismissed any notion that this could pose problems in his role as foreign minister. ‘Some other countries may have had a problem with the fact that Angela Merkel became the first female chancellor of Germany. Of course she does not wear a veil on the red carpet when she visits certain Arab states,’ he has been quoted as saying. ‘The decision as to whom we send as a government representative rests solely with us Germans, based on our political and moral standards’…

“Westerwelle’s seeming inability to speak English well [has] raised some questions about his suitability for the post of Germany’s top diplomat. Westerwelle declined to answer a question in English that had been put to him by a BBC reporter during his first news conference after last month’s elections. ‘In Great Britain it is expected that people speak English, and it is the same in Germany – people are expected to speak German,’ Westerwelle said at the time, prompting heated debate on the Internet.”

Due to his “sexual preference” and his insistence in German authority to make decisions and uphold German “values,” Westerwelle is indeed a unique figure in post-war Germany.

Guttenberg–Germany’s New Defense Minister

Der Spiegel Online wrote on October 24:

“The cabinet’s rising star Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg is to move from the Economics Ministry to Defense. At only 37 the young Bavarian conservative’s huge popularity may now be put to the test as he faces the task of overseeing the country’s unpopular mission in Afghanistan. However, his smooth communication skills and fluent English should help him in his dealings with Germany’s allies.”

It will remain to be seen what political role Guttenberg will play on the world scene.

Possibility of Anti-German Protests in the Muslim World

Der Spiegel Online wrote on October 26:

“The man who killed Marwa al-Sherbini, a pregnant Egyptian woman, in a German courtroom on July 1 went on trial on Monday in a case that authorities fear could trigger violent anti-German protests in the Muslim world…

“The killing on July 1 of Marwa al-Sherbini, the 31-year-old mother of a three-year-old, during a court hearing triggered anti-German protests in the Muslim world and led to criticism from Muslim immigrants and commentators that Islamophobia is widespread in Germany. German authorities are concerned that the trial could lead to a fresh wave of demonstrations abroad and have turned the court in Dresden into a fortress after Internet threats against her attacker, named only as Alex. W, who moved to Germany from Russia in 2003…

“The German government, which was accused by Muslim groups in Germany of being too slow to express its sorrow over the attack, is now at pains to prevent the trial from stoking demonstrations of the kind that followed the publications of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in Danish newspapers in 2005…

“The Egyptian government is closely monitoring the case and has sent its ambassador and a delegation to attend it. The president of the Egyptian bar association and the public prosecutor of Alexandria are also watching the trial. Rarely has a German justice authority been under such scrutiny…

“The German government has been aware of the explosive potential of the Dresden case for weeks, and an analysis by the foreign ministry has warned of violent protests in front of German embassies abroad… Berlin diplomats have taken unusual steps to cater for the Arab media… The court building has been cordoned off with fences and hundreds of armed police are patrolling the area. Snipers are on hand and a bullet-proof glass screen separates the court from the public gallery…”

“The Anglican Experiment Is Over…”

The Telegraph wrote on October 24:

“John Hind, the Bishop of Chichester, has announced he is considering becoming a Roman Catholic in a move that could spark an exodus of clergy. Bishop Hind said he would be ‘happy’ to be reordained as a Catholic priest and said that divisions in Anglicanism could make it impossible to stay in the church. He is the most senior Anglican to admit that he is prepared to accept the offer from the Pope, who shocked the Church of England last week when he paved the way for clergy to convert to Catholicism in large numbers.

“In a further blow to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s hopes of preventing the Anglican Communion from disintegrating, other bishops have cast doubt over its survival… John Broadhurst, the Bishop of Fulham, even claimed that ‘the Anglican experiment is over’. He said it has been shown to be powerless to cope with the crises over gays and women bishops.

“In one of the most significant developments since the Reformation, the Pope last week announced that a new structure would be set up to allow disaffected Anglicans to enter full communion with Rome, while maintaining parts of their Protestant heritage. The move comes after secret talks between the Vatican and a group of senior Anglican bishops.

“Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was not informed of the meetings and his advisers even denied that they had taken place when the Sunday Telegraph broke the story last year… the planning behind last week’s announcement began in 2006, when the Pope asked the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to consider how they could invite Anglicans into the Roman Catholic fold. He had reached out to disillusioned Anglicans three years earlier, when as head of the Congregation, the most powerful of the Vatican’s departments and successor to the medieval Inquisition, he wrote a personal letter to Anglicans in America. He reassured them of the Catholic Church’s support of their stand against the liberal tide.”

The Bible predicts that the Protestant “daughter churches” will ultimately return to the “motherly” fold of the Roman Catholic Church. In this context, please note the next article.

Woman Will Lead Germany’s Protestants

The Local reported on October 28, 2009:

“Hannover Bishop Margot Käßmann became the first woman to lead the Protestant church in Germany on Wednesday after the majority of the synod voted in her favour… Käßmann… will lead all of Germany’s 25 million Protestants for the next six years.

“Käßmann has proposed a radical course of reform for the Evangelische Kirche Deutschland (EKD), which suffers from shrinking congregations and revenues. In addition to streamlining the clergy, she plans to increase the church’s profile and improve strained relations with the Catholic Church.”

Bild Online quoted Käßmann on October 29, 2009, as follows: “The Catholics know what they got with me. [Bishop Fürst, a high-ranking Catholic bishop] was one of the first who congratulated me in the name of the Catholic Conference of Bishops. We both know: We are much more unified than divided.”

However, the Bible makes it very clear that women are not to serve in, and/or be in charge of the ministry (compare 1 Timothy 2:11-15; 1 Corinthians 14:34-35). For more information, read our free booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families.”

Turkey Looks Eastward…

The Financial Times wrote on October 22:

“Mr Sarkozy has put himself in the vanguard of European leaders – they include Germany’s Angela Merkel – who are viscerally opposed to Turkish accession to the European Union.

“It is half a century since Turkey first knocked on Europe’s door with a bid to join the Common Market. There were plenty of detours on the way to the start of formal accession talks in 2004. Often, it must be said, the fault lay with Turkey. Military coups and political repression did not help make the case for membership of Europe’s democratic club… Turkey is still a long way from meeting the democratic terms of EU membership… Admitting Turkey, Mr Sarkozy says, would ‘dilute’ the Union. What he really means is that Europe does not want 70-odd million Muslims.

“The government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, has decided to look eastwards… Ignoring anxieties in western capitals, Turkey has engaged with the Palestinian Hamas and with the Iranian-sponsored Hizbollah in Lebanon… On the other side of the ledger, the Israeli invasion of Gaza has led to a rupture in the long-standing relationship with Israel. Mr Erdogan sees an Israeli-Palestinian settlement as the sine qua non of strategic stability in Turkey’s back yard. But he has concluded that the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu has no interest in a deal.

“Not everyone is happy with the eastwards turn… But the west is losing its leverage. US power is being challenged across the Middle East; and Europe seems intent on irrelevance. Mr Erdogan’s Turkey still wants to be part of Europe…”

Deutsche Welle reported on October 28:

“Turkey makes no bones about its aspirations to act as a bridge between East and West, but a string of recent events have left the West wondering how stable any such construction might be.

“The problems began earlier this year when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stormed out of a panel discussion in Davos over the Israeli offensive in Gaza. Since then Israeli-Turkish relations, traditionally very strong, have been on a steady downward curve which culminated in Ankara excluding Israel from a recent NATO exercise. Then this week, ahead of a two-day visit to Iran, Erdogan dismissed Western worries over Teheran’s controversial nuclear program as ‘gossip’ and accused the perpetrators of hypocrisy…

“The question many commentators are asking is whether, in light of recent gestures to the East, Turkey still wants a place in Brussels… As it stands, the earliest they could join is 2015, but in terms of politics that is a long way off, and it is conceivable that by then, interest will have waned altogether… So although Turkey will continue with its accession negotiations, it is realistic enough not to put all its eggs in the European basket. It is actively pursuing other options… And that might ultimately see it drawn deeper into the Middle East fold or holding hands with fuel-rich Russia.”

Although it does not appear that Turkey will become a member of the EU–at least not in the final configuration of a united Europe led by ten nations or groups of nations–Turkey will assist in Europe’s military action against Israel, as the book of Obadiah clearly reveals.

The Kings of the East…

The BBC wrote on October 24:

“Asian leaders meeting in Thailand are discussing plans to ‘lead the world’ by forming an EU-style community by 2015… The community would involve the 10-members of Asian [Association of Southeast Asian nations] with regional partners China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand, Japanese officials have said… there was debate at the summit over whether the community would also include the United States. Increased integration has been a recurring theme of the meetings in Thailand, as the region seeks to capitalise on its recovery from financial turmoil.”

The 10-members of Asian are: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. The Bible predicts, there will form a powerful alliance in that part of the world in the near future. It is referred to in Scripture as the “kings of the east” (Revelation 16:12). This alliance will be able to muster an army of “two hundred million horsemen” (Revelation 9:16). However, Australia and New Zealand–as modern descendants of the ancient house of Israel–won’t be part of that alliance, but many of the other nations mentioned in the article undoubtedly will be. Also, Russia will clearly be a part of this alliance.

USA and China vs. Europe?

Deutsche Welle reported on October 25:

“In a move that wasn’t widely reported, but probably didn’t go unnoticed in Beijing, President Barack Obama last month turned the authority to monitor and approve missile and technology sales to China from the White House to the Commerce Department… to promote US business interests instead of the Pentagon or the State Department.
 
“Earlier, Obama’s decision not to meet the Dalai Lama before the president’s upcoming trip to China – the first presidential snub for Tibet’s spiritual leader since 1991 – had made international news and triggered a debate about a possible shift of US-China policy. Another indicator of a new US approach was a statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that human rights issues were still part of US-China policy, but couldn’t ultimately damage the relationship…

“That shift in focus by the new administration – less emphasis on human rights issues, more emphasis on trade and security issues – is reminiscent of a China approach favored by German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. During his tenure from 1998 to 2005 he repeatedly argued for overturning a EU weapons embargo against China, but his move was rejected at home by the Green party, his coalition partner, and abroad by other EU member states. President Obama may prove to be more successful in altering US human rights policy toward China than Chancellor Schroeder was in his efforts to reframe the EU’s China policy…

“Josef Braml, a US expert with the German Council on Foreign Relations… [noted that] both the US and China are basically forced to get along, because they simply are dependent on each other… ‘China could destroy America if it pulled the trigger in terms of financing US debt, but it would also hurt itself.’ With Beijing holding approximately two billion dollars, mostly in government bonds, it is a major financier of US debt. However, a quick disposal of those funds would seriously undermine the value of the US dollar and by extension the ability of American consumers to buy Chinese products. Therefore both China and the US have an avid interest in good economic and political relations…

“Despite the slow pace of improving military ties – something that the Bush administration had also worked on – relations between two of the world’s major players have improved so much under Obama that there have been concerns about the so-called G2, the US and China, determining international policy with others left to follow…

‘[Andrew Small, a China expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, points out:] ‘And if you look on the Chinese side, there is a lot of what they would describe as Euro-skepticism where the China-European relationship has got to and a sense that US-China relations are continuing to move in a very good direction and if anything are being upgraded with the new administration which has led them to become even more US-centric than they were before… And that’s meant that countries like China in particular and Russia are seeing quite a different environment and in some cases that is taking place at the expense of ties with Europe… The standing of Europe for the new administration you would have to say in the grand scheme of things is probably not as high as it was under Bush.'”

These are interesting developments in the light of biblical prophecy, showing that ultimately, there will be a military confrontation between a united Europe and a confederation of Asian nations, including China. This war will take place AFTER Europe’s attack against and defeat of the USA. The article above might give us some hints as to why, to an extent, a European-Asian war will ensue as a consequence of the previous European-American war.

The Fox News-Obama War

On October 23, Fox News published the following article by Lloyd Green, who served in the Justice Department during the George W. Bush presidency:

“The Obama White House looks like it is has taken a page out of the playbook of the late Nixon Press Secretary Ron Ziegler… during the 1972 presidential campaign, Ziegler barred Rolling Stone reporter and Gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson from flying on the lead campaign press plane, notwithstanding that Thompson had been covering the race, that there was space on the plane, and that Thompson was an accredited reporter. Thompson’s problem was that he did not report things the way the Committee to Reelect the President would have liked things to have been reported…

“Robert Gibbs, the Obama press secretary, is doing all he can to follow in Ziegler’s footsteps. Gibbs is trying to get the news organizations that cover the White House to drop Fox from the White House press pool. Pressed on his efforts to get the press to dump Fox from the pool, Gibbs demurred. Despite repeated questioning by ABC’s Jake Tapper, Gibbs would not give a straight answer on where the White House stood on Fox and pool coverage.

“It does not look like Gibbs and the White House are meeting with the success they had hoped for. On the Atlantic Monthly’s Web site, Matt Cooper was critical of the White House’s approach. According to Cooper, if the White House could talk to Iran it could surely talk to Fox. Jay Leno has also weighed in. Leno quipped that the administration was raising another 40,000 troops — to fight Fox. In the Senate, Minority Whip Lamar Alexander chided Obama for Nixon-like tactics. This is not where Obama thought he would be.

“Now today’s New York Times reports that Fox’s competitors in the press pool refused to comply with a government effort ‘to exclude Fox from a round of interviews with the executive-pay czar Kenneth R. Feinberg.’ According to The Times, a ‘pool’ camera was to tape the interviews. Guess what? The administration blinked. Fox stayed in the mix.

“Perhaps it is time for Gibbs and this administration to act like grown ups… If Obama can get the prof and the cop together for a beer, he should be adult enough to call a truce…”

When in a democracy, freedom of the press is being attacked and abolished, such a democracy is destined to fall.

More U.S. Banks Fail…

The Associated Press reported on October 24:

“It’s a big number that only tells part of the story. The number of banks that have failed so far this year topped 100 on Friday – hitting 106 by the end of the day – the most in nearly two decades. But the trouble in the banking system from bad loans and the recession goes even deeper. Dozens, perhaps hundreds, of other banks remain open even though they are as weak as many that have been shuttered. Regulators are seizing banks slowly and selectively – partly to avoid inciting panic and partly because buyers for bad banks are hard to find…

“When a bank fails, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. swoops in, usually on a Friday afternoon. It tries to sell off the bank’s assets to buyers and cover its liabilities, primarily customer deposits. It taps the insurance fund to cover the rest… The FDIC won’t say how deep a hole its deposit insurance fund is in. It can tap a credit line from the Treasury of up to a half-trillion dollars to cover the gap.

“… recovery is expected to be slow. Americans remain hesitant to spend money because of job losses, flat wages, tight credit and high debt. Their cutbacks have triggered tens of thousands of business failures. Abandoned retail space in downtowns and suburban malls means no rental income for property owners. As landlords default on real estate loans, they weaken the banks that hold the loans. The situation now is especially grave in Southern California, Georgia and Illinois, which have some of the highest home foreclosure rates…”

The economic situation in the USA is bound to decrease further. According to some financial experts, a great depression is still coming.

Evolutionists “Appalled” Over Public “Ignorance”

Mail-On-Line wrote on October 26:

“More than half the population believes children should be told about creationism – the belief that God created the world – in school science lessons, a poll reveals today. Some 54 per cent of Britons want biology teachers to discuss ‘alternative perspectives’ on human origins alongside traditional explanations of evolution. They also want children to be told about intelligent design, the idea that aspects of the universe are too complex to be explained by science and natural selection. Critics say this is just creationism under another name. The findings, in a survey commissioned by the British Council, come amid growing pressure from religious groups for schools to teach creationism… Some 21 per cent of Britons said only evolutionary theory should be taught, while 54 per cent said children should hear rival explanations.

“Britain’s support for teaching other theories alongside evolution was higher than in any of the other countries apart from Argentina and Mexico – but had the lowest proportion – at six per cent – believing that other theories should be taught in preference to evolution. National curriculum guidelines say creationism has no place in science lessons.

“Worldwide, the survey reveals just over four in 10 (43 per cent) of people believe that evolution should be taught alongside other theories in science lessons, while a fifth (20 per cent) said only evolution should be taught. In the US, almost a quarter of those questioned (23 per cent) said either other theories but not evolution should be taught, or that no theories should be taught. This figure was 28 per cent in China and 21 per cent in South Africa.

“Lewis Wolpert, emeritus professor of biology at University College London and vice-president of the British Humanist Association, told The Guardian: ‘I am appalled. It shows how ignorant the public is. Intelligent design and creationism have no connection with science and are purely religious concepts. There is no evidence for them at all. They must be kept out of science lessons.’

“Steve Jones, professor of genetics at UCL, said: ‘This shows the danger of religions being allowed to buy schools, hijack lessons and pretend that they have anything useful to say about science – which, by definition, they do not….'”

WE are appalled over the ignorance or willful mispresentations of evolutionists who claim that the evolution theory has been scientifically proven. It has not been, nor can it be.

Twisted Sabbath Rulings…

ABC News reported on October 26:

“Rabbinical ruling causes havoc as Orthodox Jews debate fate of Sabbath elevators… The Jewish day of rest has become a bit more labor-intensive for Yosef Ball. The Orthodox Jew and his wife are no longer using elevators custom-built for the Jewish Sabbath, ever since a rabbinical ruling last month outlawed them. Instead, they have been hiking up seven flights of stairs to get home each Saturday, lugging with them their five young children and a double stroller…

“Jewish law, or halacha, forbids the use of electrical items on the Sabbath. But for decades rabbis have allowed special elevators that automatically stop at every floor without the riders pushing any buttons, permitting Orthodox Jews to ride them and live in high-rise buildings. The ruling last month by one of Israel’s leading rabbis, calling the elevators a no-go, has reignited a vigorous debate over the lifts, forcing Orthodox Jews living on top floors to decide if they’re up for the steep hike home from synagogue on Saturdays.

“The Orthodox community has long been divided over the elevators. Opponents say that while the riders push no button, the weight of the passengers still increases the amount of electricity required to power the lift, thus violating Jewish law…

“The ruling, decreed last month, is the latest in a series by Israeli rabbis on the minutiae of applying Jewish law to daily life. Top rabbis can count tens of thousands of followers who abide by their rulings. Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, the revered 99-year-old scholar who signed the elevator ruling, has been behind other controversial decisions before. In September, he proclaimed Jews could not wear Crocs shoes on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, because they were deemed too comfortable for the somber fasting holiday…

“The elevators are just one of several electric devices that rabbis have found loopholes for, allowing their use. Religious families can use timers for their lights and special hot plates to warm food as long as those hot plates were not switched on or off during the Sabbath.”

No wonder that Jesus chastised the religious rabbinical leadership of His time for having made the Sabbath a burden through their pharisaical rulings. What would He say today? Obviously, He would not approve of such modern twisted unbiblical Sabbath decrees either.