Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

U.n.'s Goldstone Report is Magna Carta for Terrorists
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily NewsDaily News Los Angeles - Rabbi Marvin Hier and Rabbi Abraham Cooper
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Anti-Israel

THE climactic battle in the war against global terror has been fought - and the civilized world lost. Invoking the newly minted Goldstone fact-finding report investigating the Jewish state for its recent military action against the 8,000 rockets from Gaza's "Hamastan," the U.N.'s "Human Rights" Council has now voted for surrender.

The vote was 25 to 6, with 11 abstentions, to condemn Israel for "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity." The U.S. - which recently rejoined the council in hopes of "reforming" it - voted no, as did Italy, Ukraine and the Netherlands. The U.K. and France boycotted the vote entirely.

Not even in classic Hollywood westerns was the good guy ever expected to fight strictly according to Marquis of Queensbury Rules when the innocent heroine's fate was at stake. But today, there's been a role reversal where, even in life-and-death wartime battles, the good guys are being held up to impossible standards of morality while the bad guys like Hamas in Gaza brazenly take civilians hostage as human shields and escape U.N. condemnation.

We seem to have forgotten that war is something you engage in when you are at wit's end and there are no other solutions. It is not like attending a boxing match where there's a referee to keep both combatants from hitting below the belt

Any veteran will tell you that war is hell, especially when your opponents are die-hard fanatics who hate life and can't wait to settle down in paradise with their 72 virgins.

With this insidious vote, the U.N. Human Rights Council has surrendered the civilized world to these practitioners of evil and delivered this message to Osama bin Laden: "Come out of your cave, all-compassionate Osama, architect of the 9-11 attacks, and give us the best terms we losers can hope for."

What the members of the council chose to forget were the wise words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, who once observed that even the hallowed U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights "is not a suicide pact." He gained this perspective while serving as chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials. It was there where Jackson brought to justice "the aggressor nations" that destroyed the peace of the world and unleashed the Holocaust.

Now, Judge Richard Goldstone has perverted the judgments at Nuremberg and has put into place instead a dangerous, false morality that renders the struggle against nonstate terrorists hopeless and unwinnable.

It didn't have to go that way in Geneva. Certainly, many member states in the hall from Russia to Kuwait to Pakistan, China and Afghanistan were squirming in their seats when the one person in the room who has actually fought terrorists in Afghanistan, Col. Richard Kemp, called their bluff and said this to them at the debate:

"Based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: during Operation Cast Lead the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in the combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare... The IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties... War is chaos and full of mistakes... but mistakes are not war crimes."

Goldstone himself seems to have finally begun to realize what genie he let out of the U.N. bottle. He expressed his shock that the 36 paragraph UNHRC resolution deleted any and all criticism of Hamas. Too late, Judge - you have authored what may become the Magna Carta of al-Qaida, Hezbollah, Hamas and of generations of terrorists yet unborn.

During the 1990s, Goldstone fleetingly met with Simon Wiesenthal, who lost 89 relatives in the Holocaust. One can only imagine the horror of the famed Nazi hunter, were he still alive, at Goldstone's lending his name to a document that implicitly would equate Gen. Eisenhower with Hitler and Bibi Netanyahu with Khalid Meshaal. Wiesenthal understood in his bones that there are no moral equivalents between those who are forced to send their young people to fight terrorists and those who look at every newborn as a potential suicide bomber.

The purpose of today's global infrastructure of NGOs and humanitarian law is to uphold human rights, not render nation states powerless before the terrorist beast. We all yearn for the prophesied day when "justice (shall) roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream." But until then, we should shred Goldstone's Folly and re-introduce all member states to the lessons and warnings of Nuremberg.

The Two Year Countdown to the Battle for Jerusalem
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily NewsJpost
Categories: Commentary;Anti-Israel

In a Jerusalem Post article “In the land of miracles, let’s get real”(September 29), Gershon Baskin describes the Salaam Fayad plan as “one of the most positive and optimistic developments of recent times”.

However, a reading of Fayad’s plan, entitled “Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State: Program of the Thirteenth Government - August 2009″ would seem to belie Baskin’s postulation.

While the preface to Fayad’s paper introduces a Palestinian state that would strive for “peace, security and stability in our region on the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, with east Jerusalem as its capital,” Fayad’s 38-page position paper reads like a declaration of war, not of peace.

Fayad asserts that “Jerusalem” will be the Palestinian capital of the Palestinian state - not east Jerusalem.

In case anyone was wondering if Fayad had made a typographical error by not mentioning “east” Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, he repeats - 10 times - that he means Jerusalem, all of Jerusalem. He leaves nothing to the imagination, and writes that the Palestinian state will “protect Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Palestinian state,” because he asserts that “Jerusalem is our people’s religious, cultural, economic and political center. It is the Flower of Cities and Capital of Capitals. It cannot be anything but the eternal capital of the future Palestinian state. Jerusalem.”

Fayad goes on to claim that Jerusalem “is under threat” and that “the occupying authority is implementing a systematic plan to alter the city’s landmarks and its geographical and demographic character in order to forcibly create facts on the ground, ultimately separating it from its Palestinian surroundings and eradicating its Arab Palestinian heritage.” Fayad further claims that “Palestinian life in Jerusalem is under daily attack through systematic violations perpetrated by the occupation regime” and that “it is the right and the duty of all Palestinians to protect their land, reject the occupation and defy its measures,” adding that the Palestinian state “bears special responsibility for nurturing our people’s ability to persevere and protect their homeland.”

He adds that the Palestinian government will maintain its “unreserved commitment to defending the Arab character and status of Jerusalem…. The government will continue to do all that is possible to achieve this goal. The government will work with all organizations to preserve the landmarks of Jerusalem and its Arab Palestinian heritage, develop the city, and secure its contiguity with its Palestinian surroundings.”

Fayad frames Jerusalem as an illegal settlement, postulating that “the occupying authority is pursuing its intensive settlement policy in and around Jerusalem…. The occupation regime has shut down our national institutions, neglected the development of Palestinian life, continued to demolish and evacuate Palestinian homes, and restricted access to sacred Christian and Islamic sites.”

He goes so far as to present a practical plan to Arabize Jerusalem: Maintaining Jerusalem as a top priority on the government’s agenda and• “highlighting its predicament in the media. Launching programs to promote the steadfastness of Jerusalemites, including: Strengthen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, providing financial support to help them deliver services to citizens.”

He reassures his readers that a future Palestinian state would not be satisfied with Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza as the national home for Palestinians, and says that the Palestinian government will continue to advocate for “Palestinian refugees in accordance with relevant international resolutions, and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 in particular,” which mandates that Palestinian refugees and their descendents have a right to return to the homes and villages that Palestinians left during the 1948 war and its aftermath.

Fayad reminds Palestinians that “the refugee issue will remain under the jurisdiction of the PLO, through its Department of Refugees’ Affairs … in a manner that does not exempt the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) from its responsibilities.” In Fayad’s view, UNRWA will therefore continue to confine Palestinian refugees and their descendants to the indignity of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the “right of return.”

Meanwhile, Fayad expresses full support for Palestinians who have been convicted of murder and attempted murder, saying that “the state also has an enduring obligation to care and provide for the martyrs, prisoners, orphans and all those harmed in the Palestinian struggle for independence.” He simply cannot understand why Palestinians convicted of capital crimes should be jailed.

He proclaims that “the continued detention of thousands of Palestinian detainees and prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention camps in violation of international law and basic human rights, is of great concern to all Palestinians,” and declares that “securing the freedom of all these heroic prisoners is an utmost Palestinian priority and it is a fundamental duty all Palestinians feel to honor their great sacrifices and end their suffering,” and demands the “freedom of all Palestinian detainees and prisoners and will continue to strive to secure their liberty.”

He further declares that the Palestinian state will be an Islamic state and “promote awareness and understanding of the Islamic religion and culture and disseminate the concept of tolerance in the religion through developing and implementing programs of Shari’a education as derived from the science of the Holy Koran and Prophet’s heritage.”

In sum, the Palestinian prime minister concludes with a demand for a Palestinian state in the next two years, along the parameters that he has outlined - Jerusalem as the capital of an Islamic Shari’a state that will campaign for all convicts to be freed, for all refugees to return to the homes and villages that they left in 1948.

It would be instructive to know whether Baskin even bothered to read the plan before calling it a ‘postive development.’

Thatcher Adviser: Copenhagen Goal is 1 - World Government
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily NewsWND
Categories: Today's Headlines;World Government

A former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says the real purpose of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Dec. 7-18 is to use global warming hype as a pretext to lay the foundation for a one-world government. 

"At the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed," Lord Christopher Monckton told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience on Thursday at Bethel University in St. Paul. 

"Your president will sign it. Most of the Third World countries will sign it, because they think they're going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regimes from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won't sign it," he told the audience of some 700 attendees. 

"I read that treaty and what it says is this: that a world government is going to be created. The word 'government' actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. 

"The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to Third World countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, 'climate debt' – because we've been burning CO2 and they haven't. We've been screwing up the climate and they haven't. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government is enforcement." 

In an hour and a half lecture illustrated by slides featuring scientific data on a wide range of climate issues, Monckton refuted claims made by former Vice President Al Gore in his movie and book entitled "An Inconvenient Truth," as well as scientific arguments made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

Monckton argued that President Obama will sign the Copenhagen treaty at the December meeting, without seeking a two-thirds ratification of the treaty by the Senate, or any other type of Congressional approval. 

"So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free," he continued. "But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. 

"But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire – it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with the climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to help it." 

Monckton is a well-known critic of the theory of anthropogenic causes for global warming who has argued repeatedly that global warming hysteria is an ideological position of the political Left advanced in the interest of imposing global taxes on the United States in the pursuit of international control of the U.S. economy under a one-world government to be administered by the U.N. 

Monckton's lecture can be viewed online and his slides also can be accessed on the Internet. 

Where's the global warming? 

As evidence mounts that the United States is headed toward a cooling cycle that may last decades, global alarmists within the Obama administration remain resolved to push cap-and-trade legislation through Congress on the increasingly dubious theory that man-made carbon emissions are creating global warming. 

In what has to be seen as increasingly bad news for global warming alarmists, scientific evidence is mounting that temperatures in the United States have cooled at a rate that would be projected to lower temperatures 7.3 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century.

Preparing for Conflict Soon? New Iranian Missiles for Gaza, Syria Tops Up Hizballah's Rocket Stocks
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily Newsdebka.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Anti-Israel

Iran is making a huge effort to smuggle to the Palestinian Hamas Fajr-5 ground-to-ground rockets that bring Tel Aviv within range of the Gaza Strip. DEBKAfile's military sources also disclose that Syria, Iran's second ally with an Israeli border, has decided to transfer one-third of its missile stockpile to the Hizballah in Lebanon, topping up its arsenal with medium-range rockets that can cover central as well as northern Israel, which was heavily blitzed in the 2006 war. 

Israel's top strategists are studying these massive missile transfers to hostile entities to find answers to a number of key questions:

1. Syria has destined some 250 surface missiles of its stockpile of 800 for Hizballah. Are they Scuds B, C and D whose ranges exceed 800 kilometers, or Iranian-Syrian made projectiles whose range is shorter?

2. Do the transfers mean Iran and its allies are gearing up for a major Middle East conflict in the months ahead, possibly in early 2010?

3. Will Syria hand over to Hizballah some of its chemicals-tipped missiles?

4. Will some batteries be installed atop the mountain ranges running down central Lebanon, together with air defense systems supplied at the same time by Syria?

Israel is particularly concerned by the Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt's recent decision to turn coat against the pro-Western camp led by Saad Hariri in favor of deals with Tehran and Damascus. 

Incorporated in these under-the-counter deals are secret military clauses which permit Hizballah to deploy its missiles on highlands of his Druze fief. Israel would think twice at least before attacking areas populated by Druze villages.

In the south, Iran's Revolutionary Guards terrorist arm, the Al Qods Brigades, its bending all its smuggling resources to getting the Fajr-5 missiles into the Gaza Strip, thereby extending Hamas' rocket range to 75 kilometers and central Israel. 

According to our intelligence sources, the rockets are traveling by sea from Iran to Hamas training bases in Sudan, dismantled into 8-10 segments , transported to the northern shores of the Gulf of Suez and unloaded in Sinai. From there the segments move through tunnels into the Gaza Strip.

Military sources wonder what the Netanyahu government is doing to halt the missile stranglehold tightening around Israel. Nothing is apparent as yet.

Official: Obama 'disgusted' With Israel
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily NewsWND
Categories: Commentary;Anti-Israel

U.S. officials in recent days expressed to the Palestinian Authority that President Obama's administration is "disgusted" with Israel, a top aide to PA President Mahmoud Abbas told WND in an interview. 

Nimr Hamad said the White House was disgusted that Israel is refusing to halt all settlement activity as a precondition for re-starting talks with the PA over the creation of a Palestinian state. "Settlement activity" refers to Jewish construction in the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem. 

Hamad repeated that the term "disgusted" was used more than once in recent meetings with U.S. envoys to describe the administration's attitude toward Israel. Hamad did not name the U.S. envoys using the terminology. 

George Mitchell, Obama's envoy for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just this week wrapped up a series of meetings with Israeli and Palestinian leaders over re-starting talks. 

Senior PA sources told WND yesterday the Obama administration urged them to begin publicly pressuring Israel, starting in March, to immediately withdraw from key areas in the West Bank and peripheral eastern Jerusalem sections in which the Palestinians currently maintain administrative control. 

The sources specified that as a confidence-building measure toward the PA, Israel will be asked by the Obama administration to hand over security control to territories designated in the 1993 Oslo Accords as Area B – referring to cities administered by the PA but largely controlled by Israeli security. The specific section of the Oslo Accords regarding control of Area B was finalized in 1995. 

Separately, a top PA source, speaking on condition his name be withheld, told WND two weeks ago 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.

Obama and Dalai Lama: Why Israel Worries About the U.S. President
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily Newsjewishworldreview.com
Categories: Commentary;The Nation Of Israel

According to the Jerusalem Post, as recently as six weeks ago, just 4 percent of the Jews of Israel regarded President Obama as pro-Israel. Even if exaggerated, it is likely the most negative Israeli view of an American president since Israel's creation.

If you think Israelis are irrational in this matter, perhaps Tibet will help persuade you otherwise.

Yes, Tibet.

Whereas every Democratic and Republican president since 1991 has met with exiled Tibetan leader, the Dalai Lama, when he visited the United States, President Obama has decided that he will not do so during the Tibetan leader's visit to the United States. The president does not wish to annoy China's dictators prior to his upcoming visit to Beijing. As US News & World Report reported, "The U.S. decision to postpone the meeting appears to be part of a strategy to improve ties with China that also includes soft-pedaling criticism of China's human rights ..."

This is particularly troubling to Israelis because it means that an American president is placing appeasement of strong dictators above America's traditional defense of embattled small countries. (One assumes that the Taiwanese are equally worried; and the Iranian fighters for liberty have come close to giving up on Obama's America.)

The line between selling out Tibetans and selling out Israelis is a direct one. Even liberal New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd was disturbed by the president's snubbing of the Dalai Lama:

"Dissing the Dalai was part of a broader new Obama policy called 'strategic reassurance' — softening criticism of China's human rights record and financial policies to calm its fears that America is trying to contain it ... the tyro American president got the Nobel for the mere anticipation that he would provide bold moral leadership for the world at the very moment he was caving to Chinese dictators. Awkward."

The world is quite aware of the importance of Mr. Obama's snubbing the Dalai Lama. Dowd noted that:

"In an interview with Alison Smale in The Times last week, Vaclav Havelm pricked Barack Obama's conscience. Havel (who led) the Czechs and Slovaks from communism to democracy, turned the tables and asked Smale a question about Obama. Was it true that the president had refused to meet the Dalai Lama on his visit to Washington?"

Those who worry about good and evil know that if America decides that the world's approval is important, evil will increase exponentially. Only an America willing to be disliked, even hated, will consistently support the smaller good guys against the bigger bad guys.

If America starts shaping its foreign policy based upon getting along well with everybody, it will become less tenable to support Israel. The number of people and countries that want Israel destroyed are far more numerous than tiny Israel and its people. The price of supporting free, democratic, tolerant Israel against its death-loving, totalitarian and authoritarian enemies is reduced popularity of America in those countries. And if America now values getting along well with everyone above moral considerations, the days of strong American support for Israel are numbered.

They may indeed be numbered for additional reasons. Having been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama may be even less inclined to consider an American attack, or in any way countenance an Israeli attack, on Iran's nuclear weapons facilities. A Nobel Peace Prize laureate isn't supposed to support, much less initiate, first strikes.

Additionally, the president, given his yearning for a nuclear weapons-free world, may support an Iranian offer to disband its nuclear weapons program if Israel is forced to abandon its nuclear arsenal.

All this combined with the economically weakest America in memory — increasingly dependent on other countries to help prevent the dollar from becoming more like Monopoly money — means that the 96 percent of Israelis who do feel they cannot rely on this president of the United States as they have on prior presidents is, unfortunately, not irrational.

This president characterizes his presidency as essentially the opposite of that of his predecessor, George W. Bush. He may be right, as reflected by this note from the Washington Post: "The last time he (the Dalai Lama) was here, in 2007, George W. Bush became the first sitting president to meet with him publicly, at a ceremony at the Capitol in which he awarded the Dalai Lama the Congressional Gold Medal, Congress's highest civilian award."

If you were Israeli, which American president would you feel more secure with — the first one in 18 years who refused to meet with the Dalai Lama or the first one ever to meet with him publicly and give him a public honor?

Israel Confirms Settlers Ramping Up West Bank Construction
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily NewsHaaretz .com - Amos Harel
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

The defense establishment confirmed that in recent weeks West Bank settlers have been making a noticeable effort to expedite construction, in an attempt to maximize the "facts on the ground" before the United States and Israel reach an agreement on a settlement freeze.

A senior security source said this week that the defense establishment's view on the situation was reflected in reports published in Haaretz last Friday, which stated that extensive construction is currently being carried out in at least 11 settlements.

"The settlers are very much in tune with the ticking political clock," the senior defense source said. "You can sense it on the ground, with the infrastructure work that is being done, but also in more minor things. They are acting without any legal authorization and are ignoring the state.

"The approach at this time is that whoever can, goes ahead and builds," the source continued. "It begins with the official leadership of the Yesha Council [of settlements] and ends with the hilltop youth."

He pointed out that the phenomenon of unbridled construction is evident in both the more established settlements and in the illegal outposts.

"Whoever can, lays the floor in preparation for constructing a building; and in factories they add extensions to roofs. In some settlements, they've built factories for rapid construction of caravans on site, so that they can bypass the ban - on transporting caravans - which was issued by the Civil Administration. Everything was done with the intent of creating a critical mass in many different locations at once, which will make evacuation in the future [more] difficult," he said.

"They are well aware of the historical precedent: after all, all sides - the Americans, the Israelis, the Palestinians - are now talking of a permanent settlement that will include the settlement blocs in Israeli territory. This is happening because of previous construction in those locations," the source added.

The senior defense source acknowledged that the measures that have been adopted by the defense establishment to counter the new construction are limited in their scope. "Wherever it involves limited housing, they are evacuated. In other places, where they manage to [get there before] us, the IDF secures warrants - but this does not necessarily result in evacuation," he said.

Eu States Near Agreement on Diplomatic Service
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily NewsEUobserver - ANDREW RETTMAN
Categories: Today's Headlines;Revived Roman Empire

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - 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 10-page Swedish report - obtained by EUobserver - was submitted to EU ambassadors on Thursday (22 October) and represents a synthesis of Stockholm's consultations with the other 26 EU capitals in recent weeks.

The post of EU foreign minister or "high representative" for foreign affairs and a new EU diplomatic corps or "European External Action Service" (EEAS) are to be created following the entry into life of the EU's Lisbon Treaty.

The Swedish paper envisages a minister in charge of a unique "sui generis" institution with its own section in the EU budget alongside the European Commission, the EU parliament and the Council, the Brussels-based secretariat which prepares regular meetings of EU ministers.

The foreign minister is to propose how much money he needs each year, authorise spending, appoint his own staff and take charge of the European Commission's existing delegations across the world.

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. It is also set to take charge of the Situation Centre, the EU member states' intelligence-sharing hub in Brussels.

The EU diplomatic corps will not be responsible for trade, development or enlargement policy, which are to stay European Commission domains. But it is to have internal cells dealing with developing countries and enlargement candidates which will "play a leading role in the strategic decision-making" on commission programmes such as the European Development Fund.

No free rein

The new foreign policy body will not act entirely on its own accord, however.

The foreign minister is to "prepare" foreign policy initiatives, but "decisions" are to be made by EU member states at intergovernmental level, while the commission is to play an extensive role in the "technical implementation" of projects.

Member states' own embassies will continue to provide diplomatic and consular protection for EU citizens abroad.

Any initiatives which intrude on the commission's trade, enlargement or development work are to be prepared "jointly" by the foreign minister and the commissioner in charge of the portfolio and adopted by the college of commissioners.

The European Parliament is also to play a modest role.

"The High Representative should regularly consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the CSFP/CSDP [EU foreign and security policy]. Close contacts with the European Parliament will take place at working level," the Swedish text says.

Balancing act

In terms of staffing, the diplomatic corps is to suck in people from the commission, member states' foreign ministries and the Council. One third of senior or "AD level" staff is to come from member states.

People are to be hired keeping in mind the need to maintain "geographic balance" across the EU and "gender balance." Staff will be rotated into the EEAS and then back out into their old jobs, with diplomats from EU states temporarily becoming EU officials on equal pay and perks to colleagues from Brussels.

The Swedish paper envisages the EU foreign minister making a final proposal on the shape of the EEAS by April 2010, with the current blueprint showing the parameters of what member states are willing to accept. The new institution should reach "full cruising speed" by 2012 and undergo a thorough review in 2014.

1,000 Priests Could Quit the Church of England to Join Catholic Church
Oct 24th, 2009
Daily Newstimesonline.co.uk
Categories: Today's Headlines;One World Church

As many as 1,000 priests could quit the Church of England and thousands more may leave churches in America and Australia under bold proposals to welcome Anglicans to Rome. 

Entire parishes and even dioceses could be tempted to defect after Pope Benedict XVI’s decision to offer a legal structure to Anglicans joining the Roman Catholic Church. 

His decree, issued yesterday, is a serious blow to attempts by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, to save the Anglican Communion from further fragmentation and threatens to wreck decades of ecumenical dialogue. 

Dr Williams was notified formally only last weekend by the Vatican and looked uncomfortable at a joint press conference with the Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, to announce the plan. 

Anglicans privately accused Rome of poaching and attacked Dr Williams for capitulating to the Vatican. Some called for his resignation. Although there was little he could have done to forestall the move, many were dismayed at his joint statement with the Archbishop of Westminster in which they spoke of Anglicans “willing to declare that they share a common Catholic faith and accept the Petrine ministry as willed by Christ for his Church”. 

In a letter to bishops and clergy, Dr Williams made clear his own discomfiture. He wrote: “I am sorry that there has been no opportunity to alert you earlier to this. I was informed of the planned announcement at a very late stage.” 

The Bishop of Fulham, the Right Rev John Broadhurst, chairman of Forward in Faith, which opposes women bishops, hailed it as a “decisive moment” and predicted that, based on his group’s membership, up to 1,000 Church of England clergy could go. 

Christina Rees, of the pro-women group Watch, described the Vatican’s move as poaching. She said: “It is one thing to offer a welcome, but this seems to be a particularly effusive welcome where people are almost being encouraged. In the Anglican Church we like to operate with transparency. If this has not been done here that will add to the sense of this being a predatory move.” 

Pope Benedict wants to make Christian unity an enduring legacy of his papacy. He is due to visit Britain next year; Dr Williams will visit Rome next month. The Pope has already shown his determination to reunite Christendom at almost any price, welcoming back the traditionalist Society of Saint Pius X despite a Holocaust-denying bishop in its ranks. 

Under the plan, the Pope will issue an apostolic constitution, a form of papal decree, that will lead to the creation of “personal ordinariates” for Anglicans who convert to Rome. 

These will provide a legal framework to allow Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving distinctive elements of their Anglican identity, such as liturgy. Clergy will have to be retrained and re-ordained, since Rome regards Anglican orders as “absolutely null and utterly void”, but they will be granted their own seminaries to train future priests for the new ordinariate. 

This deal was done with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly the Holy Inquisition that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger himself headed before he became Pope. 

The Council for Christian Unity was not represented at simultaneous press conferences in Rome and London, suggesting that the Pope has had enough of dialogue focusing on canonical moves towards unity. Dr Williams was briefed formally only when Cardinal William Levada, of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, flew to London at the weekend to tell Anglican and Catholic leaders of the plans. It is understood that leading members of the council and other senior Anglican and Catholic figures tried desperately to block the decree. 

One result of the Vatican’s move is that women bishops are likely to be consecrated sooner rather than later in the Church of England. This is because Parliament and the General Synod will not sanction legal structures to “safeguard” opponents of women priests within the Church if Rome is offering an open door with the Archbishop of Canterbury’s blessing. 

Dr Williams said that the announcement did not disrupt “business as usual” in relations between the two churches. It would be a serious mistake to view the development as a response to the difficulties within the Anglican Communion, he said. It was aimed at people who had reached a “conscientious conviction that visible unity with the Holy See was now what God was calling them to”, he said. “It is not a secret that in this country the ordination of women as bishops is one of those test issues.”