Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

When Armageddon Lives Next Door
Apr 16th, 2010
Daily Newslatimes.com - Benny Morris
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Warning

Obama is denying Israel the right to self-defense when it is not his, or America's, life that is on the line.

I take it personally: Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, wants to murder me, my family and my people. Day in, day out, he announces the imminent demise of the "Zionist regime," by which he means Israel. And day in, day out, his scientists and technicians are advancing toward the atomic weaponry that will enable him to bring this about.

The Jews of Europe (and Poles, Russians, Czechs, the French, etc.) should likewise have taken personally Adolf Hitler's threats and his serial defiance of the international community from 1933 to 1939. But he was allowed, by the major powers and the League of Nations, to flex his muscles, rearm, remilitarize the Rhineland and then gobble up neighboring countries. Had he been stopped before the invasion of Poland and the start of World War II, the lives of many millions, Jews and Gentiles, would have been saved. But he wasn't.

And it doesn't look like Ahmadinejad will be either. Not by the United States and the international community, at any rate. President Obama, when not obsessing over the fate of the ever- aggrieved Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, proposes to halt Ahmadinejad's nuclear program by means of international sanctions. But here's the paradox: The wider Obama casts his net to mobilize as many of the world's key players as he can, the weaker the sanctions and the more remote their implementation. China, it appears, will only agree to a U.N. Security Council resolution if the sanctions are diluted to the point of meaninglessness (and maybe not even then). The same appears to apply to the Russians. Meanwhile, Iran advances toward the bomb. Most of the world's intelligence agencies believe that it is only one to three years away.

Perhaps Obama hopes to unilaterally implement far more biting American (and, perhaps, European) sanctions. But if China and Russia (and some European Union members) don't play ball, the sanctions will remain ineffective. And Iran will continue on its deadly course.

At the end of 2007, the U.S. intelligence community, driven by wishful thinking, expediency and incompetence, announced that the Iranians had in 2003 halted the weaponization part of their nuclear program. Last week, Obama explicitly contradicted that assessment. At least the American administration now publicly acknowledges where it is the Iranians are headed, while not yet acknowledging what it is they are after -- primarily Israel's destruction.

Granted, Obama has indeed tried to mobilize the international community for sanctions. But it has been a hopeless task, given the selfishness and shortsightedness of governments and peoples. Sanctions were supposed to kick in in autumn 2009; then it was December; now it is sometime late this year. Obama is still pushing the rock up the hill -- and Ahmadinejad, understandably, has taken to publicly scoffing at the West and its "sanctions."

He does this because he knows that sanctions, if they are ever passed, are likely to be toothless, and because the American military option has been removed from the table. Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates -- driven by a military that feels overstretched in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq and a public that has no stomach for more war -- have made this last point crystal clear.

But at the same time, Obama insists that Israel may not launch a preemptive military strike of its own. Give sanctions a chance, he says. (Last year he argued that diplomacy and "engagement" with Tehran should be given a chance. Tehran wasn't impressed then and isn't impressed now.) The problem is that even if severe sanctions are imposed, they likely won't have time to have serious effect before Iran succeeds at making a bomb.

Obama is, no doubt, well aware of this asymmetric timetable. Which makes his prohibition against an Israeli preemptive strike all the more immoral. He knows that any sanctions he manages to orchestrate will not stop the Iranians. (Indeed, Ahmadinejad last week said sanctions would only fortify Iran's resolve and consolidate its technological prowess.) Obama is effectively denying Israel the right to self-defense when it is not his, or America's, life that is on the line.

Perhaps Obama has privately resigned himself to Iran's nuclear ambitions and believes, or hopes, that deterrence will prevent Tehran from unleashing its nuclear arsenal. But what if deterrence won't do the trick? What if the mullahs, believing they are carrying out Allah's will and enjoy divine protection, are undeterred?

The American veto may ultimately consign millions of Israelis, including me and my family, to a premature death and Israel to politicide. It would then be comparable to Britain and France's veto in the fall of 1938 of the Czechs defending their territorial integrity against their rapacious Nazi neighbors. Within six months, Czechoslovakia was gobbled up by Germany.

But will Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu follow in Czech President Edvard Benes' footsteps? Will he allow an American veto to override Israel's existential interests? And can Israel go it alone, without an American green (or even yellow) light, without American political cover and overflight permissions and additional American equipment? Much depends on what the Israeli military and intelligence chiefs believe their forces -- air force, navy, commandos -- can achieve. Full destruction of the Iranian nuclear project? A long-term delay? And on how they view Israel's ability (with or without U.S. support) to weather the reaction from Iran and its proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas and Syria.

An Israeli attack might harm U.S. interests and disrupt international oil supplies (though I doubt it would cause direct attacks on U.S. installations, troops or vessels). But, from the Israeli perspective, these are necessarily marginal considerations when compared with the mortal hurt Israel and Israelis would suffer from an Iranian nuclear attack. Netanyahu's calculations will, in the end, be governed by his perception of Israel's existential imperatives. And the clock is ticking.

Volcanic Ash Halts Much of Northern Europe Air Travel
Apr 16th, 2010
Daily NewsReuters - Michael Holden
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

LONDON  - A huge ash cloud from an Icelandic volcano spread out across Europe on Friday causing air travel chaos on a scale not seen since the Sept. 11 attacks.

About 17,000 flights were expected to be cancelled on Friday due to the dangers posed for a second day by volcanic ash from Iceland, aviation officials said. Airports in Britain, France, Germany, and across Europe were closed until at least Saturday.

"I would think Europe was probably experiencing its greatest disruption to air travel since 9/11," said a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority, Britain's aviation regulator.

"In terms of closure of airspace, this is worse than after 9/11. The disruption is probably larger than anything we've probably seen."

Following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on Washington and New York, U.S. airspace was closed for three days and European airlines were forced to halt all transatlantic services.

Vulcanologists say the ash could cause problems to air traffic for up to 6 months if the eruption continues, but even if it is short-lived the financial impact on airlines could be significant.

The fallout hit airlines' shares on Friday with Lufthansa, British Airways, Air Berlin, Air France-KLM, Iberia and Ryanair down between 0.8 and 2.2 percent.

The International Air Transport Association said only days ago that airlines were just coming out of recession.

Uk Authority: Western Wall not in Israel
Apr 16th, 2010
Daily NewsYnet News
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel

Advertising Standards Authority wants tourism ads showing holy site removed because it implies 'occupied territories are part of Israel'

The British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) criticized Israel for including pictures of the Western Wall in a tourism advertisement, claiming that the holy site is technically not located within the country's borders, the Independent reported Wednesday.

"We told the Israeli Tourist Office not to imply that places in the Occupied Territories were part of the state of Israel," ASA, which is a public organization but not government-funded, said in a statement.

It was not the first time the organization had been called upon by the British public to remove Israeli ads. One year ago ASA ordered the Israeli Tourism Ministry to remove posters displaying a map of Israel that included the West Bank and the Golan Heights within its borders from London's Underground, after receiving 300 letters of protest.

The current case was also brought to ASA's attention by a "concerned citizen" who said the ad was misleading as it implies that east Jerusalem, under Israeli law since 1967, was a part of the state.

The poster, which is comprised mostly of a photo displaying a Tel Aviv beach, included a tiny picture of Temple Mount at the bottom.

"The ASA noted the itinerary image of Jerusalem used in the ad featured the Western Wall of the Temple Mount and the Dome of the Rock, which were both in East Jerusalem, a part of the Occupied Territories of the West Bank," ASA stated.

"We noted the ad stated 'You can travel the entire length of Israel in six hours – imagine what you can experience in four days', and 'Visit now for more itineraries in Israel', and considered that readers were likely to understand that the places featured in the itinerary were all within the state of Israel.

"We understood, however, that the status of the occupied territory of the West Bank was the subject of much international dispute, and, because we considered that the ad implied that the part of East Jerusalem featured in the image was part of the state of Israel, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead."

Israel: Ad is entirely accurate

But unlike its previous dispute with ASA, the Tourism Ministry did not capitulate and responded that the ad provides "basic, accurate information to a prospective UK traveler who wanted to know what to expect in Israel".

"It is entirely accurate to assert that a visitor to Israel could visit Jerusalem as part of a short visit. Had the ad omitted a reference to a visit to the city of Jerusalem, it would have been incorrect and potentially misleading," the response says.

It adds that Israel "took responsibility to support the religious sites of all denominations, a commitment which also formed part of the obligations of an agreement with the Palestinian Authority signed in 1995", and that "the agreement placed the upkeep of holy sites and the determination of tourist visiting hours under Israeli jurisdiction".

The ministry added that Jerusalem's legal status was irrelevant to the issue at hand. "It is only of relevance if there was an attempt to interpret the straightforward message of the ad in a manner that went beyond what consumers were likely to understand from the ad," the statement says.

Surrendering An Ally is No Strategy At All
Apr 16th, 2010
Daily NewsWesley Pruden
Categories: Commentary;Warning

Barack Obama has come up with an interesting strategy for dealing with the evildoers of the world. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Surrender your friends, if necessary.

He wants to make Israel, our oldest and only reliable friend in the Middle East, the guinea pig to see whether the strategy works. What appeared to be a minor flap between old friends only a fortnight ago now looks like an exploitable opportunity for the man who learned about who's evil in the world from a crazy Jew-baiting preacher in Chicago.

The public scolding of Israel and the warning that it must make nice with those determined to "wipe it off the map" are now revealed to be tactics in the plan to make the Middle East over in a way to please the Islamic radicals. The observant among us have seen this coming. America's true friends - Britain, Canada, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Norway and Poland in addition to Israel - have been getting the back of Mr. Obama's hand from the day he took his oath. The commitment to constitutional government and the ancient traditions of intellectual freedom that make up the cultural heritage of the West have been snubbed when not ignored, the natural allies of America lectured to when not insulted.

We're told that it's not nice, and maybe even racist, to notice that Michelle Obama, the elegant first lady who does so many things well, has cultivated her husband's talent for strategic snobbery. She once conceded that she only became proud of America when her husband got to the brink of the presidency, and in a remarkable video of a 2008 appearance that surfaced only this spring, she told of their visiting "his home country in Kenya." Unless she was conceding that she, too, is a "birther," she meant that Kenya is his ancestral and cultural home. This could explain a lot, and it certainly offers insights now into his determination to discard the Israelis in the affections of Americans and replace them with nations alien to the affections of most Americans. Why retain an emotional attachment to the sources of American law and literature when you could bow to the Saudi king and court the leaders of Iran, Syria and Venezuela?

Nothing would please the enemies and adversaries of America - the "outliers," in the trendy term of the moment - like putting the Jews in their place. Mr. Obama and some of his wise men, particularly in the State Department, which has traditionally looked for occasions to lend a hand to the Arab tormentors of Israel, now see their opportunity to impose a "settlement" of the dispute between Israel and the Palestinians. Mr. Obama finally put his game in play this week when he told a press conference that resolving the conflict was "a vital national security interest of the United States." Describing the conflict in these not-so-vague terms gives him the opportunity to prescribe any solution, however malignant or fanciful, just that way. The president, any president, must put the "vital national security interest" of the United States first and foremost. Who could argue with that?

Presidents before him, Democrat and Republican, have regarded Israel's right to survive as unquestioned and inviolate, bound up with America's own traditions of democratic government, and Mr. Obama continues to pay lip service to the American vow to defend Israel's right to survive. But lip service is not much defense against rockets, gunfire and suicide bombs and the contempt of the despots of the world. Conflicts like the continuing small-bore war in the Middle East end up, the president says, "costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure." Anyone can see where that argument goes.

This is of a piece with the remarks of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, to Congress that "the lack of progress" in the Middle East creates a "hostile environment" for the United States. True enough, and the general's frustration is understandable (and shared). Wars have always been dangerous places to be, which is exactly why we send soldiers to such places. If only the Germans had not been so hostile, the Americans and the British could have had a day at the beach on D-Day. Alas, hostile the environment was, and there was no picnic. But the civilized world can be glad it never occurred to President Roosevelt to surrender France.

Eric Cantor: Israel a Key Strategic Ally in Middle East
Apr 16th, 2010
Daily NewsJpost.com
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor issued a harsh response Thursday to US President Barack Obama’s remarks in Tuesday's New York Times that Israel may be “costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure.”

“Israel is a democracy that has always made the sacrifices necessary for peace despite living under constant threats to their very existence. The true barrier to ending the Mideast conflict is the widespread Palestinian refusal to accept and to live alongside Israel as a Jewish state," said Cantor. "While Israel continues its search for a reliable partner in peace, Palestinian terrorism is still celebrated in the West Bank and Gaza. Despite this reality, since day one the White House has applied a severe double standard that refuses to hold the Palestinians accountable for their many provocations. It makes one wonder where the responsible adults are in the administration?"

He said that with each passing day more Americans were becoming increasingly concerned about the deteriorating state of US-Israel relations, adding that he "couldn’t agree more" with the concerns expressed in a letter from World Jewish Congress President Ron Lauder.

"The American people understand that Israel is a key strategic ally in the Middle East, one that we should stand with in our mutual struggle to prevent the spread of Islamic extremism and a nuclear Iran," Cantor concluded.

Clinton Pushes Israel, not Pa, to Take Risks for Peace
Apr 16th, 2010
Daily NewsArutz Sheva - Maayana Miskin
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Peace Process

United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has increased the pressure on Israel again to strengthen the PLO and Fatah and make concessions to the Palestinian Authority. The pressure is an apparent response to an impasse in talks between Israel and the PA, which has refused to hold direct negotiations. It is in direct contradiction to Obama's recent remarks about not continuing to concentrate on the Middle East, since he sees no progress after all the U.S. efforts to start talks.

Clinton spoke Thursday at the opening of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace think tank. While she called for the PA, led by Mahmoud Abbas, to end its incitement against Israel, she had a number of steps for Israel to take.

"We encourage Israel to continue building momentum toward a comprehensive peace by demonstrating respect for the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, stopping settlement activity and addressing the humanitarian needs in Gaza,” she said. “And to refrain from unilateral statements and actions that could undermine trust or risk prejudicing the outcome of talks.”

Israel must strengthen the PA and the PLO in order to counter Hamas, Clinton said. “Israel can and should do more to support the Palestinian Authority's efforts to build credible institutions and deliver results,” she argued.

Clinton praised Abbas's work in the PA, but said that if Abbas is seen as unable to get results, “there is no doubt his support will fade and Palestinians will turn to alternatives – including Hamas.”

As Israel has halted construction in Judea and Samaria's Jewish communities, Clinton's reference to “settlement activity” was apparently in regard to the construction of Jewish homes in Jerusalem. Israel's capital city was split in 1949 as Jordan seized half the city, and reunited in 1967 during the Six Day War.

Israel has declared united Jerusalem as its capital. The PA has demanded that those areas that were under Jordanian control for 18 years be given to the PA as the capital of a future Arab state.

When Clinton served as senator of New York she supported Israel's position, stating that Jerusalem's status as Israel's undivided capital “must never be questioned.” However, since her appointment as President Barack Obama's secretary of state, Clinton has changed her position in favor of the PA, and recently called the construction of housing in the Jewish neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo “insulting”.

Following the Obama administration's insistence that Israel cease construction in much of Jerusalem, the PA took up the same demand and PA leaders have now stated that they will not hold direct talks with Israel as long as Jews are allowed to build in areas once under Jordanian control – including historically Jewish neighborhoods such as the Old City.