Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

The Revived Roman Empire
Sep 26th, 2009
Audio Message
Categories: Prophecy

The Owner
Sep 26th, 2009
Audio Message
Categories: Exhortation

The Antichrist
Sep 26th, 2009
Audio Message
Categories: Prophecy;World Government

Obama Orders Israel to 'end the Occupation'
Sep 26th, 2009
Daily NewsArutz Sheva - Maayana Miskin
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

 United States President Barack Obama issued a stinging condemnation of the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria on Wednesday in a speech to the United Nations General Assembly. The U.S. “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,” Obama announced.

Using unusually harsh terminology, Obama called to "end the occupation that began in 1967" - referring to Israel's control of Judea and Samaria.

Obama also stated that the U.S. must put more pressure on Israel to accept Arab demands. “The United States does Israel no favors when we fail to couple an unwavering commitment to its security with an insistence that Israel respect the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestinians,” he said.

The U.S. president had demands for Israel's opponents as well, and called on UN member states to avoid “vitriolic” attacks on Israel and recognize Israel's legitimacy. In addition, he called on the Palestinian Authority to “end incitement against Israel.”

In his speech, Obama reported that progress had been made in a meeting the day before with  Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Obama has pressured Israel to completely freeze building for Jews in Judea and Samaria, a plan Netanyahu has rejected. Israeli leaders have stated that many Judea and Samaria communities are within the “national consensus” regarding towns that are expected to remain in Israeli hands permanently, and that building should continue in those areas. The Obama administration's most recent statements on the subject made clear, however, that a freeze on settlements could not be a precondition for peace talks between Israel and the PA.

Regarding Iran, Obama expressed support for both diplomacy and consequences. Iran and North Korea should be offered “greater prosperity and a more secure peace” if they agree to abide by international guidelines, but “must be held accountable” if they insist on pursuing nuclear weapons, he said.

Bolton: Israel on the Chopping Block

Former United States ambassador to the UN John Bolton said the president's message had strong significance, particularly given the venue. Obama has put Israel “on the chopping block,” Bolton warned.

'World Must Work Together'

Obama called for the nations of the world to work together, saying, “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility.”

"Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems alone,” he added pointedly.

Obama said UN member states had fallen short in addressing the world's problems. Among the issues he called to address were genocide, “protracted conflicts,” nuclear proliferation, and global warming.

Megiddo 1 - the March to Armageddon
Sep 26th, 2009
VideoYou Tube - Dave Hunt
Categories: Prophecy;Warning

Meet the Next Palestinian Leader and Why It Matters
Sep 26th, 2009
Daily Newswww.jpost.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Peace Process

Few subjects get written about more often - and inaccurately - than the Palestinians, yet there is curiously little interest in the politics and ideology governing their behavior. The same situation applies to the man slated to become their next leader, only the third to hold that post in 50 years, after Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas. 

The fact that an issue that is supposedly the most important, high-priority question in the world is studied so little has a simple explanation. The contemporary narrative is that the Palestinian leaders yearn for a state, an end to the conflict, and peace, while the failure to achieve these can be blamed on Israel. Yet even the slightest real examination shows the exact opposite is true. 

This point is only underlined by looking at the current candidate for next leader, Muhammad Ghaneim, often known as Abu Mahir. Of all those who might credibly have been considered for the leadership of Fatah - and hence of the PLO and Palestinian Authority (PA) - he is probably the most hardline. 

While media coverage of the 2009 Fatah Congress may have stressed the accession of "young" and "more flexible" leaders, the 72-year-old Ghaneim certainly doesn't fit that description. 

Born in Jerusalem on August 29, 1937, his first political involvement was with the Muslim Brotherhood, but he became a founding member of Fatah in 1959 and has been active ever since, involved mainly in recruitment and organization. 

It is difficult to say to what extent Ghaneim's early involvement with radical Islam has shaped his thinking, and whether it would make it easier for him to reconcile with the even more radical Hamas. Most Fatah and PLO members came from more secular Arab nationalist or leftist movements. The only prominent leader who seemed to blend an Islamist background with nationalism was Arafat himself. 

Ghaneim's big career break came in 1968 when, at the age of just 30, Arafat appointed him commander of Fatah's forces in Jordan. Later that year, he was put on Fatah's Central Committee, in charge of organization and recruitment. 

It is impossible to overstate the importance of these two jobs. At that time, Jordan was a Fatah stronghold and the group constituted a shadow government alongside that of King Hussein, the country's nominal ruler. Fatah guerrillas - and shortly after Arafat took over, the whole PLO - had military bases from which they launched attacks on Israel across the Jordan River. Arafat must have had an extraordinarily high opinion of Ghaneim to appoint him to such a sensitive post. 

Since so much of this task was involved with military matters, Ghaneim took a short officers' course in China. On his return in 1969, Arafat gave him a third chore, as his deputy for military issues. While the details aren't clear, this means Ghaneim must have played a central role in planning and implementing scores of guerrilla and terrorist attacks. Ghaneim played a central role in selecting those to be given key jobs and just how much authority each had. Of course, everyone was far below Arafat, but Ghaneim was about as essential as a second-tier figure could be. 

In 1970, Fatah overplayed its hand, was defeated by Jordan's army, and had to flee to Lebanon. Ghaneim continued his organizational and military duties there. When the PLO and Fatah were forced out of Lebanon in 1982, Ghaneim accompanied Arafat to Tunis. From 1982 to mid-2009 he remained there, though he may have begun visiting the PA-ruled territories as early as July 2007. 

Ghaneim didn't return with Arafat in 1994 because, despite serving Arafat closely and loyally for 35 years, Ghaneim rejected the 1993 Oslo accords as too moderate. Only armed struggle, total victory, and Israel's destruction were worthy goals in his eyes. 

While Arafat sought these things covertly, the compromises involved in such a pretense were too much for Ghaneim. He stayed in Tunisia despite numerous invitations from Arafat, starting in October 1994, to join the PA, and instead insisted Arafat cease all negotiations with Israel. 

Ghaneim moved closer to the popular Farouq Kaddumi, often referred to as the second most powerful man in Fatah. Kaddumi rejected the Oslo agreement and kept up a close connection with Syria. Arafat undercut him, but Kaddumi was so strong in the movement that he could never be fired altogether. 

Finally, Ghaneim decided to return and support Mahmoud Abbas. While the details are not clear, this coincided with Abbas naming him as successor. Despite some who claim Ghaneim has moderated his positions, there is absolutely no evidence of this. 

Ghaneim has a definite appeal for Abbas as ally and successor. He is one of the few remaining founders of Fatah, and has wide contacts throughout the movement. 

In addition, as someone who has been outside PA politics for 15 years he is seen as a neutral figure in many petty disputes. 

But this is not the man to choose if your top priorities are making peace with Israel and maintaining good relations with the West. He is the man you would choose if you intend to reject compromise, rebuild links to Syria and Hamas, and perhaps return to armed struggle. 

On arrival at the Allenby Bridge crossing from Jordan on July 29, 2009, just before the Fatah Congress, Ghaneim was picked up by Abbas' personal limousine, taken to his office, and welcomed in a ceremony. 

At the reception, Ghaneim stated: "The struggle will continue until victory" and that if political means did not achieve Israel's destruction, the movement would return to armed struggle. (Al-Hayat al-Jadida, July 30, 2009). It is clear how Ghaneim defines victory, and it is not a West Bank-Gaza state with its capital in east Jerusalem living alongside Israel. 

That Ghaneim would give up "the right of return," make any territorial compromise, or end the conflict permanently is extremely unlikely. These are things that even the supposedly less extreme Abbas has rejected. 

Thereafter, Abbas promoted Ghaneim among the delegates to the meeting. He finished first in the Central Committee elections with 1,338 votes, about two-thirds of those participating and far ahead of every other candidate.

Ghaneim's success, and the others elected, show that the old Arafat crowd is still in control. If Ghaneim becomes leader of Fatah the PA and PLO, you can forget about peace. 

No one should say a word about the Palestinian issue, the peace process, or Israeli policy without analyzing these factors. 

Unfortunately, there isn't at present a Palestinian partner for peace. Fortunately, there is a Palestinian partner for maintaining a relatively peaceful status quo. But if and when Ghaneim takes over, even this consolation might be gone.

Many See Obama UN Speech As Dangerous for Israel
Sep 26th, 2009
Daily NewsIsrael Today
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Warning

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu highly praised US President Barack Obama's speech to the UN General Assembly on Wednesday, during which the American leader repeatedly referred to Israel as "the Jewish state" and demanded an end to Palestinian incitement against it.

However, while two of Israel's top peace demands are recognition as a Jewish state and an end to Palestinian incitement, observers noted that Obama did far more to damage Israel's legitimacy by highlighting the "occupation" and Jewish settlements as the root of the conflict.

"The goal is clear: two states living side by side in peace and security: a Jewish State of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967," said Obama. The how and why of how those territories came to be in Israel's possession were again glossed over.

All that matters now, stated Obama, is that "America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."

There is concern that adopting the Arab line regarding the "occupation" will only perpetuate the conflict by encouraging the Arabs to push for rights to or compensation for the rest of "occupied Palestine," which they say encompasses all of the State of Israel.

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas didn't go quite so far in his initial response to Obama's speech, but did use the president's address as a pretext to declare Netanyahu an unfit peace partner due to his failure to completely halt all Jewish construction in Judea, Samaria and on the eastern side of Jerusalem.

"The Netanyahu government is a real problem and there is no common ground for negotiations with it," said Abbas in an interview with the Palestinian daily Al-Hayyat. "Construction in the settlements is continuing, Netanyahu is declaring Jerusalem...not up for negotiations, so what is there to talk about?"

Israeli Politicians Accuse Obama of 'misrepresenting History' in UN Speech
Sep 26th, 2009
Daily Newswww.wnd.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Peace Process

Did President Obama yesterday adopt U.N. and Palestinian phraseology while calling on Israel to give up the biblical West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount? 

Some members of the Israeli government here reacted angrily to Obama's strongly worded demand – expressed during his speech to the U.N. General Assembly – for the creation of a "viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967." 

The term "occupation" routinely is used by the Palestinians as well as some countries hostile to the Jewish state in reference to Israel's presence in the West Bank and Jerusalem. It is unusual for U.S. presidents to use the term, although Jimmy Carter once famously called Israel's presence in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem "illegal." 

"Occupation that began in 1967" is a specific reference to the lands Israel retained after the Six Day War of that year, particularly the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount. 

The Palestinians never maintained any official capacity in either territory, lands in which Jews have been present for thousands of years. The territories came under Jordanian rule from 1948 until Israel captured them in 1967 after Jordan's King Hussein ignored Israeli pleas for his country to stay out of the Six Day War. Most countries rejected Jordan's initial claim on the area, which it formally renounced in 1988. 

Commenting on Obama's speech during a WND interview today, Tzipi Hotovely, a Knesset member for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, accused the U.S. president of "misrepresenting history." 

"Obama is misrepresenting Mideast history," she said. "The Jewish people's right to live in Judea and Samaria is firstly rooted in the Bible and God's promise 2,000 years before 1967." 

"I really believe the whole 16-year process since the Oslo Accords (in which Israel gave up land in exchange for promises of peace) has proven the settlements are not the obstacle for peace. The main obstacle is the Palestinians' continued rejection of Israel as a Jewish state even within the borders of 1967." 

Danny Danon, another Likud Knesset member, told WND today, "Obama cannot force this on Israel. We do not have a partner in Israel which is a viable partner." 

Continued Danon: "Every concession Prime Minister Netanyahu makes was not appreciated by the Palestinian Authority. The Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria is an asset for Israeli security. Instead of pressuring Israel, we would like to see the Obama administration deal with the real threat – the global threat coming from Iran." 

The West Bank is considered landlocked territory not officially recognized as part of any country. Israel calls the land "disputed." The Palestinians and the U.N. Security Council claims the West Bank is "occupied" by Israel, which maintains overall control of most of the area while the Palestinian Authority has jurisdiction in about 40 percent. The U.N. Security Council is traditionally considered hostile to Israel. 

The West Bank borders most of Israel's major cities, including Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Military strategists long have estimated Israel must maintain most of the West Bank to defend its borders from any ground invasion. 

Many villages in the West Bank, which Israelis commonly refer to as the "biblical heartland," are mentioned throughout the Torah. 

The Book of Genesis says Abraham entered Israel at Shechem (Nablus) and received God's promise of land for his offspring. He later was buried in Hebron. 

The nearby town of Beit El, anciently called Bethel meaning "house of God," is where Scripture says the patriarch Jacob slept on a stone pillow and dreamed of angels ascending and descending a stairway to heaven. In that dream, God spoke directly to Jacob and reaffirmed the promise of territory. 

And in Exodus, the holy tabernacle rested in Shiloh, believed to be the first area the ancient Israelites settled after fleeing Egypt. 

Obama's reference yesterday to "occupation that began in 1967" comes after a top PA official, speaking on condition his name be withheld, told WND earlier this week the Obama administration largely has adopted the positions of the PA to create a Palestinian state within two years based on the 1967 borders, meaning Israel would retreat from most of the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem. 

The official said Obama also accepted the PA position that Israeli-Palestinian negotiations begin where they left off under Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who went further than previous Israeli leaders in his concessions to the Palestinians. 

Olmert reportedly offered the PA not only 95 percent of the West Bank and peripheral eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods but also other territories never before offered by any Israeli leader, including parts of the Israeli Negev desert bordering Gaza as well as sections of the Jordan Valley. 

The official claimed the Obama administration will still support the announcement of a Palestinian state within two years. 

"We understand from the U.S. that the Netanyahu government is not in a position to go against creating a state within two years," the official said. 

The official claimed the Obama administration was ready to ultimately consider "sanctions" against Israel if the Netanyahu government rejected negotiations leading to a Palestinian state. The official refused to clarify which sanctions he was referring to or whether he was specifically told by the U.S. government it would consider sanctions.

Earth's Darkest Hour
Sep 26th, 2009
Audio Message
Categories: Prophecy;Revived Roman Empire

Christians Face Trial for Criticising Islam in U.k.
Sep 26th, 2009
Daily Newswww.christian.org.uk
Categories: Today's Headlines;Persecution

The Christian owners of a hotel are being prosecuted for a crime because they defended their faith and criticised Islam in a debate with a Muslim guest.

Police arrested Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang, who run the Bounty House Hotel in Liverpool, after a Muslim woman complained that she was offended by comments made on 20 March.

According to newspaper reports, the debate involved discussion of whether Jesus was the Son of God or just a minor prophet of Islam.

Newspapers also report that the debate included comments that Mohammed was a warlord and Muslim dress for women was a form of bondage.

However, the facts of the case are disputed.

The pair are now being prosecuted for a “religiously aggravated” public order offence. A criminal trial is set for 8 and 9 December at Liverpool Magistrates’ Court.

A major client of the couple’s hotel has ceased referring guests because of the allegations. This has led to a 80 per cent drop in the hotel’s income, leaving the couple in financial difficulty.

The Christian Institute is funding the Vogelenzangs’ legal defence. Its spokesman, Mike Judge, said: “We believe there are significant free speech and religious liberty issues at stake.”

The couple’s lawyer, David Whiting, said: “Ben and Sharon do not accept they were threatening, abusive or insulting.

“They are committed Christians and it is the defence’s contention that they have every right to defend their religious beliefs and explain those beliefs to others who do not hold similar views.”

The couple were arrested and charged in July under Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and Section 31 (1) (c) and (5) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

If convicted the couple face a maximum fine of £5,000 and a criminal record.

Lawyers have expressed growing concern at the way public order offences are being used to limit free speech. The laws were introduced to deal with yobbish disorder in the streets, not limit robust debate.

Neil Addison, a criminal barrister and author of a legal textbook on harassment law, said: “The purpose of the Public Order Act is to prevent disorder, but I’m very concerned that the police are using it merely because someone is offended.

“It should be used where there is violence, yobbish behaviour or gratuitous personal abuse. It should never be used where there has been a personal conversation or debate with views firmly expressed.

“If someone is in a discussion and they don’t like what they are hearing, they can walk away.”

He added that the police had a legal duty under the Human Rights Act to defend free speech “and I think they are forgetting that”.

A police spokesman said: “Merseyside Police can confirm that Benjamin Vogelenzang and Sharon Vogelenzang, both of Fazakerley, were charged with a religiously-aggravated public order offence on 29 July 2009. This follows an incident on 20 March 2009.”

Blasphemous Teachings of the 'emergent Church
Sep 26th, 2009
VideoYou Tube
Categories: The Church;Apostasy

Bernanke is Wrong! the Economy is Getting Worse, not Better, Schiff Says
Sep 26th, 2009
Daily NewsYahoo Finance
Categories: Today's Headlines;Commentary;Warning