Are We Safer Today Than on September 11, 2001?
Fox News wrote on September 11:
“More than 20 years into the War on Terror and a year after the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, terrorism still remains a threat to American security and interests around the globe…
“According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted last year, 49% of Americans believe the country is safer today than it was before 9/11, while 41% believe the U.S. is less safe than it was 21 years ago. The numbers mark a dramatic departure from the same survey two years after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. In 2003, 67% of Americans believed the country was safer compared to 27% who said it was less safe. An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll conducted last year had worse results, with 30% of respondents believing the country is safer than it was before 9/11 compared to 44% who said it is less safe…
“The foothold al Qeada has in Afghanistan provides the organization with two important strategic advantages, safe haven and state sponsorship. Like before September 11, 2001, the terrorist organization can use Afghanistan as a base of operations with little fear, providing safe haven for it to recruit, train, and possibly carry out attacks. However, unlike in 2001, the Taliban completely controlling the country means the organization will have a powerful ally and plenty of protection. Making the threat potentially more deadly is that terrorist organizations have both multiplied their numbers and spread to more far-flung regions of the world, making it difficult for the U.S. to track and fight the organizations on multiple fronts…”
The article also mentions the lack of U.S. commitment to fight… which is in line with Ezekiel 7:14.
More Challenges for the UK
Yahoo! News wrote on September 9:
“It could hardly be a more dramatic start to Liz Truss’ tenure as Britain’s latest prime minister. Barely 48 hours after being formally invited by Queen Elizabeth II to become premier, she found herself faced with the unsettling news Thursday that the beloved 96-year-old monarch had died — an event that instantly plunged the country into grief. Truss and her fledgling Conservative government must now manage the mourning, as well as a complicated, security-laden, emotional state funeral expected to draw heads of state from around the world.
“At the same time, the new prime minister is faced with urgent problems that could quickly boil over into full-blown crises, including runaway energy prices, soaring inflation and Brexit-induced questions over the future of Northern Ireland and Scotland within the United Kingdom…
“Britain has been effectively leaderless in the two months since Truss’ predecessor, Boris Johnson, was forced to resign over a series of ethics scandals and to serve as a lame-duck prime minister until a successor was chosen. Parliament has been mostly paralyzed while the cost-of-living crisis ballooned, gas prices skyrocketed and Britons grew fearful over how to get through the coming winter. The queen’s death now means a further slowdown of some of the workings of government, with parliamentary business suspended during a 10-day mourning period….”
In the end, the irreversible downfall of Great Britain is prophesied.
Queen Elizabeth and King Charles III
The Algemeiner wrote on September 9:
“That Queen Elizabeth II was both Britain’s longest-serving and oldest monarch is a testament to the period of history in which she lived, and upon which she left an indelible mark… Memorable actions, such as staying in London for much of the devastating Blitz wrought by the fighter planes of the German Luftwaffe in 1940 and 1941, fed into a broader narrative of service to her country before anything else…
“Many of the obituaries published since her death noted with amazement that no less than 15 prime ministers were in office during her reign, including Sir Winston Churchill, who was born in 1874, and the newly installed Liz Truss, born in 1975. Each of these prime ministers would dutifully attend a private weekly meeting with the queen to debrief her on current events…
“No one should pretend that Charles will easily fit his mother’s outsized shoes, and he now faces the formidable task of winning the affections of the British people alongside their respect. The knowledge that his mother held onto the throne despite frequent suggestions that she should abdicate in Charles’s favor—so as to avoid the present situation, where he becomes king at the age of 73—will not help in that regard either…
“Nevertheless, the coming days will see an outpouring of prayers for the new monarch’s success, not least from the British Jewish community, which this Shabbat will recite its weekly prayer for the Royal Family with King Charles named as ‘our sovereign lord’ for the very first time. That will be accompanied by a profound sense of sadness that a woman who was integral to British life for nearly a century is suddenly no longer there, together with a modicum of anxiety about what the future might hold. It seems fair, then, to wish King Charles the best of British luck.
“Given what his mother represented, and the high regard in which she was held around the world, he is going to need it.”
Breitbart wrote on September 10:
“King Charles III has been formally proclaimed as monarch following a meeting of the ancient Accession Council in St James’s Palace…. King Charles also gave a formal oath concerning his constitutional duty relating to the security of the Church of Scotland — a tradition dating back to a time when the Scottish royal family had ascended to the English throne but not yet united the Scottish and English states….”
An upcoming series of Q&As will address this succession of the throne. Neither British “luck” nor prayers for Britain’s “sovereign lord” will prevent Britain’s demise.
Canada’s New Monarch
The Associated Press wrote on September 10:
“King Charles III was officially proclaimed Canada’s monarch Saturday in a ceremony in Ottawa. Charles automatically became king when Queen Elizabeth II died Thursday. But like the ceremony in the United Kingdom hours earlier, the accession ceremony in Canada is a key constitutional and ceremonial step in introducing the new monarch to the country. Charles is now is the head of state in Canada, which is a member of the British Commonwealth of former colonies.
“Overall, the antiroyal movement in Canada is minuscule, meaning that Charles will almost certainly remain king of Canada. One reason is that abolishing the monarchy would mean changing the constitution. That’s an inherently risky undertaking, given how delicately it is engineered to unite a nation of 37 million people that embraces English-speakers, French-speakers, Indigenous tribes and a constant flow of new immigrants…
“Trudeau attended the ceremony where the Chief Herald of Canada read the proclamation on the accession of the new sovereign. Also taking part was Governor General Mary Simon, who is the representative of the British monarch as head of state, a mostly ceremonial and symbolic position. She is an Inuk and is the first Indigenous person to hold the position….”
The glory and power of the “British Commonwealth”—as it had been prophesied in the Bible—is long gone. However, some ceremonial loyalties without any practical consequences are being maintained. Note the next article.
Australia’s New Monarch
The Guardian wrote on September 13:
“Victorian MPs have sworn allegiance to King Charles III in a special sitting of parliament unique to the state following the death of Queen Elizabeth II. The speaker, Maree Edwards, opened the sitting on Tuesday with a message from the Victorian governor, Linda Dessau, formally announcing the death of the Queen and the ascension of King Charles III to the throne. All 88 lower house MPs were then asked to take an oath or affirmation in which they pledged to be ‘faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty and His Majesty’s heirs and successors according to law’… Victoria is the only state or territory which requires members of both houses to swear allegiance to the new monarch after their predecessor’s death under section 23 of its constitution.
“The last time this occurred was on 14 February 1952, eight days after the death of Queen Elizabeth II’s father, King George VI…
“Condolences will continue in both houses for much of Tuesday before parliament adjourns for one week as a mark of respect. It will return for two final sitting days next week ahead of the November state election.
“In NSW, a brief sitting of parliament was held on Tuesday morning, with the premier, Dominic Perrottet, moving a motion to profess ‘profound sorrow’ at the death of the ‘beloved sovereign’. He then moved a separate motion congratulating King Charles III on his ascension to the throne, swearing ‘unswerving loyalty’ and wishing a ‘long and happy’ reign ‘marked by peace and prosperity throughout NSW and Australia.’”
There is discussion in Australia about the future of the monarchy, but it was felt that now was not the time to pursue that matter.
Europe to Become Autonomous?
FP [Foreign Policy] wrote on September 8:
“Russia’s war in Ukraine, Europe’s military weakness, and the United States’ outsized role in the Western response have led many officials and observers to conclude that now is finally the time to ensure Europe can defend itself—and become an autonomous strategic actor. Last week, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz joined the chorus calling for a ‘stronger, more sovereign, geopolitical European Union.’ Claiming that Washington’s focus has shifted to competition with China in the Indo-Pacific, he concluded that ‘Europe is our future.’
“…the European Union has almost 450 million people, a GDP of $18 trillion, and more $200 billion in defense spending by its member countries…
“Europe could do more but remains unwilling… Germany, France, and Italy combined have pledged less to Ukraine than Poland on its own, even though their collective GDP is almost 14 times larger…
“Who would control an EU army? Would Germany—let alone France—agree to be blocked by Hungary (if war needs a unanimous decision among EU members) or be outvoted (if a majority suffices)? Which country’s electorates would tolerate their government passing decisions literally over the life and death of thousands of citizens to EU institutions?…”
The author argues against European autonomy and pleads for staying under the US umbrella. But biblical prophecy shows that the opposite will happen. In times of ongoing crises, ten European core nations or groups of nations will transfer their power and authority to a future charismatic military leader of German or Austrian descent; and this new power bloc will be antagonistic towards the USA.
Germany’s Army (Bundeswehr) Gains Momentum
The Los Angeles Times wrote on September 8:
“In the not-so-distant past, the reputation of the Bundeswehr — the successor force to the infamous Nazi-era Wehrmacht — was less than stellar. Some members, especially conscripts, did their best to keep a low public profile. Few young people aspired to join. Starved of funds, shrunken in size, the military was almost invisible to the public… After the depredations of World War II, framers of the country’s postwar order initially envisioned Germany having no military at all. But a divided Germany was the Cold War’s ground zero for a tense standoff between the West and the members of the Warsaw Pact, led by the Soviet Union. At its height, the Bundeswehr belonged to the former West Germany and fielded almost half a million troops…
“The military draft remained in effect until 2011, but many young Germans sought to avoid conscription by applying to do some form of civilian service instead, such as working in a hospital…
“To a German public deeply shocked by events in Ukraine, the Bundeswehr — which has concerned itself mainly with foreign peacekeeping and natural disasters at home — is now seen as an indispensable guarantor of security... Recruiters are seeking to capitalize on that more dynamic image. A new Bundeswehr video titled ‘We Protect Germany’ features action-heavy scenes of fast-moving tanks and helicopter-borne troops swooping in to land.
“Germany’s Green Party has been an intriguing barometer of changing sentiment. A heavyweight in the current coalition government and deeply rooted in the antiwar movements of the 1970s and 1980s, the left-leaning, environmental-minded party has probably made the most stunning U-turn in Germany’s recent political history, backing continued weapons shipments and a tough stance toward autocratic governments like those in Beijing and Moscow.”
How times have changed. The once—more or less— pacifistic approach of many Germans has turned to a more military outlook and is returning to and embracing Germany’s problematic and frightening original roots. All of this has been prophesied to happen for these end times. The last and final European revival of the ancient Roman Empire, leading to the return of Jesus Christ, is in full swing. Note the next short article as well.
Germany to Play a Leading Military Role
Deutsche Welle wrote on September 12:
“German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht said on Monday she believed Germany was obliged to play a leading global role, including in the military sphere, and that the country should not be afraid of the responsibility.
“‘Germany’s size, its geographical situation, its economic power — in short, its clout — makes us a leading power whether or not we want to be one. Militarily as well,’ she said in a keynote security address in Berlin.”
The signs of the time…
Putin Threatens to Cut Off Europe’s Energy Supplies
The Sun wrote on September 7:
“Vladimir Putin has threatened to cut off Europe’s energy supplies completely.He vowed to axe all ‘gas, coal and heating oil’ if the EU imposes a price cap this winter… He fumed: ‘We will not supply anything.’… [He] blasted EU plans as ‘stupid’ and vowed Russia would renege on deals to supply gas through the Nord Stream pipeline.
“Addressing a forum in Vladivostok, he said: ‘Will there be any political decisions that contradict the contracts? Yes, we just won’t fulfil them. We will not supply anything at all if it contradicts our interests.’… Putin switched off Nord Stream One gas supplies last week for unspecified repairs and threatened not to restore them until sanctions are lifted.”
Predictably, EU ministers seem to be caving in to Russia.
Deutsche Welle wrote on September 10:
“European energy ministers have disagreed on a price cap on Russian gas, and want the EU Commission to rework proposals to shield Europeans from increasing energy prices… The biggest sticking point appeared to be whether and how to impose a price cap on the amount the bloc pays for Russian gas… Member states in central and eastern Europe who still get gas from Russia feared retaliation by Moscow.”
Reports were published about Ukraine’s surprise advances in certain key regions in Eastern Ukraine and Russia’s retreat there to “regroup.” But it has also been stated that the war will drag on for months. Ultimately, Russia and Ukraine will unite, and as Ukraine is temporarily victorious in certain regions, Putin’s wrath is kindled… especially against Europe which is sanctioning Russia and supporting Ukraine with weapons and money.
When the Lights Go Out…
The Guardian wrote on September 11:
“That Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister in his recent, pre-ministerial life, wrote a children’s book in which a girl called Emily experiences ‘how exciting a night-time power cut can be’ may yet come back to haunt him. These days, Habeck is charged with the daunting task of ensuring that the lights do not go out… in Europe’s largest economy. And even if Germans have been hoarding candles and camping stoves, just as not so long ago they were doing with toilet paper and pasta, they consider the prospect of a blackout and cold homes to be scary rather than exciting. Reports of people illegally felling trees for fuel have brought back memories of postwar squalor, when Berlin’s Tiergarten park was stripped bare as Germans tried to keep warm.
“But a blackout is not so unrealistic since Moscow closed down the Nord Stream 1 pipeline more than a week ago… Bakers in northern Germany on Thursday turned off their lights in protest at the way they had been excluded from the government’s unwieldy sounding Energiekostendämpfungsprogramm, to provide help towards the bills of energy intensive industries, from glass to wallpaper manufacturers. ‘Lights today, ovens tomorrow?’ was the slogan posted on the door of a bakery in the well-to-do Hamburg district of Blankenese. ‘Bread could yet become a luxury good that only rich people can afford,’ the owner said, desperate for recognition that her gas provider had cancelled her contract and she was facing a monthly gas bill that had gone from €3,800 (£3,300) to €8,000…
“Energy specialists say that despite Scholz’s insistence that Germany would have enough energy to get through the winter, it is too early to be optimistic. Already in a colder than usual September, consumption has been higher than expected… Germany now faces nothing less than weighing up which is greater – its angst over atomic power or a blackout.”
Putin Counts on a Strong Winter
The Hill wrote on September 11:
“As the summer war in Ukraine transitions into autumn and the harvesting of sunflowers begins, repeated Russian military setbacks in the Donbas region and Kherson Oblast are forcing Vladimir Putin to show his hand. Impatient to reverse course on the battlefield, the Russian president is signaling that Moscow fully intends to weaponize Europe’s winter energy needs — for not just Ukraine but the entire European Union.
“Putin is gambling on a brutally cold and snowy winter like that of 1941, which helped derail the German army’s attack on Moscow during Operation Barbarossa. Theoretically, the Kremlin’s strategic aim is to produce an energy crisis in the dead of a European winter to break the will of NATO from continuing to militarily and economically support Kyiv. The underlying assumption is that Europeans would choose warmth and comfort over Ukraine’s independence.”
The author continues that Putin’s approach will not work, but time will tell…
The Fear of Nuclear War
Yahoo! Sports wrote on September 12:
“…comments from Ukraine’s top general last week point to a significant threat… ‘There is a direct threat of the use, under certain circumstances, of tactical nuclear weapons by the Russian armed forces,’ General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, writes in an article published by state news agency Ukrinform. ‘It is also impossible to completely rule out the possibility of the direct involvement of the world’s leading countries in a “limited” nuclear conflict, in which the prospect of World War III is already directly visible.’
“That’s a scary picture. The possibility of nuclear war makes all other problems seem trivial in comparison. Legendary investor Warren Buffett once called it ‘the ultimate problem of mankind.’ Warren Buffett is not a doom-and-gloom type of investor. He’s not shy about expressing his seemingly endless optimism over the U.S. economy. But if there’s one threat that keeps the investing legend up at night, it’s most certainly the threat of nuclear war. ‘It is the ultimate problem of mankind,’ Buffett said at his company Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholders meeting back in 2006. ‘And it will happen someday.’… Buffett expressed similar concerns in 2017. ‘I’ve been concerned since 1945 when the first atomic bomb was used,’ he said during a CNBC interview. ‘We have developed over these 72 years, since August of 1945, the ability around the world to almost destroy civilization…”
Sadly, there will be worldwide nuclear war in the future—not just a limited one—which WOULD destroy ALL life on earth if Jesus Christ were not to return to shorten those days and prevent human extinction.
Project Syndicate wrote on September 5:
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and nuclear saber rattling against the West have revived a debate about nuclear weapons. Last year, when a United Nations treaty to ban such weapons outright entered into force, none of the world’s nine nuclear-weapons states was among the 86 signatories…
“In 1960, the British scientist and novelist C.P. Snow concluded that nuclear war within a decade was ‘a mathematical certainty.’ That may have been an exaggeration, but many believed Snow’s prediction would be justified if a war occurred within a century. In the 1980s, Nuclear Freeze campaigners like Helen Caldicott echoed Snow in warning that the buildup of nuclear weapons ‘will make nuclear war a mathematical certainty.’… There was a lower probability of nuclear war in 1963, just after the Cuban Missile Crisis, precisely because there had been a higher probability in 1962… During the Cuban Missile Crisis, US President John F. Kennedy reportedly estimated the probability of nuclear war to be between 33% and 50%.”
Many feel that nuclear war is not really possible as there have been so many warnings in the past—and nothing happened. They could not be more wrong.
Acknowledgement and Disclaimer
These Current Events are compiled and commented on by Norbert Link. We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of news articles from our readership. The publication of articles in this section is not to be viewed as an endorsement or approval as to contents or accuracy of the selected articles, but they are published for the purpose of pointing at worldwide developments in the light of biblical end-time prophecy and godly instruction. Our own comments are provided in italics.
