Mossad Joins Hunt For al-Qaeda

Mossad Joins Hunt For al-Qaeda
Vol: 14 Issue: 30 Saturday, November 30, 2002

Mossad Joins Hunt For al-Qaeda

The simultaneous terrorist attacks against separate Israeli targets on two continents raises the stakes for all concerned; for Israel, certainly, and for Washington. Israel has just been thrust onto the front lines of the war against al-Qaeda while the lines between Palestinian terrorism and al-Qaeda are sufficiently blurred as to make them one and the same.

An attack on an Israeli target, just like an attack against Israel itself, aims to strike at the spearhead of Western culture in the Middle East.

The state of Israel is portrayed by Wahabi Islamic fundamentalists as a symbol of the infiltration of the West into the Arab-Muslim culture.

As one Israeli analyst at the International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism at Herzliya’s Interdisciplinary Center observed, an attack on an Israeli target, just like an attack against Israel itself, aims to strike at the spearhead of Western culture in the Middle East.

The State of Israel is perceived by this particular breed of Wahabi Islam as a symbol of the infiltration of the West into the Arab-Muslim culture.

It is important to realize Israel is not the CAUSE of the wave of radical Islamic terrorism washing over the world, but rather its chief VICTIM because of its identification with the West and because of its very location in this part of the world.

These radical Islamic organizations, who purport to represent the oppressed and poor Muslims hurt and continue hurting the very sector they claim to represent.

Their activities are not part of the struggle by the poor against western globalization. Instead, see it more as a cynical exploitation and brainwash of the Muslim masses by Muslim extremists.

These are those of whom President Bush was speaking when he spoke of those few who hijacked ‘pure’ Islam. Bush got it right, but he got it backwards. While pure Islam IS the kind that spawns terrorism, the modified and modernized Islam practiced by the majority of global Islam is not.

Still, if the radicalized Islam of al-Qaeda accounts for even one percent of global Islam, that adds up to as many as TWENTY MILLION potential enemies of the West out of the 1.9 billion worldwide adherents to Islam today.

Assessment:

Israel has been drawn into a wider war on terrorism — George Bush’s war, as distinct from the endless bloodletting at home in Israel against Palestinian militant groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah.

Defense Minister Shaul Mofez declared, “Our long arm will get (those responsible)” — a reminder that Israel does not let such acts go unpunished either at home or abroad.

Sharon reportedly declared that there would be “no forgiveness” for the perpetrators of both the bombing in Kenya and the attack at the Beit Shean polling station.

Israeli press reports said Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had ordered the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence organization, to start an immediate investigation.

It is fair to say that al-Qaeda probably didn’t think this through. The only military on earth capable of meeting al-Qaeda on a level battlefield environment is Israel.

While the United States responded to 9/11 by using anvils to squash mosquitoes in Afghanistan, Israel has been waging offensive assymetrical warfare since its rebirth in 1948.

The Mossad is the only agency on earth capable of matching al-Qaeda in stealth, determination, and, above all, ruthlessness.

After the 1972 Munich Olympics Massacre, the Mossad created a twelve man team with only one assignment. Track down the planners of the massacre, and liquidate them where ever you find them.

The team traveled the globe for almost a decade, conducting systematic assassinations until only George Habash remained. The team was closing in on him when Israel pulled the plug on the operation.

The Israelis kept the team small and detached to prevent the political fallout such an assassination team would have engendered if discovered. But the world was not engaged in a global assymetrical war on terror in the 1970’s — it is now.

Israel needn’t worry about keeping the team small, or secret, or concern itself with public reaction. Israel is fighting for its life, and it WILL have its vengeance against al-Qaeda.

This enormously complicates the prospects for limiting the war in Iraq. So far, the U.S.-led mission against Iraq has relied on willing support of Britain and some other European allies (Spain and Italy, for example) and the tacit backing of moderate Arab states.

To boost its legitimacy, Bush has included the anti-Iraq offensive in the context of the war on terrorism. But if Israel becomes a de facto participant, strategic Arab states whose logistical support would be vital in any military action may withdraw their cooperation.

Earlier this year, Bush had secured Sharon’s commitment that, in the event of an attack on Iraq, the Israelis would stay out of the fray — unless Israel was itself attacked. Following the Mombasa bombing, however, all bets are off.

Blurring the lines between the Palestinians and al-Qaeda means erasing the “no-Jews allowed” lines drawn around the Arab Middle Eastern states, including Iraq.

Israel continues to be governed by the rules of engagement set forth in the Law of Moses, something that al-Qaeda doesn’t have to worry about when fighting the Christian West.

“And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it: And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:” Deuteronomy 20:12-13]

While those are the only rules of engagement that will work against al-Qaeda, it will only hasten the day spoken of by the prophet Zechariah who said that in the last days, the whole world will gather itself against Israel, over the city of Jerusalem and the territories of Samaria and Judea [the modern West Bank]

“And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for ALL people: ALL that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, THOUGH ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE EARTH be gathered together against it.” [Zechariah 12:2]

The stage continues to be set for this coming confrontation. For the Christian, the gathering storm over the Middle East is cause for rejoicing, in spite of the gloomy outlook. It means Jesus’ return is even closer than we had believed.

It is WHEN the whole world gathers to force Israel to give up Jerusalem that, according to the prophet, “. . I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” [Zechariah 12:10]

Events continue to conspire together to bring about the exact scenarios prophesied for the last days before the return of the King. The signs of the times are writ large in the pages of the daily newspapers.

Get ready. Oh, and tell your friends.

The Muslim Who Canceled Christmas

The Muslim Who Canceled Christmas
Vol: 14 Issue: 29 Friday, November 29, 2002

Yasser Arafat has decided to punish Israel for reoccupying Bethlehem by canceling Christmas. Speaking to reporters at his Ramallah office, Arafat called the army’s decision to declare Bethlehem a closed military zone until the end of the year a “crime.”

“These [Israeli] measures mean that there is no Christmas this year,” Arafat said. Wow! Now that’s power! Arafat, a Muslim, to punish Israel, a Jewish state, has decided to cancel Christmas, a Christian holiday. Gee, can he DO that?

It’s ok, though. Arafat the Muslim says that if the Jewish State behaves itself, he’ll un-cancel the Christian Christmas in Bethlehem. Speaking through Palestinian ‘sources’ Arafat let it be known that his decision would be rescinded if the IDF leaves the city.

Immediately after cancelling Christmas, Arafat appealed directly to the Pope to intervene, according to the Jerusalem Post. (“Stop me, before I cancel New Year’s and Easter!”) He took his case to the ‘international community’ (the media) as well, demanding they condemn the Israeli ‘invasion’ of Bethlehem and demanding they put pressure on the Israelis to pull out.

But every single time Israel DOES pull out, the terrorists regroup and attack another Israeli target. So Arafat is, in essence, using the occasion of the Birth of Christ to clear the way for additional murders against Israeli women and children.

As Israelis gathered to vote, two terrorists attacked a voting station, shooting several, coming in conjunction with the attacks against an Israeli airliner and a Kenyan hotel popular with Israelis.

According to statistics compiled by the IDF, as of November 17, 2002, there had been a total of 15,298 Palestinian terror attacks against Israel since the intifada began in September 2000.

No other modern state has endured that many attacks in a two year period. Arafat and Company have set a record that nobody hopes to ever see broken.

And now, having already taken Israeli security hostage and while holding the rest of the Middle East hostage, threatening to plunge the entire region into war if his demands are not met, Arafat decided this would be a good time to take Christmas hostage.

“The most dangerous escalation is the closure of Bethlehem, which will last until the end of December. There won’t be any Christmas,” Arafat told reporters outside his battered compound in the West Bank town of Ramallah.

The re-occupation of Bethlehem constitutes an “international crime” about which “the world is staying silent, it is hard to believe!” he said.

What is hard to believe is that nobody has pointed out to Yasser Arafat that he agreed, in return for an Israeli pullout, that he would personally guarantee free access to the holy places revered by Christians and Jews, as well as those sacred to Islam.

Assessment

Last year, Arafat declared Jesus a Muslim and made a big show of trying to attend the Catholic Christmas Mass after being forbidden to do so by Israel. Arafat got fabulous global coverage, portraying him as a victim if Israeli religious ‘intolerance’. (Remember – Arafat-Muslim, Israel-Jew, Christmas – Christian — how did Christ get involved, here?)

A declaration by Yasser Arafat that Jesus was a Muslim does not make Arafat a Catholic. In any case, barring Muslim Arafat from attending Christian Mass last year was ‘Israeli religious intolerance’ but nobody is calling Muslim Arafat ‘intolerant’ for canceling Christmas for Christians.

Am I the only one wondering what that is all about? I note that Israel denying a Muslim his Christmas celebration is intolerant, but a Muslim denying the Christian world the same thing is not.

Why is that? Well, here’s a hint. Both Christians and Jews worship the God of the Bible. Islam does not.

Here’s how Jesus (the One Whose Birth is celebrated at Christmas) explained it. “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” (John 15:19)

Gay Rights And Century 21

Gay Rights And Century 21
Vol: 14 Issue: 28 Thursday, November 28, 2002

Pennsylvania became the most recent in a long line of states who have passed special protection legislation to protect homosexuals and homosexual conduct by issuing homosexuals privileged minority status.

The bill, which passed the House on Tuesday by a vote of 118 to 79, adds ”ancestry, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity” to the state’s Ethnic Intimidation law, which already raises the grade of crimes motivated by hatred against victims because of their race, color, religion or national origin.

Although the bill’s opponents argued the bill violated the principle of equal justice for all in a fierce 90 minute debate, the bill passed 118 to 79.

“With this law, we’re stripping away the blindfold which has been used for centuries to indicate that Lady Justice doesn’t see the person who committed the crime but is only considering the facts,” said Rep. Allan Egolf, R-Landisburg.

“We should be looking at the crime … not trying to decide what the thoughts were of the perpetrator,” he added.

WND columnist Felicia Dionisio noted that opponents worry the law could be enforced too liberally to include, among other things, preachers quoting passages from the Bible against homosexual activity.

William Devlin, of the Urban Family Council, sees it the same way.

He says although hate-crimes legislation isn’t unusual, a bill that specifically mentions speech and verbal harassment with “malicious intent” is unusual.

“This bill is so broad, that if you have an attender at your church who feels offended or intimidated by what is said from the pulpit, you and your church leadership will be receiving certified letters inviting you to either a deposition or a court appearance,” he said.

Although hate-crimes legislation isn’t unusual, a bill that specifically mentions speech and verbal harassment with “malicious intent” is unusual.

“This bill is so broad, that if you have an attender at your church who feels offended or intimidated by what is said from the pulpit, you and your church leadership will be receiving certified letters inviting you to either a deposition or a court appearance,” Devlin said.

Also very interesting about this piece of legislation are its champions. Not just the usual gay rights lobby, but also Stewart Greenleaf, the chair of the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee. Greenleaf claims to be a born-again Christian and was formerly a deacon in the American Presbyterian Church.

The bill, which passed the Senate last year, 32-15, now heads for the desk of Gov. Mark Schweiker, who has promised to sign it.

Assessment:

Similar legislation extending protected minority status to homosexuals in recent months include Maryland, Vermont, Florida and elsewhere. In other states, the issue of extending special status to homosexuals is deeply divisive.

Conservative lawmakers in Kentucky, noting with alarm the number of cities and counties in the state banning discrimination against sexual orientation, are preparing to push for passage of a statewide law next year that would prohibit adoption of local gay civil rights ordinances.

The Kentucky Post reports Democratic State Rep. Tom Kerr has begun drafting a bill that would forbid counties and municipalities from granting legal protection to gay men and lesbians and would void local gay-rights laws already in place.

Setting everything else aside, all arguments from all quarters, there remains one burning question. If protected minority status is extended based on lifestyle choices, what does that mean for members of actual minorities, like blacks or Latinos? If one can become a ‘minority by declaration’ so to speak, then what actual protection is actually there?

If a well-educated white male of European origin can compete on an even footing with disadvantaged minorities simply by claiming gay rights equality, then where is the protection for the disadvantaged minority?

What will be the determining factor? A black American or a Latino American’s minority status is self-evident – that is why protected status is extended in the first place. A homosexual’s minority status kicks in when he decides he wants to claim it. So would a straight white male of European origin, should he want to avail himself of it. And new laws passed to protect homosexuals who announce their sexual preference also forbid anyone from teasing the straight guy that decided he was tired of standing at the end of the line.

Now, to the real argument. It is already illegal in many places, including Canada, to call homosexual conduct a sin. The Bible says otherwise. Leviticus 18:22 calls it an ‘abomination’. Genesis 13-19 tells the story of the destruction of Sodom. Sodom’s sin was rampant homosexuality, although new ‘scholarship’ says that interpretation is ‘erroneous’ and ‘homophobic’.

Really? How come all the new gay rights laws specifically remove ‘sodomy’ from states’ criminal codes?

But Deuteronomy 23:17 demolishes this revisionist argument, leaving no doubt what the sin of Sodom was.

“There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.”

The argument that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition seems powerful to the layman — many Christians are being convinced by the alleged science behind it. And those who can’t quite ignore the OT but still want to be politically correct point out that the Old Testament Law was fulfilled at the Cross. (That’s the exasperated, ‘We don’t stone homosexuals anymore, do we?’ argument.

But the New Testament provides no hint that God changed His mind.

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (Romans 1:26-27)

It is illegal to connect that ‘recompence of their error’ that Paul says was ‘meet’ (appropriate) with the fact the AIDS epidemic is officially traced back to Patient Zero, a homosexual flight attendant who frequented gay bath houses at each port of call. Or that it is an epidemic against which the only protection is a Godly, monogamous lifestyle. (And no exposure via medical procedures, I know. But where did the infected blood plasma supply come from in the first place?)

Paul continues, “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.” (Romans 1:28-32)

That’s a pretty strong New Testament admonition, as I read it. Again, there are revisionists who argue that it doesn’t mean what it says — read it yourself.

I may well be breaking the law in sending this issue of the Omega Letter Intelligence Digest in the place where you live because I am not pretending the Bible is incorrect on this issue.

But I would be breaking God’s Law if I did. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16)

I might even be labeled a ‘homophobe’ — whatever that means. I am not afraid of homosexuals. I am afraid FOR them. “Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them,” Paul says.

In reacting to this kind of legislation, it is easy to sound hateful, and is it easy to make the case that Christians hate homosexuals. Sadly, in some cases, I have observed evidence to support that charge in some individual Christians.

We are admonished to hate sin, but to love the sinner and to pray for his salvation. A homosexual may be brainwashed into believing that his particular sin is the result of God’s error in programming his genetic program, but the fact is, it is the result of the enemy combining lust and rebellion into a potent sin cocktail that is more difficult for some to resist than it is others.

James says, “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren.” (James 1:14-16)

It is the duty of the Christian to recognize the sin for what it is, but to pray for the sinner.

In any case, it is a moot point. Nowhere in the Bible, in either Testament, has the authority to declare sin to be sinless been delegated to an act of human legislation.

The GOP’s Fifth Column – The Media

The GOP’s Fifth Column – The Media
Vol: 14 Issue: 27 Wednesday, November 27, 2002

What do the Washington Times, FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh have in common? According to Al Gore, two things. First, they are the ‘major institutional voices’ in America, now.

Not CNN, or the New York Times, or ABC, NBC and CBS, or the Washington Post or the LA Times or the San Francisico Examiner. Evidently, these are second string against the mighty Washington Times or Fox News Network.

The second thing these major voices have in common is that they are really GOP strongholds masquerading as news.

With the exception of Rush Limbaugh. He isn’t masquerading as anything. He doesn’t pretend to be news, neither does he pretend to be balanced. But it sounds good in a speech.

“The media is kind of weird these days on politics, and there are some major institutional voices that are, truthfully speaking, part and parcel of the Republican Party,” said Al Gore in a recent interview.

“Fox News Network, The Washington Times, Rush Limbaugh there s a bunch of them, and some of them are financed by wealthy ultra-conservative billionaires who make political deals with Republican administrations and the rest of the media . Most of the media [has] been slow to recognize the pervasive impact of this fifth column in their ranks that is, day after day, injecting the daily Republican talking points into the definition of what s objective as stated by the news media as a whole.”

According to Al Gore, it is impossible for him or his fellow Democrats to get a fair shake in the press, since it is controlled by the Republican party.

“Something will start at the Republican National Committee, inside the building, and it will explode the next day on the right-wing talk-show network and on Fox News and in the newspapers that play this game, The Washington Times and the others. And then they ll create a little echo chamber, and pretty soon they ll start baiting the mainstream media for allegedly ignoring the story they ve pushed into the zeitgeist. And then pretty soon the mainstream media goes out and disingenuously takes a so-called objective sampling, and lo and behold, these R.N.C. talking points are woven into the fabric of the zeitgeist.”

Gore also said he believed that evolving technologies and market forces have combined to lower the media s standards of objectivity.

“The introduction of cable-television news and Internet news made news a commodity, available from an unlimited number of sellers at a steadily decreasing cost, so the established news organizations became the high-cost producers of a low-cost commodity,” said Gore.

“They re selling a hybrid product now that s news plus news-helper; whether it s entertainment or attitude or news that s marbled with opinion, it s different. Now, especially in the cable-TV market, it has become good economics once again to go back to a party-oriented approach to attract a hard-core following that appreciates the predictability of a right-wing point of view, but then to make aggressive and constant efforts to deny that s what they re doing in order to avoid offending the broader audience that mass advertisers want. Thus the Fox slogan We Report, You Decide, or whatever the current version of their ritual denial is.”

(Hey, Al – I thought you were in favor of technology?)

“We understand that Gore is frustrated,” said R.N.C. spokesman Kevin Sheridan. “He s the leader of a party without a message. But if he thinks that the Republican National Committee can control the American media, then perhaps he needs a break from the book tour.”

Of course, some of the harshest criticisms of Mr. Gore have come from distinctly non-conservative quarters. Mr. Gore seemed particularly stung, for example, by an op-ed written by Frank Rich of The New York Times, suggesting that his new spontaneity was a charade.

“When people write a line like one that I read this morning quote, People do not change, period, end quote well, there s a difference between learning from experience and self-reinvention,”

Gore said. “People do change, particularly in America. If you don t learn from the experiences you have in life, then you re not trying very hard, and if you don t make mistakes, you re not human . If people who make their living criticizing anybody and everybody want to add me to their list, that s all right. Hell, they ve got to make a living.”

Although Gore has a solid core of support, many Democrats do want a fresh face to take on George W. Bush in 2004. The same formal and informal polls that show Gore with substantially larger backing than any other Democratic hopeful also show that a great many donors, opinion makers and party leaders are uncommitted and leaning toward Anyone But Gore.

“Maybe I bear the blame for some of it,” he said. “I haven t been very good about calling all of the insiders over the last two years, and maybe some of them have a beef with me because of that. I know they have been courted assiduously by some of the others who are considering a run for the White House, and it may be that some of them have already signed up with other people. If I do decide to run again, I think there s a lot of support, but I d also have to work really hard to get a bunch of them committed back to me.”

Assessment:

This story is important mostly because it is so ridiculous — and because it will provide an object lesson in how propaganda works, since we got to this one in its infancy.

Gore is a master at a particular brand of propaganda that depends on deep division and uses a kind of hypnotic ‘mantra’ repeated over and over again until it sounds like truth.

Like, repeating ‘every vote should count’ while simultaneously suing to have thousands of military votes disqualified since they wouldn’t like have broken his way. Not that I want to revisit Election 2000, but that is where all the best past examples of his technique can be found.

Gore’s assertion that the major media is in the GOP’s pocket is an example in the making. That is not to say that Gore doesn’t believe it himself – he’d rather believe the whole press corps is Republican than believe what they write about him.

Gore himself said of his current press image, “MAYBE I bear the blame for SOME of it,” he said. But the rest is the fault of the Republicans who control the media.

But this is vintage Gore ‘us vs. them’ political propaganda. The Washington Times is conservative in viewpoint, but to call it a media trend-setter is ridiculous.

The Washington Times is notable only because it IS a conservative newspaper struggling to survive in an overtly liberal environment.

FoxNews is beating CNN because it presents BOTH sides — which, compared to CNN, would make it LOOK conservative, since CNN is so overtly liberal that it enjoyed the nickname “Clinton News Network” throughout his administration.

Rush Limbaugh never pretends to be anything but a Republican. But the charges will stick with Gore’s constituency; to them, three media outlets that aren’t liberal constitute a right-wing majority.

Gore’s political capital is dissention and division — it has served him well throughout his political life.

(Try and find a Gore speech that doesn’t use the word ‘fight’)

When Al Gore says the mainstream press is run by the conservative right, it is just a dumb statement. When it gets picked up by his political operatives and repeated over and over again, it begins to sound like the truth.

The fact that it is so obviously untrue works in favor of the propagandist. Hitler explained in ‘Mein Kampf’ that the more outrageous the lie, the more people that will believe it, since the assumption is that no leader would say something that contradictory unless it really WAS true.

The whole purpose of presenting the Gore story here wasn’t to beat up Gore — he can do that all by himself. It was to demonstrate the power of propaganda to convince the masses that black is white or up is down at will.

Propaganda and semantics were elevated to a science during the last century, and the advent of television gave us new terms like ‘sublimatics’ to explain how brainwashing works. All these tools were developed at just the right moment in history.

The infrastructure of antichrist continues to develop before our eyes as the hours count down for the last generation of human government. Everything is in place.

“And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28)

Material Breach?

Material Breach?
Vol: 14 Issue: 26 Tuesday, November 26, 2002

Hans Blix, the Swedish chairman of the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, confirmed that inspections are to begin tomorrow, with 19 arms experts — 11 from his unit and eight from the International Atomic Energy Agency. By Christmas, he hopes to have 100 people on the ground, he told reporters after briefing the council.

Iraq has to submit a declaration to the council by Dec. 8, listing all its weapons programs as well as materials that could be used as ingredients for nuclear, chemical, biological and ballistic arms.

The United States has said that any errors in the declaration could be a “material breach” of a Nov. 8 Security Council resolution and might lead to war.

Now, the government of Iraq is officially denying that it is in possession of any weapons of mass destruction. And weapons inspector Hans Blix says that the Iraqis are expressing ‘reservations’ about letting the UN team inspect Iraq’s presidential palaces.

Blix isn’t accepting either the denials or the conditions. “The production of mustard gas is not exactly the same as production of marmalade,” Blix said after briefing the United Nations Security Council on preparations for inspections. . . “You expect those who produce chemical weapons to keep track. It is in their own interests to do so,” Blix said.

“They provided a lot of figures to UNSCOM in the past,” he went on. “These figures do not give a full account, and if they want to be believed they had better provide a better account,” he added.

Resolution 1441, adopted unanimously by the Council on Nov. 8 to give the inspectors a new, forceful mandate, authorizes them to inspect the vast compounds around Saddam Hussein’s nine palaces.

On the critical issue of access, Iraqi officials remarked during last week’s talks “that the entry into a presidential site or a ministry was not exactly the same thing as entry into a factory,” Blix said, according to his briefing notes.

“That is undeniable,” he told reporters afterward, but he stressed that “the council authorizes us to go anywhere, anytime and we intend to do so.”

Secretary General Kofi Annan received an 11-page letter Iraq sent to him on Saturday picking apart the Council resolution clause by clause, calling it a violation of international law and an excuse for the United States to go to war.

Annan responded by telling the Iraqis to go along with the inspections –not what they were hoping to hear.

The Iraqis continued to bluster and issue threats against the global community in general and the United States in particular.

We have great confidence in the solid and strong position of our people and its readiness to confront any unjust US imperialist aggression, Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan said after the inspectors arrival.

In dealing with UN Security Council Resolution 1441, Iraq wanted to prove to the entire world the truth about the US evil plot which aims at extending hegemony over the region, favoring Zionist (Israeli) interests and not to discuss the so-called weapons of mass destruction, Ramadan said in remarks carried by the official Iraqi media.

Assessment:

And in another incident Monday that the US says could be such a breach of the resolution, an Iraqi military spokesman said anti-aircraft batteries opened fire at US and British planes over the south of the country.

Interestingly, to the United Nations, Iraqi anti-aircraft attacks against US and British warplanes is NOT a material breach of the Gulf War ceasefire. Let me say that once more, with feeling. Firing on our aircraft is NOT a violation of the cease-fire, says the UN.

“Let me say I don’t think the Security Council will say that this is in contravention of the resolution,” Mr Annan said as he visited a village in the southern Yugoslav province of Kosovo.

Somebody help me here. If the UN ceasefire resolutions have NOT been revoked, and if they call on Iraq to stop firing, and if Iraq is still shooting at us more than a decade later, how then, can that NOT be a violation?

Answer? The UN decided that the actual ‘no-fly’ zone isn’t exactly, precisely and specifically spelled out in detail in the cease-fire resolution.

The UN explains that while coalition aircraft have been patrolling the no-fly zone for all these years, Iraq has been shooting at them for all those years.

So evidently, if you want to attack US warplanes with impunity, then all you have to do is attack them regularly. Soon your ‘right’ to shoot down somebody else’s airplanes is protected by unwritten international law while WRITTEN international law demanding a cease-fire can be ignored for a decade without consequence.

“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.” 2 Timothy 3:1

Indeed!

What Did The Saudis Know? And When Did They Know It?

What Did The Saudis Know? And When Did They Know It?
Vol: 14 Issue: 25 Monday, November 25, 2002

Now that Election 2002 has finally put Election 2000 behind us, the question is being raised among members of the Senate that should have been asked long ago. Instead, it was perverted by the partisan process into rhetorical nonsense.

But at long last, Senator Joe Leiberman asked the question the way it should have been asked all along. “What do the SAUDIS know and when did they know it?”

A year ago, political partisans were asking that question of Bush. Now that the election is over, the politicians are stepping out from their political bomb shelters to grab some press on an issue of substance, for a change.

The Democrats caught their campaign issue, but they got it too late to do them any good in 2002. Senator Lieberman’s query, “What do the Saudis know and when did they know it?” was followed by the observation that, “The F.B.I. and maybe other parts of our government have seemed to want to almost defend the Saudis, or not be as aggressive as they should be about the Saudis.”

Had that been the issue raised by the Democrats when it first became obvious that the Saudis were playing both sides against the middle, there might be a Democrat majority in both Houses today.

Lieberman admitted that, “President Bush has taken a lot of abuse in the last two years because of the connections of this administration with Saudi Arabia.” he said. But then he counter-punched, I think it’s time for the president to blow the whistle and remember what he said after September 11 — you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists.”

Because that is an issue that has yet to be adequately addressed by the White House, which continues, inexplicably, to run interference for the House of Saud, despite the fact the Saudis appear to be running interference for the terrorists.

Lieberman’s remarks on the CBS News program “Face the Nation” followed disclosures that the F.B.I. had investigated financial contributions from the wife of the Saudi ambassador in Washington to the family of a Saudi man in San Diego who had befriended two men who were among the Sept. 11 hijackers.

The Saudi man in San Diego, Osama Bassnan, and a Saudi friend of his in the city, Omar al-Bayoumi, were investigated by the F.B.I. after the attacks because they were acquaintances of Khalid al-Midhar and Nawaq Alhazmi, who were among the 15 Saudis in the group of 19 hijackers.

Bassnan and Bayoumi helped Midhar and Alhazmi find housing in San Diego, assisted them with opening bank accounts, provided them with small amounts of cash, and introduced them to other Saudis in Southern California, officials said.

Saudi officials have said the payments from Princess Haifa began about four years ago and were initially intended to help pay for the medical needs of Bassnan’s ailing Jordanian wife. They said such gifts were typical of Princess Haifa’s generosity in aiding Saudis and others in distress.

The princess, the daughter of the late King Faisal, said ‘she was alarmed by news reports suggesting that she had indirectly aided the hijackers’.

“I heard U.S. lawmakers in the American media today say that money that I have donated to a needy Saudi family living in the United States was transferred to two Saudi 9/11 terrorists.”

“My father, King Faisal, was killed in a terrorist act in 1975,” she said. “I find accusations that I contributed funds to terrorists outrageous and completely irresponsible.” She added, “This is the time for people to come together to combat the scourge of terrorism so that others will not suffer the loss of loved ones.”

Assessment:

‘Outrageous and irresponsible’ — my foot. According to a report in Newsweek, Bassnan wasn t just some indigent Saudi, but had connections with Saudi intelligence. When Crown Prince Abdullah visited President Bush in April, his entourage stopped in Houston. Bassnan was also in Houston, where he met with “a high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters.”

Basnan was convicted of visa fraud in August and was ordered to be deported. As of the time of this writing, he still hasn’t left the US.

The other indigent Saudi to receive monthly checks from Princess Haifa, al Bayoumi, was believed by some local Muslims to be working for Saudi intelligence. He also claimed to be studying at San Diego university but it has no records of him.

The Saudis have stonewalled every investigation of every terror act involving Saudi citizens since the Khobar Towers attack. (That’s a lot of investigations for a friendly ally to stonewall)

As Senator Mitch McConnell pointed out on Fox News Sunday, “The Saudis are on all sides of every issue.” Senator Charles Schumer noted, “it seems every time the Saudis are involved, we stop,” while Senator Richard Shelby said on “Meet The Press” that “they’ve got a lot of answering to do.”

Shelby said, “I would like for them to be our ally, but you can’t have it both ways . .”You can’t finance terrorists, you can’t finance charities that you have reason to believe that will finance terrorism around the world and even abet it, and say, ‘Oh, we’re great friends of the United States.'”

“The list goes on and on of Saudi failures, and their central role that they have played in one way or another in this rise of Islamic fundamentalism all over the world,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, on ABC’s “This Week.”

Princess Haifa says she didn t know that she was funneling money to terrorists. Logic says that is probably true. If she had, she d have been a lot more careful about how she did it.

But it isn t about a Saudi princess it s about Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda and what the Saudis knew and when they knew it .

The answer to that question is not something the administration is eager to uncover.

Because, as Senator Lieberman pointed out, the White House has made its position very clear.

You re either with us, or you’re with the terrorists.

More Spies, Lies and Secret Ties

More Spies, Lies and Secret Ties
Vol: 14 Issue: 24 Sunday, November 24, 2002

Using forces and equipment that General Pervez Musharraf assured President Bush would be devoted to the war on terror, Pakistan has been secretly trading equipment for making nuclear weapons for ballistic missile parts from North Korea.

In a perfect marriage of interests, Pakistan provided the North with many of the designs for gas centrifuges and much of the machinery it needs to make highly enriched uranium for the country’s latest nuclear weapons project, one intended to put at risk South Korea, Japan and 100,000 American troops in Northeast Asia.

The Central Intelligence Agency told members of Congress this week that North Korea’s uranium enrichment program, which North Korea admitted to this summer, will produce enough material to produce weapons in two to three years.

Previously it has estimated that North Korea probably extracted enough plutonium from a nuclear reactor to build one or two weapons, until that program was halted in 1994 in a confrontation with the United States.

Yet the C.I.A. report at least the unclassified version made no mention of how one of the world’s poorest and most isolated nations put together its new, complex uranium project.

In interviews over the past three weeks, officials and experts in Washington, Pakistan and South Korea described a relationship between North Korea and Pakistan that now appears much deeper and more dangerous than the United States and its Asian allies first admitted to.

The accounts raise disturbing questions about the nature of the uneasy American alliance with General Musharraf’s government.

The officials and experts described how, even after Gen. Musharraf sided with the United States in ousting the Taliban and hunting down Qaeda leaders, Pakistan’s secretive A. Q. Khan Nuclear Research Laboratories continued its murky relationship with the North Korean military.

It was a partnership linking an insecure Islamic nation and a failing Communist one, each in need of the other’s expertise.

Pakistan was desperate to counter India’s superior military force, but encountered years of American-imposed sanctions, so it turned to North Korea.

For its part, North Korea, increasingly cut off from Russia and China, tried to replicate Pakistan’s success in developing nuclear weapons based on uranium, one of the few commodities that North Korea has in plentiful supply.

Yet while the United States has put tremendous diplomatic pressure on North Korea in the past two months to abandon the project, and has cut off oil supplies to the country, it has never publicly discussed the role of Pakistan or other nations in supplying that effort.

American and South Korean officials, when speaking anonymously, say the reason is obvious: the Bush administration has determined that Pakistan’s cooperation in the search for Al Qaeda is so critical especially with new evidence suggesting that Osama bin Laden is still alive, perhaps on Pakistani soil.

Pakistan’s military ties to North Korea go back to the 1970’s. But they took a decisive turn in 1993, just as the United States was forcing the North to open up its huge nuclear reactor facilities at Yongbyon. Yongbyon was clearly a factory for producing bomb-grade plutonium from spent nuclear fuel.

When North Korea refused to allow in inspectors headed by Hans Blix, the man now leading the inspections in Iraq, President Bill Clinton went to the United Nations to press penalties and the Pentagon drew up contingency plans for a strike against the plant in case North Korea removed the fuel rods to begin making bomb-grade plutonium.

In 1998, the Clinton administration and North Korea reached a deal that froze all nuclear activity at Yongbyon, where international inspectors still live year-round.

In return, the United States and its allies promised North Korea a steady flow of fuel oil and the eventual delivery of two proliferation-resistant nuclear reactors to produce electric power.

Kim Jong Il never allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency to begin the wide-ranging inspections required before the critical parts of the plants could be delivered.

And so Pakistan joined Iran, Libya, Yemen, Syria the Palestinian Authority and Egypt as regular customers for North Korean missile parts.

But, while Pakistan couldn’t afford to pay North Korea in hard currency, Pakistan has something that Pyongyang wants much more — Pakistan has nuclear weapons.

Assessment:

Most of the above information was gleaned from the pages of the Arizona Star, who in turn got their information from the New York Times. This raises a major point that should not go unnoticed.

If the administration has been tracking the Pakistani-North Korean barter arrangement since 1998 (which seems certain, given Bush’s surprise inclusion of North Korea into the Axis of Evil) why hasn’t the White House put a stop to it earlier?

The short answer is the easiest one — it can’t. Not now. Bush is attempting to balance the most difficult foreign policy challenges ever faced by any American president.

We are fighting a global war against enemies in high places in governments with whom we are NOT at war. Some of those enemies — like al-Qaeda — are ideological and ruthless.

Others, like officials in friendly Western governments (notably Canada, France and Germany) are simply enemies of US foreign policy in all its forms, even when those policies are favorable to their own interests.

A case in point was the Canadian Defense Minister, John McCallum. Although he favors increasing Canada’s defense spending (which is the function of a defense minister, to keep the military supplied, especially with money) when the US requested Canada boost its spending to meet the challenges of the war on terror, he opposed it for no reason apart from the fact America asked him to.

As he put it, “I simply said this is a made-in-Canada decision. I’m on the record as wanting more defense spending, but I’m not asking for support from our American allies on this subject.”

Enemies of America like al-Qaeda use the sibling rivalries that exist between the US and the Western democracies as a shield behind which they are able to operate, thanks to the enthusiastic support of those idiots (like McCallum, among others) in other Western governments who are blinded to the danger facing Western civiization by their petty jealousy of the world’s most powerful government.

The administration is further hamstrung by dissention from within the country and opposition to a third World War for which the opening shots may have already been fired.

This administration — and even the Clinton administration — cannot move against the North Korea nuclear threat without taking action against Pakistan for supplying it. India will insist on that. Russia is an ally of the Indian nuclear program, China the father of the Pakistani Bomb.

There is a global ritual that precedes world war. First, there is denial of the threat until it is so overwhelmingly obvious that pretending it isn’t there doesn’t work any more.

Then begins the process of ‘negotiation’, which is in reality an effort at appeasement, since the threat existed before the negotiation process began. Then more denial on both sides, followed by threats. Finally comes acceptance — and then it becomes a waiting game while the world holds its breath and waits for the first domino to fall over.

We are well into the process, the ritual denials have given way to acceptance of the threat and we are holding our collective breath in anticipation of the inevitable.

The White House has promised that this will be a long war, and a difficult one. How long and how difficult remains to be seen, but the Bible does provide some insight into what war looks like in the last days.

Joel 2:30 describes it this way. “And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.” The Apostle John spoke of a “a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;” [Revelation 8:11]

(We know from the 39 Scuds that were fired against Israel from Iraq in Persian Gulf War I what an incoming missile looks like; from a distance, it looks like a flare, or even a falling star.)

We also know without doubt that if it DOES come to all-out global war, it will involve nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

Here’s how Zechariah describes the scene from his vantage point in history, 2500 years before the fact. (How would YOU describe a modern battlefield using the frames of reference common to 500 BC?)

“And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.” (Zechariah 14:12)

Who participates in this last war? Obviously, Israel. Also, “Edom , Moab, and the people of Ammon; all the kings of Tyre, all the kings of Sidon, and the kings of the coastlands which [are] across the sea; Dedan, Tema, Buz, and all [who] [are] in the farthest corners; all the kings of Arabia and all the kings of the mixed multitude who dwell in the desert; all the kings of Zimri, all the kings of Elam, and all the kings of the Medes; all the kings of the north, far and near, one with another; and all the kingdoms of the world which [are] on the face of the earth.” (Jeremiah 25:21-26)

Geographically, that encompasses pretty much the entire Middle East, together with the boundaries of the Medo Persian Empire, (which includes Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan).

But it also includes the ‘kings of the east’ (Revelation 16:12) in the roster in a final end-time war that, at its conclusion, will have killed three-quarters of the human race.

According to Scripture, the majority of those will be killed by the very weapons we now face on every side; nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

This seems an exceedingly gloomy report; there’s no cheery way to present it. But it isn’t all bad news. The simple fact that things are exactly as predicted means that the situation is still completely under control and functioning precisely according to God’s previously stated Plan for the last days and the final judgment of human government.

It will get much worse before it gets better, but we know Who wins in the end. The war described by Scripture is almost upon us, I believe. But it could be a long war, and the catastrophic events described by the Bible may yet be years away.

Or they could move forward right now — with the push of a button. From the perspective of Bible prophecy one event remains yet unfulfilled.

“For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”

“Wherefore, comfort one another with these words.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15-18)