Saturday, January 19, 2008


George W. Bush and Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, hand in hand.

Suicide/Homicides Bombers for Peace Now
Paradise awaits this Muslim homicidal bomber...
But will 72 virgins really fight over what's left of him?


From the Editor

America Is Copying Chamberlain’s Mistakes

In World War II, Britain’s prime minister dreamed of making peace with Hitler. Today, the U.S. has the same fantasy. By Gerald Flurry

We live in the most dangerous times ever. And they are getting much more dangerous every day. At the same time, most people are afraid to face reality—even though that frightening reality is a sign of the best news we could ever imagine.

Two bombshell events happened within one week—the Annapolis “peace” talks and the release of a National Intelligence Estimate (nie) regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program—that signal a nation-destroying change in American foreign policy!

Both events reveal how Americans prefer to live in a fantasy world—like the one portrayed in the nie. Like little children, far too many Americans hide from the ugly and dangerous truth.

It is hard for me to read about the Israeli-Palestinian “peace” conference in Annapolis—which the U.S. hosted on Nov. 27, 2007—and not think about the relationship between Adolf Hitler and Neville Chamberlain before World War ii. Many experts believe we came dangerously close to losing that war because we refused to face reality. Winston Churchill called it “the unnecessary war” because we failed to confront Hitler’s humiliation of the West before he became so powerful.

Coddling Hitler

A terrifying event was unfolding in Germany during 1932. Here is what Martin Gilbert wrote in his biography of Winston Churchill, The Prophet of Truth (please take note of that powerful title): “As the German economic crisis intensified, and unemployment rose, Adolf Hitler’s following had increased, and by mid-January more than 400,000 men had joined his semi-military ‘Stormtroopers,’ while Nazi Party membership reached 2 million. The three most strident Nazi demands were an end to the Versailles Treaty, rearmament, and the removal of German Jews from all walks of German life.”

Hitler and the Nazis demanded “the removal of German Jews from all walks of German life.” Hitler’s sick and dangerous demands should have been met with a resolute will. But Chamberlain and others had a defeatist attitude. As a result, Hitler and Germany eventually caused the deaths of 50 million people.

During the 1930s, British and other Western diplomats worked feverishly to have peace with a diabolical Hitler. Neville Chamberlain, the last prime minister before Churchill, was humiliated and had his career tarnished forever by the Nazis. The media, politicians and people of Britain and America were supportive of Chamberlain’s allowing himself to be bullied and abused by Hitler before the whole world. (Just as most of our media, politicians and people loved the Annapolis conference.) There was a strong buzz about Chamberlain receiving the Nobel Prize—until Hitler started World War ii.

Winston Churchill warned Chamberlain and others throughout the 1930s against giving in to Hitler’s egregious demands. But he was ALONE and almost driven from his own party—until people were forced to see that he was right. However, they didn’t see it until it was almost too late.

Let’s just imagine there had been some kind of “peace” made with Hitler. What kind of peace can you have with a murderous racist who wants to remove a whole race of people from his society?

The West did nothing as Hitler toppled the government of Austria and got control of that country. Many Jews and others were slaughtered. The Times of London even tried to justify Hitler’s enslaving of that nation against the majority’s will.

That was a land-for-peace deal—which is exactly what Israel has been using for many years to try to gain peace with the radical Arabs. What does this tactic say about Israel? It is in its final phase as a nation if it doesn’t wake up!

After devouring Austria, Hitler wanted the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. Britain and France forced that country to give away a large portion of its territory—all in the name of peace.

Then Hitler attacked and conquered all of Czechoslovakia. The West let it happen to a freedom-loving country, in the name of peace. Britain and France didn’t declare war until Hitler attacked Poland. But even then, Chamberlain tried to get Hitler to withdraw from Poland and sign a peace treaty with Britain. What a fantasy world Neville Chamberlain lived in.

I marvel that we have learned no lessons from what happened in the 1930s. In spirit, Churchill is alone once again. His views run totally counter to the Nazi spirit that prevailed at the Annapolis “peace” conference. That means a far worse danger is just around the corner, as it was in the 1930s.

Racism in Annapolis

On Nov. 30, 2007, Caroline Glick wrote in her column for the Jerusalem Post: “This week the Bush administration legitimized Arab anti-Semitism. In an effort to please the Saudis and their Arab brothers, the Bush administration agreed to physically separate the Jews from the Arabs at the Annapolis conference in a manner that aligns with the apartheid policies of the Arab world which prohibit Israelis from setting foot on Arab soil.

“Evident everywhere, the discrimination against Israel received its starkest expression at the main assembly of the Annapolis conference on Tuesday. There, in accordance with Saudi demands, the Americans prohibited Israeli representatives from entering the hall through the same door as the Arabs. …

“It is true that Israel has security concerns, but as far as [U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice is concerned, the Palestinians are the innocent victims. They are the ones who are discriminated against and humiliated, not [Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi] Livni, who was forced—by Rice—to enter the conference through the service entrance” (emphasis mine throughout).

The foreign minister received that repugnant treatment even though she came prepared to make weighty concessions.

How abominable! The spirit of Hitler prevails again. And somehow we think this is going to bring peace. This is not the way to peace—it’s the way to war! Just as it was in the 1930s. We are nurturing the Nazi spirit to our everlasting shame!

This is about two nations—America and Israel—that lack the will to survive! It’s about the end of two world powers! It has horrifying consequences for the West.

When will we ever learn?

Many of the Arabs attended the conference only because they fear Iran and want America’s protection. But if we won’t take a stand against their Jewish hatred, how can we protect them from Iran? Soon they will understand how weak America really is. Then they will turn to Europe for protection. At that point, Americans, like the Jews, will probably not be allowed to set foot on Arab soil. (Remember how Hitler spread his racism and hate toward other races—trying to create his master race? The Arabs know we have been closely allied with Israel for a long time, and they often hate Americans more than they hate the Jews.)

Caroline Glick wrote, “Israel’s humiliated foreign minister did not receive support from her American counterpart. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who spent her childhood years in the segregated American South, sided with the Arabs. Although polite enough to note that she doesn’t support the slaughter of Israelis, she made no bones about the fact that her true sympathies lie with the racist Arabs.

“As she put it, ‘I know what it is like to hear that you cannot go on a road or through a checkpoint because you are a Palestinian. I understand the feeling of humiliation and powerlessness.’

“Rice’s remarks make clear that for the secretary of state there is no difference between Israelis trying to defend themselves from a jihadist Palestinian society which supports the destruction of the Jewish state and bigoted white Southerners who oppressed African Americans because of the color of their skin” (ibid.).

What a fantasy the U.S. is now promoting. Israel has continually given back land to the Arabs, which it won in a war that the Arabs started. These territorial concessions threaten Israel’s own security as the Nazi Arabs gain control—as they have in Gaza and a large portion of Lebanon. Still, America is moving toward their side, away from Israel. This is not about Israeli bigotry and racism. It’s about America’s broken will.

It is easy to see why the Israeli-American alliance is beginning to crumble. What a paradox. Israel is the only true democracy in the Middle East. Have we already lost the war against terrorism?

America is helping to extinguish what it professes to be fighting for in Iraq: freedom and democracy. The end of all this is going to be worse than we can even imagine.

America Favors Syria Over Israel

Syria, the second-leading terrorist-sponsoring nation in the world, came to the conference only because America agreed to allow its chosen leader to gain control of Lebanon. The terrorists already have the upper hand there.

The political party of Saad al-Hariri, son of assassinated former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, has tried to limit Syria’s influence in Lebanon. On Nov. 28, 2007, however, his party agreed to a constitutional amendment that opened the door for Michel Suleiman, commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces, to be elected president. The Weekly Standard reported, “Up until now, Hariri and his March 14 allies (the date of the 2005 Cedar Revolution) had resisted Suleiman’s candidacy; Lebanese democrats are generally loath to have military men serve as president of the republic, especially after the last nine years of former commander Emile Lahoud’s presidency. But more importantly, Suleiman is Damascus’s number-one choice to fill the now-vacant spot.

“So why have Hariri and his colleagues, including Druze chieftain Walid Jumblatt and leader of the Christian Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea, made an about-face? It is because of Annapolis. They feared Washington was going to cut a deal with Syria over Lebanon, so they made their own bargain to protect themselves since it is now obvious Washington will not. Thus, the wages of peace processing” (Nov. 30, 2007).

The Standard article continued by describing some of the background of this situation. Please take note of this: “In October, Hariri visited Washington where he met with the president and every major administration figure along with dozens of legislators on both sides of the aisle. ‘There is a killing machine in Syria,‘ Hariri told a roomful of journalists. ‘We came to Washington to say, “If you are going to do something about it, let us know. If you are not going to do anything about it, let us know. But no matter what, we’re not going to give in.”‘

“Hariri and the rest apparently did give in. March 14 figures are being picked off one by one, and their Washington ally, the world’s lone superpower, has done nothing to check the violence. …

“Consciously or not, Rice signaled where America’s real priorities lie—not with protecting a fledgling democracy in Beirut from the terrorist state next door, but in trying to reward a society that breeds terrorism within its own state. …

“In Beirut, though, it means a continuation of the Syrian-backed military and security apparatus that has killed Lebanese politicians, journalists, and civil society figures with impunity. It means, as well, a betrayal of the Lebanese men and women who peacefully resisted a terrorist regime and its local allies, who risked their lives over the last two-plus years on behalf of a national dream of tolerance and coexistence. …

“It seems that in the end, Bashar al-Assad and his family will pay no price for their murderous campaign against a U.S. ally. That is to say, insofar as the White House’s post-9/11 freedom agenda was meant to counter violence and extremism, it is Osama bin Laden’s vision of the Middle East that has won the day in Lebanon—not freedom, sovereignty and independence, but terror and death.

Now we have a stronger killing machine in Lebanon, supposedly to bring peace! And who is rejoicing? The terrorists of Lebanon and the Middle East—instead of the more innocent, freedom-loving people who trusted in America to help them gain peace and freedom. The Arab Nazis will usher in a new era of “peace” in the Middle East with their killing machine—with a lot of help from the U.S.

We are helping this terrorist-sponsoring nation destroy a fledgling democracy. How could anyone not believe we are hurting our war against terrorism? Or have we just surrendered in that war?

This is not the action of a real superpower. America made a watershed change in its foreign policy at Annapolis. History clearly shows us that this will lead to a colossal disaster!

How despicably weak and childish our foreign policy has become. Remember this: The aftereffects of Annapolis will be even more bitter for America than for Israel. Winston Churchill has already shown us that. But nobody learned from his example. So prepare yourselves for much more suffering to come. There are consequences for such heinous deeds!

An Announcement to the World

Not one week after the Annapolis conference, the U.S. intelligence community released the nie about Iran. This report was America’s indirect announcement to a stunned world that we lack the will to ever stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

Iran is the number-one terrorist-sponsoring nation in the world—by far. The Israeli intelligence network is probably the best in this world. Israel estimates that Iran will have nuclear bombs within two years—a radically different view than the nie report.

When Iran gets nuclear weapons, it is more likely to start a nuclear World War iii than any nation on Earth. President Ahmadinejad already said he would wipe Israel off the map. That is not the kind of mind that diplomacy is going to change. The terrorists of Hezbollah and Hamas control southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. They are sponsored and controlled by Iran. They frequently attack Israel without being provoked. How much more dangerous will this world be if they get nuclear weapons?

Well-meaning but weak-willed, dangerous peaceniks (what Churchill called them) in politics and the media helped and encouraged Hitler to start World War ii. He could have easily been stopped in the early years. Weak leaders said diplomacy would work. But diplomacy only paved the way for Hitler’s causing the death of 50 million people. Churchill stood alone, warning of the coming catastrophe. Many people called him a warmonger—until they came to see he was right.

We are repeating the same distressing, inexcusable error today. When the peaceniks get control, surrender and war are almost certain to follow rapidly! That is especially true in peace-loving nations like America, Britain and Israel today.

Peaceniks offer virtually no resistance to tyrants and even encourage them in their warring spirit. Maybe we should start calling these people who seek peace at any price warmongers! History would certainly justify such a label.

Here is what Churchill said after his long warning in the 1930s and shortly before World War ii began: “When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand we apply too late the remedies which then might have effected a cure.

“There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as the Sibylline books. It falls into that long, dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong—these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history” (Gilbert, op. cit.).

Churchill was a high-level government official before and during World War i. The government he served made terrible mistakes shortly before and during that war. Mr. Churchill was horrified to see the same mistakes being repeated in the 1930s and during World War ii. The Western world scoffed at his warning of a coming world explosion.

Several reputable historians state that Germany came dangerously close to winning World War ii. We are making the same tragic mistakes today that were made in those two world wars.

Betraying Israel—and America

Yossi Klein Halevi wrote this for the New Republic, December 6, after the nie was released: “America, even under George Bush, is hardly likely to go to war to stop a program many Americans now believe doesn’t exist.

“Until now, pessimists here could console themselves that a last-resort Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would likely draw wide international sympathy and even gratitude—very different from the near-total condemnation that greeted Israel’s attack on Saddam’s reactor in 1981. Now, though, the nie will ensure that if Israel does attack, it will be widely branded a warmonger, and faulted for the inevitable fallout of rising oil prices and increased terror.

“The sense of betrayal within the Israeli security system is deep. After all, Israel’s great achievement in its struggle against Iran was in convincing the international community that the nuclear threat was real; now that victory has been undone—not by Russia or the European Union, but by Israel’s closest ally.

What makes Israeli security officials especially furious is that the report casts doubt on Iranian determination to attain nuclear weapons. [The report offers absolutely no evidence to support such a view—but it could have deadly consequences!] There is a sense of incredulity here: Do we really need to argue the urgency of the threat all over again? The Israeli strategists I heard from ridicule the report’s contention that ‘Tehran’s decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs.’ Is it, asks one Israeli analyst sarcastically, a cost-benefit approach for one of the world’s largest oil exporters to risk international sanctions and economic ruin for the sake of a peaceful nuclear program?”

Anybody who doesn’t think Iran has a crash program to build nuclear weapons is simply refusing to face the truth. Weak-willed people make deadly mistakes from which a nation may not recover—especially in this nuclear age. It’s the same old story. History keeps repeating itself.

That intelligence report did betray Israel. But it also betrayed the American people! It has caused them to relax and believe there is no immediate threat. It’s the Hitler scenario all over again, this time with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

We should have learned from Hitler that our “peace” making is fostering a nuclear World War iii. If we think we can do nothing and somehow escape the raging danger, we are thinking like children! When a nuclear war starts, the whole world is going to be dragged into the fiery furnace.

It isn’t that we can’t see the danger. We refuse to face it, hoping it will somehow go away. Instead, we make the problem a thousand times worse.

Winston Churchill called this the “confirmed unteachability of mankind.” He said “these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”

When will we ever learn?

Churchill experienced World Wars i and ii. He served as a watchman in both world wars—especially World War ii. But we have learned nothing from his vast experience and warnings. That means we are going to suffer as no people ever have by refusing to learn the truth.

Politics Above Survival

Here is another powerful statement from the New Republic: “Nor do senior analysts [in Israel] take seriously the nie’s vague assessments of when Iran will reach the point of no return: beginning in 2010, it says, though not likely until 2013 or even 2015. Israel’s point of no return is when Iran attains the potential to produce sufficient fissile material for making a bomb. And they believe that is likely to happen—barring continued mishaps, accidental or not, in the Iranian nuclear program, like exploding centrifuges—somewhere within the next two years.

“Once the material is available, the final step toward constructing a bomb is the least complicated part of the process. ‘Making bombs is a much shorter process than uranium enrichment,’ explains Ephraim Asculai, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies and a 40-year veteran of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission. ‘Today the Iranians are enriching uranium at 4 percent; to make a bomb, you need 90 percent. From there, the transition doesn’t require a lot of time. Most of the work has been done to get to the 4 percent. It is a matter of months, not years.’”

We should be thinking in terms of months, not years! However, major media outlets are picturing this as another intelligence blunder by the Bush administration. They are helping their political party win elections. They are also causing far-reaching damage to America.

Politics are being placed above the welfare of our nation. That portends a black, foreboding future for America. These are the most dangerous times in our history. We can’t afford such terrifying blunders if we are to survive as a nation.

Grave Danger of a World Explosion

Churchill kept crying out as a voice in the wilderness of political confusion. There was still a possibility, Churchill believed, of preserving peace. “Never must we despair,” he said, “never must we give in, but we must face facts and draw true conclusions from them.” It was now essential for Britain to retrieve “the woeful miscalculations of which we are at present the dupes, and of which, unless we take warning in time, we may some day be the victims” (Gilbert, op. cit.).

We are not facing the facts. Our people are being duped by leaders who want to hear “smooth things” in a world filled with unparalleled dangers.

Churchill continued: “Terrible preparations are being made on all sides for war,” and he added: “I do not feel that people realize at all how near and how grave are the dangers of a world explosion. Some regard the scene with perfect equanimity; many gape stolidly upon it, some are angry to be disturbed by such thoughts in their daily routine and pleasures” (ibid.).

Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin later admitted he put his own political interest ahead of the nation’s welfare! And his country came perilously close to death. The people wouldn’t face Churchill’s warning until it was almost too late. He talked about the possible “end” of Britain’s glories. But the people did not want to think about the bloody dangers of a world explosion. They didn’t want to be disturbed from their comfortable routine and pleasures. So they voted for politicians who spoke to them about more pleasures and a prosperous world.

The same is true today. We face a far more spectacular world explosion. But we are too glutted on sports and entertainment to heed a strong warning. As Churchill said, history continues to repeat itself! We have not learned from the historical lessons of World War ii. Today, we are again surrendering to evil tyrants.

Ehud Olmert has said that Israel is “tired of fighting.” America has the same sickness. It is a fatal disease to have in a world in which you have so many powerful enemies.

Again, let’s hearken back to World War ii. France surrendered to Germany in six weeks. There were many reasons why France should have continued to fight. But its government was led by men with no will to fight. Charles de Gaulle was the only real leader in the higher echelon of government. But other leaders fought to keep him out of power.

Would there even be a France today if it weren’t for Churchill’s fighting spirit?

There are over a hundred prophecies in your Bible that tell us we are getting extremely close to the best news you can ever imagine! You can prove every one of those scriptures. You can also live to see every one of them fulfilled.

Is there any hope? Yes there is! There is hope in ascertaining why America, Britain and Israel have a broken will. It was prophesied in the book of Daniel and other places (Daniel 9:10-14; Leviticus 26:19). Daniel didn’t even understand what he wrote. The biblical book of Daniel is an end-time book—it was written for us today. Request a free copy of our booklet Daniel—Unsealed at Last! The Prophet Daniel tells us that we can shine like the stars forever and ever if we face the truth.

In the meantime, all we have to do is sit back and wait for Iran to test its first nuclear bomb. I feel strongly that we won’t have long to wait. Then all of the childish fantasies will quickly disappear.

Isaiah prophesied that the ambassadors of peace shall weep bitterly! (Isaiah 33:7). That is a prophecy for this end time. What a brutal condemnation of our diplomats. We must learn why the ambassadors of peace are going to weep bitterly. Therein lies the real path to peace.

DEBKAfile: Washington lines up with Moscow’s soft diplomacy on Iran, Nicholas Burns drops out

January 19, 2008, 12:18 PM (GMT+02:00)

Nicholas Burns resigns: Exit US tough line on Iran

Nicholas Burns resigns: Exit US tough line on Iran

Nicholas Burns’ retirement as US undersecretary for political affairs Friday, Jan. 18, and his replacement by US ambassador to Moscow William Burns, take the Bush administration’s strategy on Iran’s nuclear activities a stage closer to Moscow’s line of soft diplomacy.

State department spokesman Sean McCormack Saturday played down expectations that the six powers meeting in Berlin next Tuesday would produce a consensual UN sanctions resolution. The group - the US, Russia, China, UK, France and Germany - were deadlocked at previous meetings by Moscow and Beijing’s opposition to harsh measures. The change in Washington is indicated by McCormack’s reference to “multilateral diplomacy.”

The outgoing Nicholas Burns, in the No. 3 State Department spot, held the Iran portfolio and led the Bush administration’s drive for tough sanctions at the UN Security Council. (He is the 19th diplomat to quit the State Department in recent weeks). Ambassador Burns (no relation) is closer to the Russian approach.

DEBKAfile’s Moscow sources note that President George W. Bush has in recent months taken strides towards closing the gap with the Kremlin on Iran.

President Valdimir Putin’s standard line - I have no information that Iran is developing nuclear arms – was corroborated by the US National Intelligence Estimate’s conclusion in December that Tehran had shelved its military program in 2003.

Circles close to Putin maintain that the two presidents began working together quietly in October 2007, on the shared understanding that affirmative tactics were preferable to tough penalties for weaning Tehran away from uranium enrichment, even temporarily. Therefore, after long opposition, Bush surprisingly came out in favor of Moscow’s decision to consign uranium fuel rods for Iran’s atomic reactor in Bushehr.

Our sources in the Persian Gulf and Vienna disclose, moreover, that the US president also lined up with Saudi King Abdullah on a decision to relegate the handling of Iran’s nuclear issues to the UN nuclear watchdog’s director Mohammed ElBaradei.

ElBaradei was therefore accorded the unusual honor of an audience with Iran’s supreme ruler Ayatollah Ali Khamenei when he visited Tehran on Jan. 12. He was told he could expect full cooperation from the Iranian government and promised answers to his questions on the tough questions of the uranium enrichment process and plutonium production.

The US and Russian governments both believe that an important breakthrough has been achieved and a way forward for further diplomatic engagement on the hitherto intractable Iranian nuclear program.

The United States has therefore turned away from confrontation with Iran and consigned its clandestine nuclear projects to the routine diplomatic track.

This course is diametrically opposed to the policy pursued by Nicholas Burns in recent years. His resignation was therefore logical.

Blog Archive