Have you ever watched the Kempler video?
The Israeli oligarchy doesn't want you to see it.
Shimon Peres Came to Power Over Rabin's Dead Body
Read this for important background information - The Kempler Video of Yitzhak Rabin Assassination step by step - then WATCH THE KEMPLER VIDEO for yourself.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Shimon Peres plots with Rome to finish off Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem
The defeatist Kadima party of LEFTIST criminals, bought and paid for by foreigners, is the furthest thing from balance and horribly reflects this harsh reality: Israeli society is mentally and spiritually unbalanced and about to fall under EUROPEAN OCCUPATION, having been sold out by the likes of Shimon Peres, Ariel Sharon, Yossi Beilin and other traitors.
The UNJews, the secular, are so out of touch with reality, with God, Torah and the Land and People of Israel, they're in denial they're slitting their own throat and undermining the sovereignty of Israel by wheeling and dealing with terrorists and Euro-Nazis, who are pretending to make peace while preparing for war. Such Hellenists will find out too late when the European Antiochus Epiphanes reveals what a brute beast, not a peacemaker, he is, and physically detaches many from the Land they hate and despise and people they hold in contempt.
Even as Yitzhak Rabin's part in the staged assassination plot to discredit the Right backfired, taking his life in the "peace process," so the bloody vulture Shimon Peres and criminal company's treachery will find themselves unable to escape the tsunami of the unholy See that will release its EU forces upon the Holy Land and Holy City.
Excerpt from Did Rabin Know? by Uzi Benziman, a senior columnist at the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz:
"Did Rabin himself sanction Avishai Raviv's employment as a Shin Bet informer? To what extent was the prime minister aware of the double agent's incitement against him?
The key sentence in the secret appendix is: "His (Raviv's) incitement, especially where it involved physical acts of violence against Arabs, and where it drew the public's attention to the existence of violent and extremist political groups, was indirectly damaging to well-known legal political groups. His operators could not have overlooked this fact." What this means is that Raviv's acts of extremist incitement affected the public perception of the entire right-wing camp, including the Likud, and also furnished fuel for the left-wing counterattack before Rabin's murder.
This conclusion leads one to ask a question that is so horrific that it is in fact difficult to put down on paper. Was Yitzhak Rabin, who paid with his own life for the brave peace policy he pursued, a victim of his own actions? In the past, his close associates used to rail against the disdain with which he entertained their warnings of possible risks to his physical safety, but now a different question arises. Was he a party, knowingly or not, to Raviv's incitement activities? Did he continue to respond to incitement from the right even when he knew that it was stoked, or at least partially so, by the provocative acts of undercover agent Avishai Raviv? And if this is the case, did Rabin do so because it gave him a casus belli to flay his political adversaries?"
The truth will prevail. THE LEFT MURDERED YITZHAK RABIN AND BLAMED THE RIGHT AND NOW IT'S COMING BACK TO HAUNT THEM.
Shimon Peres Came to Power Over Rabin's Dead Body and now aims to return to finish off Israel, collaborating with Germany and the Jesuits, the bloody Vatican, against the Temple Mount, Mt. Zion, and Jerusalem.
************************************************************************
Will Yitzhak Rabin's "Bloody Shirt" Defeat Shimon Peres Again?
The Kempler Video of Yitzhak Rabin's Assassination
The Kempler Video
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
The UNJews, the secular, are so out of touch with reality, with God, Torah and the Land and People of Israel, they're in denial they're slitting their own throat and undermining the sovereignty of Israel by wheeling and dealing with terrorists and Euro-Nazis, who are pretending to make peace while preparing for war. Such Hellenists will find out too late when the European Antiochus Epiphanes reveals what a brute beast, not a peacemaker, he is, and physically detaches many from the Land they hate and despise and people they hold in contempt.
Even as Yitzhak Rabin's part in the staged assassination plot to discredit the Right backfired, taking his life in the "peace process," so the bloody vulture Shimon Peres and criminal company's treachery will find themselves unable to escape the tsunami of the unholy See that will release its EU forces upon the Holy Land and Holy City.
Excerpt from Did Rabin Know? by Uzi Benziman, a senior columnist at the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz:
"Did Rabin himself sanction Avishai Raviv's employment as a Shin Bet informer? To what extent was the prime minister aware of the double agent's incitement against him?
The key sentence in the secret appendix is: "His (Raviv's) incitement, especially where it involved physical acts of violence against Arabs, and where it drew the public's attention to the existence of violent and extremist political groups, was indirectly damaging to well-known legal political groups. His operators could not have overlooked this fact." What this means is that Raviv's acts of extremist incitement affected the public perception of the entire right-wing camp, including the Likud, and also furnished fuel for the left-wing counterattack before Rabin's murder.
This conclusion leads one to ask a question that is so horrific that it is in fact difficult to put down on paper. Was Yitzhak Rabin, who paid with his own life for the brave peace policy he pursued, a victim of his own actions? In the past, his close associates used to rail against the disdain with which he entertained their warnings of possible risks to his physical safety, but now a different question arises. Was he a party, knowingly or not, to Raviv's incitement activities? Did he continue to respond to incitement from the right even when he knew that it was stoked, or at least partially so, by the provocative acts of undercover agent Avishai Raviv? And if this is the case, did Rabin do so because it gave him a casus belli to flay his political adversaries?"
The truth will prevail. THE LEFT MURDERED YITZHAK RABIN AND BLAMED THE RIGHT AND NOW IT'S COMING BACK TO HAUNT THEM.
Shimon Peres Came to Power Over Rabin's Dead Body and now aims to return to finish off Israel, collaborating with Germany and the Jesuits, the bloody Vatican, against the Temple Mount, Mt. Zion, and Jerusalem.
************************************************************************
Will Yitzhak Rabin's "Bloody Shirt" Defeat Shimon Peres Again?
The Kempler Video of Yitzhak Rabin's Assassination
The Kempler Video
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Beware German soldiers on Israel's border!
Role of multinational force in Lebanon explored
By ELIAS LEVY
MONTREAL - Avi Primor, a respected Israeli diplomat, is a former Israeli ambassador to Germany and the European Union, and a former vice-president of Tel Aviv University. He is currently director of European studies at the interdisciplinary centre of Herzliya University.
Primor, who is close to Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz, has, from the beginning of the war with Lebanon, been responsible for evaluating the possibility of deploying an international military force in southern Lebanon.
In an interview from his home in Tel Aviv, Primor discussed the war.
Canadian Jewish News: Could the international community force Israel to accept a ceasefire?
Primor: In the final analysis, the situation is this: no one wants war and everyone wants a ceasefire, but it depends on the conditions. If we’re talking about having a ceasefire imposed on us, as Hezbollah, Iran and Syria are asking, in order to preserve the status quo ante, it’s out of the question. The situation in southern Lebanon has to change drastically, completely.
At the moment, the Lebanese army is too weak to deploy troops in southern Lebanon. The other possibility is to call on a strong international force capable of fighting the Hezbollah militia and allowing the government in Beirut to impose its authority on all of southern Lebanon. If these conditions were met, then there could be a ceasefire. Meanwhile, Israel must continue to fight Hezbollah, and at the same time, prepare the ground for the deployment of an international force.
CJN: What role does Israel see for this multinational force?
Primor: This would have to be very different from other peace forces that have been sent to the Middle East. It would be an international force modelled on the multinational force that was established in Kosovo, or the one that attacked Iraq in 1991 to liberate Kuwait. It would be a combat force, not a force of observers.
A few days before her first visit to Lebanon and Israel, American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the same thing – that any international force must have the mandate and the military potential needed to be active rather than passive like the UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) soldiers now stationed in southern Lebanon.
CJN: Is this multinational force likely to be in place soon?
Primor: No, it would take several weeks to deploy. The troops have to be organized, with the approval of their governments, once the governments have the approval of their respective parliaments. The military intervention force will also need to have a clear mandate from the United Nations.
CJN: Would this force operate under the aegis of the United Nations?
Primor: No. This military force would not be under the direct command of the United Nations, but probably under that of NATO. The UN will only give its approval to the military force to give it international legitimacy.
CJN: Do you think the Lebanese government will agree to collaborate with this international intervention force?
Primor: It’s in the Lebanese government’s best interest to collaborate closely with this multinational force whose principal mandate will be to disarm Hezbollah. Without the help of the political authorities in Beirut, the military force will not be able to accomplish its objectives.
CJN: What are the main countries that will provide soldiers for this international military force?
Primor: The countries Israel would like to see participate are the ones that have a stake in Lebanon. First of all, France, which has a stake in and an emotional attachment to Lebanon and a military force that can carry out this type of foreign mission. The French military has already proven itself in several countries. But France can’t and doesn’t want to do this work alone. It will probably receive support from other European military forces, certainly from Germany.
CJN: Is it possible that the presence of German soldiers on Israel’s northern border will make Israelis uncomfortable?
Primor: Yes. The majority of Israelis would view with disfavour any deployment of German military forces along the Israeli-Lebanese border. Any accidental confrontation would have dramatic consequences for both Israel and Germany. But if there are German forces, I think they would have to take on two important tasks: helping with logistics, and stationing troops in northern Lebanon along the Syrian border to prevent the passage of Iranian arms coming to Lebanon through Syria.
CJN: Will the high number of Lebanese civilians who have died in IDF bombings of Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon weaken the support of western governments for Israel?
Primor: I don’t share that view. On the contrary, I believe it has been a very long time since Israel has had the benefit of such strong international support, including that of Europe. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t critics or concerns. The images that are being shown – you see them more than we Israelis do because our television stations protect us from them – are tragic images. You must understand that no sensitive human beings can remain indifferent to these images.
I attended some of the conversations that Condoleezza Rice had with top Israeli politicians during her first stop in Jerusalem. Eighty per cent of these discussions dealt with humanitarian issues in Lebanon. Nevertheless, Rice, like the Bush administration, unconditionally supports the State of Israel. She does not want a ceasefire. On the contrary, she wants Israel to continue to fight Hezbollah. There are even a fair number of Americans who are pushing us to attack Syria.
Yet the American politicians are very aware of the humanitarian crisis in Lebanon. And American public opinion, like public opinion anywhere in the world, is very sensitive to the war images coming from Lebanon. Still, the fact that European public opinion is also very sensitive to these dreadful images doesn’t mean that it does not support Israel in her war, which is a just war, a war of defence against the Islamist forces that attacked us.
CJN: In an interview with the newspaper Le Monde (July 27), French President Jacques Chirac said: “In this conflict, the blame is obviously shared.” Did that declaration shock Israelis?
Primor: Of course it shocked us. But you must understand that France has always been very sensitive toward Lebanon. The country is, in a way, its precious child. In addition, if France has to be at the forefront in southern Lebanon, it doesn’t want to alienate a majority of Lebanese. It wants the popular support of the Lebanese people. France can’t support Israel unconditionally because it would have very little credibility with the Lebanese.
I understand France’s position. But I can also tell you that in private conversations we have had with French political figures, we have seen that the French position is not so black-and-white.
CJN: In this conflict, English-speaking countries, specifically the United States, Great Britain, Canada and Australia, are supporting Israel, whereas non-anglophone countries, especially in Europe, are criticizing – some vehemently – Israel’s entirely legitimate response to the Hezbollah attacks. How do you explain this?
Primor: I don’t know how the situation appears in Canada, but the United States and England are both in an all-out war, in Iraq and Afghanistan, against Islamist terrorist forces. These two countries, both directly affected by Islamist terrorism, are more sensitive to Israel’s struggle against terrorist organizations. Europe, with the exception of England, is not present on these battlegrounds.
CJN: Is this conflict likely to significantly tarnish Israel’s image in the world?
Primor: I think Israel’s image will depend a lot on the outcome of this conflict. If this war ends with Hezbollah being significantly weakened, international law being imposed, and the restoration of the legitimacy of the government of Beirut in all of the Lebanese territory, I believe the overall result for Israel will be positive, although there will always be critics.
******************************
CJN: Is it possible that the presence of German soldiers on Israel’s northern border will make Israelis uncomfortable?
As well it should!
God Save Us From Islam and Europe!
Ehud Olmert Playing with German Fire
CJN: In this conflict, English-speaking countries, specifically the United States, Great Britain, Canada and Australia, are supporting Israel, whereas non-anglophone countries, especially in Europe, are criticizing – some vehemently – Israel’s entirely legitimate response to the Hezbollah attacks. How do you explain this?
The British-Israelites and Jews must stand or fall together.
Call for Anglo-Israeli Alliance
Joseph Isn't Jewish!
The Plain Truth About the "Lost Ten Tribes" and Why You Need to Know!
By ELIAS LEVY
MONTREAL - Avi Primor, a respected Israeli diplomat, is a former Israeli ambassador to Germany and the European Union, and a former vice-president of Tel Aviv University. He is currently director of European studies at the interdisciplinary centre of Herzliya University.
Primor, who is close to Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz, has, from the beginning of the war with Lebanon, been responsible for evaluating the possibility of deploying an international military force in southern Lebanon.
In an interview from his home in Tel Aviv, Primor discussed the war.
Canadian Jewish News: Could the international community force Israel to accept a ceasefire?
Primor: In the final analysis, the situation is this: no one wants war and everyone wants a ceasefire, but it depends on the conditions. If we’re talking about having a ceasefire imposed on us, as Hezbollah, Iran and Syria are asking, in order to preserve the status quo ante, it’s out of the question. The situation in southern Lebanon has to change drastically, completely.
At the moment, the Lebanese army is too weak to deploy troops in southern Lebanon. The other possibility is to call on a strong international force capable of fighting the Hezbollah militia and allowing the government in Beirut to impose its authority on all of southern Lebanon. If these conditions were met, then there could be a ceasefire. Meanwhile, Israel must continue to fight Hezbollah, and at the same time, prepare the ground for the deployment of an international force.
CJN: What role does Israel see for this multinational force?
Primor: This would have to be very different from other peace forces that have been sent to the Middle East. It would be an international force modelled on the multinational force that was established in Kosovo, or the one that attacked Iraq in 1991 to liberate Kuwait. It would be a combat force, not a force of observers.
A few days before her first visit to Lebanon and Israel, American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the same thing – that any international force must have the mandate and the military potential needed to be active rather than passive like the UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) soldiers now stationed in southern Lebanon.
CJN: Is this multinational force likely to be in place soon?
Primor: No, it would take several weeks to deploy. The troops have to be organized, with the approval of their governments, once the governments have the approval of their respective parliaments. The military intervention force will also need to have a clear mandate from the United Nations.
CJN: Would this force operate under the aegis of the United Nations?
Primor: No. This military force would not be under the direct command of the United Nations, but probably under that of NATO. The UN will only give its approval to the military force to give it international legitimacy.
CJN: Do you think the Lebanese government will agree to collaborate with this international intervention force?
Primor: It’s in the Lebanese government’s best interest to collaborate closely with this multinational force whose principal mandate will be to disarm Hezbollah. Without the help of the political authorities in Beirut, the military force will not be able to accomplish its objectives.
CJN: What are the main countries that will provide soldiers for this international military force?
Primor: The countries Israel would like to see participate are the ones that have a stake in Lebanon. First of all, France, which has a stake in and an emotional attachment to Lebanon and a military force that can carry out this type of foreign mission. The French military has already proven itself in several countries. But France can’t and doesn’t want to do this work alone. It will probably receive support from other European military forces, certainly from Germany.
CJN: Is it possible that the presence of German soldiers on Israel’s northern border will make Israelis uncomfortable?
Primor: Yes. The majority of Israelis would view with disfavour any deployment of German military forces along the Israeli-Lebanese border. Any accidental confrontation would have dramatic consequences for both Israel and Germany. But if there are German forces, I think they would have to take on two important tasks: helping with logistics, and stationing troops in northern Lebanon along the Syrian border to prevent the passage of Iranian arms coming to Lebanon through Syria.
CJN: Will the high number of Lebanese civilians who have died in IDF bombings of Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon weaken the support of western governments for Israel?
Primor: I don’t share that view. On the contrary, I believe it has been a very long time since Israel has had the benefit of such strong international support, including that of Europe. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t critics or concerns. The images that are being shown – you see them more than we Israelis do because our television stations protect us from them – are tragic images. You must understand that no sensitive human beings can remain indifferent to these images.
I attended some of the conversations that Condoleezza Rice had with top Israeli politicians during her first stop in Jerusalem. Eighty per cent of these discussions dealt with humanitarian issues in Lebanon. Nevertheless, Rice, like the Bush administration, unconditionally supports the State of Israel. She does not want a ceasefire. On the contrary, she wants Israel to continue to fight Hezbollah. There are even a fair number of Americans who are pushing us to attack Syria.
Yet the American politicians are very aware of the humanitarian crisis in Lebanon. And American public opinion, like public opinion anywhere in the world, is very sensitive to the war images coming from Lebanon. Still, the fact that European public opinion is also very sensitive to these dreadful images doesn’t mean that it does not support Israel in her war, which is a just war, a war of defence against the Islamist forces that attacked us.
CJN: In an interview with the newspaper Le Monde (July 27), French President Jacques Chirac said: “In this conflict, the blame is obviously shared.” Did that declaration shock Israelis?
Primor: Of course it shocked us. But you must understand that France has always been very sensitive toward Lebanon. The country is, in a way, its precious child. In addition, if France has to be at the forefront in southern Lebanon, it doesn’t want to alienate a majority of Lebanese. It wants the popular support of the Lebanese people. France can’t support Israel unconditionally because it would have very little credibility with the Lebanese.
I understand France’s position. But I can also tell you that in private conversations we have had with French political figures, we have seen that the French position is not so black-and-white.
CJN: In this conflict, English-speaking countries, specifically the United States, Great Britain, Canada and Australia, are supporting Israel, whereas non-anglophone countries, especially in Europe, are criticizing – some vehemently – Israel’s entirely legitimate response to the Hezbollah attacks. How do you explain this?
Primor: I don’t know how the situation appears in Canada, but the United States and England are both in an all-out war, in Iraq and Afghanistan, against Islamist terrorist forces. These two countries, both directly affected by Islamist terrorism, are more sensitive to Israel’s struggle against terrorist organizations. Europe, with the exception of England, is not present on these battlegrounds.
CJN: Is this conflict likely to significantly tarnish Israel’s image in the world?
Primor: I think Israel’s image will depend a lot on the outcome of this conflict. If this war ends with Hezbollah being significantly weakened, international law being imposed, and the restoration of the legitimacy of the government of Beirut in all of the Lebanese territory, I believe the overall result for Israel will be positive, although there will always be critics.
******************************
CJN: Is it possible that the presence of German soldiers on Israel’s northern border will make Israelis uncomfortable?
As well it should!
God Save Us From Islam and Europe!
Ehud Olmert Playing with German Fire
CJN: In this conflict, English-speaking countries, specifically the United States, Great Britain, Canada and Australia, are supporting Israel, whereas non-anglophone countries, especially in Europe, are criticizing – some vehemently – Israel’s entirely legitimate response to the Hezbollah attacks. How do you explain this?
The British-Israelites and Jews must stand or fall together.
Call for Anglo-Israeli Alliance
Joseph Isn't Jewish!
The Plain Truth About the "Lost Ten Tribes" and Why You Need to Know!
Saturday, August 05, 2006
Tony Blair's speech concedes defeat
Tony Blair revealed, in his speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, he just doesn't get it (or is at least ordered to appear that way like President Bush). The war on terrorism is a war against Nazi-Muslims, plain and simple. It is not our duty to try and convert those nations to our "values" (doesn't he realize our values, dangerously adrift from our biblical moorings, is what alienates many of the faithful among Islam?). We are called to serve as a "city on a hill," a light to all the nations, a model nation others seek to emulate not immolate!
Contrary to humanist ideas, spreading democracy is not our holy mission. Democracy is not the gospel. It has worked relatively well among our Israelite family of nations with our disposition, but generally fails among those who aren't so inclined to it, who don't share our proclivity for it, as is their prerogative. We're trying to scrub the spots off the leopard and it just won't work!
...we will not win the battle against this global
extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as force, unless we show we are even-handed, fair and just in our application of those values to the world... My point is that this war can't be won in a conventional way. It can only be won by showing that our values are stronger, better and more just, more fair than the alternative.
They hate and despise our values, and according to Blair's battle plans they would need to accept them for us to win. A dog chasing its tail. They already know what we stand for and have rejected it. According to Blair's diagnosis, their disease is terminal and we've lost the war trying to save them. When they do opt for democracy they elect those of whom we don't approve, who clearly don't share our values, as the Hamas victory blares to those who aren't willfully deaf, dumb and blind.
The banner was not actually "regime change" it
was "values change".
Blair kept bleating about "values change" rather than regime change, and such a "banner" is blown to bits daily by those who don't share or want our values, resisting the forced conversion which the Muslim world correctly see as a new crusade. However, it is not yet a Catholic crusade (will a nuclear jihad against Vienna or Berlin provoke a rapid response from the EU?), and it certainly isn't a Christian crusade - although some embers of biblical influence remain despite the floodgates of hell that have waged war against them, our "values" that have systematically sought to squelch and substitute them with evolution, humanism and relativism - it is a SECULAR CRUSADE, a serious conflict of interests, a culture clash.
This is not just about security or military tactics. It is about hearts and minds about inspiring people, persuading them, showing them what our values at their best stand for.
"War is hell" - not a group hug or liberal classroom! We lost the war when we became entangled in the world of ideas and attitudes rather than stay focused on taking out a hostile regime and leaving Iraq to do whatever Iraq wanted to do - civil war or not. Otherwise we should clear out the area of Arabs and claim it for the British-Israelites, Joes (Joseph isn't Jewish!), as it is part of Greater Israel to the Euphrates, and open it up like the Wild West, offering incentives to pioneers willing to move there and stake out claims. (Besides, we're still in the process of nation building here at home, with many improvements needed and changes necessary. Charity begins at home. Cut off our entangling alliances and bring our troops and money home! Why shouldn't taxpayers money be spent in America - not overseas by foreigners who hate us and would dance in the streets if we fell tomorrow?).
If the Iraqis "elected" to choose another hostile regime making serious threats against us, we could take out that dictator too. We didn't defeat the Japanese or Germans by trying to impress them with our "values" or self-restraint. We fought and won the war and didn't worry about disproportionate use of force or civilian casualties, knowing our enemies are responsible for such and must be held accountable. They started the war, we finished it.
Blair then praised General Sharon for illegally expelling innocent Jews - rewarding terrorism and providing them another base to launch attacks against Israel - preached the nations must force the "peace" issue between Israel and "Palestinians," and promoted an accursed Palestine as the final solution. He should have called for an Anglo-Israeli alliance to defeat our sworn enemies.
Jews and Christian-Zionists oppose such a BIG LIE and remind all the world to go by the Book (Malachi 4:4) and scrap the worthless road map that is leading to the dismantling of Israel, the occupation of Jerusalem, and the fall of the United States and British Commonwealth (due to rot from within and the death blow by fascist Europe from without).
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
Contrary to humanist ideas, spreading democracy is not our holy mission. Democracy is not the gospel. It has worked relatively well among our Israelite family of nations with our disposition, but generally fails among those who aren't so inclined to it, who don't share our proclivity for it, as is their prerogative. We're trying to scrub the spots off the leopard and it just won't work!
...we will not win the battle against this global
extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as force, unless we show we are even-handed, fair and just in our application of those values to the world... My point is that this war can't be won in a conventional way. It can only be won by showing that our values are stronger, better and more just, more fair than the alternative.
They hate and despise our values, and according to Blair's battle plans they would need to accept them for us to win. A dog chasing its tail. They already know what we stand for and have rejected it. According to Blair's diagnosis, their disease is terminal and we've lost the war trying to save them. When they do opt for democracy they elect those of whom we don't approve, who clearly don't share our values, as the Hamas victory blares to those who aren't willfully deaf, dumb and blind.
The banner was not actually "regime change" it
was "values change".
Blair kept bleating about "values change" rather than regime change, and such a "banner" is blown to bits daily by those who don't share or want our values, resisting the forced conversion which the Muslim world correctly see as a new crusade. However, it is not yet a Catholic crusade (will a nuclear jihad against Vienna or Berlin provoke a rapid response from the EU?), and it certainly isn't a Christian crusade - although some embers of biblical influence remain despite the floodgates of hell that have waged war against them, our "values" that have systematically sought to squelch and substitute them with evolution, humanism and relativism - it is a SECULAR CRUSADE, a serious conflict of interests, a culture clash.
This is not just about security or military tactics. It is about hearts and minds about inspiring people, persuading them, showing them what our values at their best stand for.
"War is hell" - not a group hug or liberal classroom! We lost the war when we became entangled in the world of ideas and attitudes rather than stay focused on taking out a hostile regime and leaving Iraq to do whatever Iraq wanted to do - civil war or not. Otherwise we should clear out the area of Arabs and claim it for the British-Israelites, Joes (Joseph isn't Jewish!), as it is part of Greater Israel to the Euphrates, and open it up like the Wild West, offering incentives to pioneers willing to move there and stake out claims. (Besides, we're still in the process of nation building here at home, with many improvements needed and changes necessary. Charity begins at home. Cut off our entangling alliances and bring our troops and money home! Why shouldn't taxpayers money be spent in America - not overseas by foreigners who hate us and would dance in the streets if we fell tomorrow?).
If the Iraqis "elected" to choose another hostile regime making serious threats against us, we could take out that dictator too. We didn't defeat the Japanese or Germans by trying to impress them with our "values" or self-restraint. We fought and won the war and didn't worry about disproportionate use of force or civilian casualties, knowing our enemies are responsible for such and must be held accountable. They started the war, we finished it.
Blair then praised General Sharon for illegally expelling innocent Jews - rewarding terrorism and providing them another base to launch attacks against Israel - preached the nations must force the "peace" issue between Israel and "Palestinians," and promoted an accursed Palestine as the final solution. He should have called for an Anglo-Israeli alliance to defeat our sworn enemies.
Jews and Christian-Zionists oppose such a BIG LIE and remind all the world to go by the Book (Malachi 4:4) and scrap the worthless road map that is leading to the dismantling of Israel, the occupation of Jerusalem, and the fall of the United States and British Commonwealth (due to rot from within and the death blow by fascist Europe from without).
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
Tony Blair's speech concedes defeat
Tony Blair revealed, in his speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, he just doesn't get it (or is at least ordered to appear that way like President Bush). The war on terrorism is a war against Nazi-Muslims, plain and simple. It is not our duty to try and convert those nations to our "values" (doesn't he realize our values, dangerously adrift from our biblical moorings, is what alienates many of the faithful among Islam?). We are called to serve as a "city on a hill," a light to all the nations, a model nation others seek to emulate not immolate!
Contrary to humanist ideas, spreading democracy is not our holy mission. Democracy is not the gospel. It has worked relatively well among our Israelite family of nations with our disposition, but generally fails among those who aren't so inclined to it, who don't share our proclivity for it, as is their prerogative. We're trying to scrub the spots off the leopard and it just won't work!
...we will not win the battle against this global
extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as force, unless we show we are even-handed, fair and just in our application of those values to the world... My point is that this war can't be won in a conventional way. It can only be won by showing that our values are stronger, better and more just, more fair than the alternative.
They hate and despise our values, and according to Blair's battle plans they would need to accept them for us to win. A dog chasing its tail. They already know what we stand for and have rejected it. According to Blair's diagnosis, their disease is terminal and we've lost the war trying to save them. When they do opt for democracy they elect those of whom we don't approve, who clearly don't share our values, as the Hamas victory blares to those who aren't willfully deaf, dumb and blind.
The banner was not actually "regime change" it
was "values change".
Blair kept bleating about "values change" rather than regime change, and such a "banner" is blown to bits daily by those who don't share or want our values, resisting the forced conversion which the Muslim world correctly see as a new crusade. However, it is not yet a Catholic crusade (will a nuclear jihad against Vienna or Berlin provoke a rapid response from the EU?), and it certainly isn't a Christian crusade - although some embers of biblical influence remain despite the floodgates of hell that have waged war against them, our "values" that have systematically sought to squelch and substitute them with evolution, humanism and relativism - it is a SECULAR CRUSADE, a serious conflict of interests, a culture clash.
This is not just about security or military tactics. It is about hearts and minds about inspiring people, persuading them, showing them what our values at their best stand for.
"War is hell" - not a group hug or liberal classroom! We lost the war when we became entangled in the world of ideas and attitudes rather than stay focused on taking out a hostile regime and leaving Iraq to do whatever Iraq wanted to do - civil war or not. Otherwise we should clear out the area of Arabs and claim it for the British-Israelites, Joes (Joseph isn't Jewish!), as it is part of Greater Israel to the Euphrates, and open it up like the Wild West, offering incentives to pioneers willing to move there and stake out claims. (Besides, we're still in the process of nation building here at home, with many improvements needed and changes necessary. Charity begins at home. Cut off our entangling alliances and bring our troops and money home! Why shouldn't taxpayers money be spent in America - not overseas by foreigners who hate us and would dance in the streets if we fell tomorrow?).
If the Iraqis "elected" to choose another hostile regime making serious threats against us, we could take out that dictator too. We didn't defeat the Japanese or Germans by trying to impress them with our "values" or self-restraint. We fought and won the war and didn't worry about disproportionate use of force or civilian casualties, knowing our enemies are responsible for such and must be held accountable. They started the war, we finished it.
Blair then praised General Sharon for illegally expelling innocent Jews - rewarding terrorism and providing them another base to launch attacks against Israel - preached the nations must force the "peace" issue between Israel and "Palestinians," and promoted an accursed Palestine as the final solution. He should have called for an Anglo-Israeli alliance to defeat our sworn enemies.
Jews and Christian-Zionists oppose such a BIG LIE and remind all the world to go by the Book (Malachi 4:4) and scrap the worthless road map that is leading to the dismantling of Israel, the occupation of Jerusalem, and the fall of the United States and British Commonwealth (due to rot from within and the death blow by fascist Europe from without).
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
Contrary to humanist ideas, spreading democracy is not our holy mission. Democracy is not the gospel. It has worked relatively well among our Israelite family of nations with our disposition, but generally fails among those who aren't so inclined to it, who don't share our proclivity for it, as is their prerogative. We're trying to scrub the spots off the leopard and it just won't work!
...we will not win the battle against this global
extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as force, unless we show we are even-handed, fair and just in our application of those values to the world... My point is that this war can't be won in a conventional way. It can only be won by showing that our values are stronger, better and more just, more fair than the alternative.
They hate and despise our values, and according to Blair's battle plans they would need to accept them for us to win. A dog chasing its tail. They already know what we stand for and have rejected it. According to Blair's diagnosis, their disease is terminal and we've lost the war trying to save them. When they do opt for democracy they elect those of whom we don't approve, who clearly don't share our values, as the Hamas victory blares to those who aren't willfully deaf, dumb and blind.
The banner was not actually "regime change" it
was "values change".
Blair kept bleating about "values change" rather than regime change, and such a "banner" is blown to bits daily by those who don't share or want our values, resisting the forced conversion which the Muslim world correctly see as a new crusade. However, it is not yet a Catholic crusade (will a nuclear jihad against Vienna or Berlin provoke a rapid response from the EU?), and it certainly isn't a Christian crusade - although some embers of biblical influence remain despite the floodgates of hell that have waged war against them, our "values" that have systematically sought to squelch and substitute them with evolution, humanism and relativism - it is a SECULAR CRUSADE, a serious conflict of interests, a culture clash.
This is not just about security or military tactics. It is about hearts and minds about inspiring people, persuading them, showing them what our values at their best stand for.
"War is hell" - not a group hug or liberal classroom! We lost the war when we became entangled in the world of ideas and attitudes rather than stay focused on taking out a hostile regime and leaving Iraq to do whatever Iraq wanted to do - civil war or not. Otherwise we should clear out the area of Arabs and claim it for the British-Israelites, Joes (Joseph isn't Jewish!), as it is part of Greater Israel to the Euphrates, and open it up like the Wild West, offering incentives to pioneers willing to move there and stake out claims. (Besides, we're still in the process of nation building here at home, with many improvements needed and changes necessary. Charity begins at home. Cut off our entangling alliances and bring our troops and money home! Why shouldn't taxpayers money be spent in America - not overseas by foreigners who hate us and would dance in the streets if we fell tomorrow?).
If the Iraqis "elected" to choose another hostile regime making serious threats against us, we could take out that dictator too. We didn't defeat the Japanese or Germans by trying to impress them with our "values" or self-restraint. We fought and won the war and didn't worry about disproportionate use of force or civilian casualties, knowing our enemies are responsible for such and must be held accountable. They started the war, we finished it.
Blair then praised General Sharon for illegally expelling innocent Jews - rewarding terrorism and providing them another base to launch attacks against Israel - preached the nations must force the "peace" issue between Israel and "Palestinians," and promoted an accursed Palestine as the final solution. He should have called for an Anglo-Israeli alliance to defeat our sworn enemies.
Jews and Christian-Zionists oppose such a BIG LIE and remind all the world to go by the Book (Malachi 4:4) and scrap the worthless road map that is leading to the dismantling of Israel, the occupation of Jerusalem, and the fall of the United States and British Commonwealth (due to rot from within and the death blow by fascist Europe from without).
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
