SPECIAL INTERVIEW with the author of the Harbinger, Pastor Jonathan Cahn

Dave James
Pastor Jonathan Cahn
Dr. Jimmy DeYoung moderates a discussion between David James and Pastor Jonathan Cahn, author of “The Harbinger”.

BOOK REVIEW BY DAVID JAMES

The Harbinger: Fact or Fiction?

Does Isaiah 9:10 really contain an ancient mystery that holds the secret of America’s future?

Read or download Dave James’ review on “The Harbinger”

T.A. McMahon with the Berean Call…A critical review of The Harbinger

The Harbinger is a novel that is becoming very popular among both Christians and non-Christians, even reaching the top of the New York Times best-seller list.

Read more

Thomas Ice takes “A Critical look at The Harbinger”

The Harbinger[1] is a fictional account of what its author, Messianic Rabbi Jonathan Cahn believes is a scenario that is on the verge of happening to America.

Read more
 
 

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Expert: ‘Settlements’ Are Legal, Look at the UN Documents

By: Elad Benari -Arutz Sheva

Dr. Meir Rosenne, former Israeli ambassador to the United States and France, said on Wednesday that the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria are legal and that this is true under international law.

Rosenne spoke to Arutz Sheva a day after the prosecutor for the International Criminal Court in The Hague rejected a complaint filed by the Palestinian Authority against Israel for alleged war crimes during “Operation Cast Lead” in Gaza in 2009.

The prosecutor explained that only states can file a complaint with the International Criminal Court, noting that the PA is only an observer at the United Nations and not a member state.

Dr. Rosenne noted that “the PA is not a country. It has a Palestinian Authority and Hamas which controls Gaza but they have no country. All UN documents dealing with Resolution 242 do not mention the word Palestinian.”

He added that although some people may not be aware of this, under international law the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria have full legal status.

“American jurists such as former ICJ President Stephen Schwebel have said that Israel has more rights to Judea and Samaria,” said Rosenne. “Any legal expert who looks at the UN documents will see that there is no such concept as the West Bank or the occupied territories, but rather Judea and Samaria. That is the terminology that appears in the most official documents.”

Dr. Rosenne added that according to the Geneva Convention, all the Jewish communities are legal, saying, “Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention says that an occupying power cannot forcibly move citizens to occupied territory. This was true during World War II when the Germans forcefully moved German citizens to occupied Polish territories. In our case, Israel never occupied Judea and Samaria. Judea and Samaria is an area that has never belonged to another country. Jordanian occupation was never recognized, just as the Egyptian occupation of Gaza was not recognized. The fate of these areas should be determined by negotiations among the parties. The settlers never forcibly entered anywhere, nor were they moved there, so they are perfectly legal.”

He also noted that, according to the Geneva Convention, terrorists imprisoned in Israel should not be considered prisoners of war.

“The Geneva Convention states that a prisoner of war is a man who openly carried weapons and wore uniforms and respected the laws of war,” said Rosenne. “The terrorists do not carry arms openly, they do not have uniforms and they do not respect the laws of war when they kill children. They are not party to the conflict because no Arab state has adopted them. Nevertheless, Israel allows every terrorist to meet with an attorney.”

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Muslim Book Calling for World Domination Sold in Canada

By: Elad Benari – Arutz Sheva

After it was revealed that a book advising Muslim men how to abuse and control their wives is being sold in a Toronto bookstore, The Toronto Sun newspaper has exposed that there are other controversial Muslim books being sold in Canadian stores.

According to a report in the newspaper this past weekend, one Islamic bookstore in east Toronto is selling books that urge Muslims to usurp the Western world and install an Islamic State in its place.

The books were written by deceased Islamic scholar Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi and in one of them, called “Jihad in Islam”, he wrote, “Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation that rules it. Islam requires the earth – not just a portion – but the whole planet.”

Maududi was an influential Pakistani journalist, theologian and Muslim revivalist leader, who wrote more than 120 books and pamphlets. He lived from 1903 to 1979 and is described in the preface of one of the books as an author who “provided the present-day revival of Islam with its intellectual foundations,” according to The Toronto Sun.

Maududi’s books carry a common theme of Islam as a revolutionary “ideology and program which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals,” the report said.

The newspaper quoted another book, “The Process of the Islamic Revolution,” in which Maududi wrote that Muslims “should be prepared to sacrifice all prospects of personal advancement in wordily life” including giving up friends and their own and their parents’ expectations to further the expansion of Islamic belief.

“Society, government, law, nation, country, whatsoever obstructs the achievement of their object [of an Islamic Revolution], they should be prepared to struggle against it,” he wrote.

In another quote from “Jihad In Islam” brought by The Toronto Sun, Maududi wrote, “All rules which he considers wrong; all taxes that he deems unlawful; all matters which he believes to be evil; the civilization and way of life which, in his view, are wicked; the education system which seems to him as fatal – all these will be so inexorably imposed on him, his and his children that evasion will become impossible.”

He wrote that as soon as Islam “captures” another state, it will ban gambling and prostitution, outlaw business dealings forbidden by Islamic law and “make it obligatory for non-Muslim women to observe the minimum standards of modesty in dress as required by Islamic Law.”

The Toronto Star reported that most of Maududi’s books — small and slim paperbacks — could be bought at the store, which is located in the Toronto municipality of Scarborough, for as little as $1.

When one of the store’s managers was asked by a reporter who posed as a customer whether he stocked “Jihad in Islam”, the manager said he hadn’t carried it for years because the RCMP had been to his store to ask questions about why it would carry such a book.

Another manager said the store did not carry any of the six books on the reporter’s list, but the reporter was able to find “Jihad in Islam” and four others of Maududi’s books stacked on a bottom shelf in the middle of the store within 30 minutes.

When it was revealed to the store manager that it was a Toronto Sun reporter who bought those books, he was irate, saying he “will say nothing” before disappearing into an office at the back of the store. The RCMP would not comment on its supposed questioning of the manager.

Tarek Fatah, a Muslim moderate and renowned commentator, cautioned that such literature can be dangerously attractive to young men raised in overly-strict Muslim households.

“The radical Islamists … keep pumping this idea that … their Islamic heritage is far superior than what the Western world has done, and that the West, what it’s doing, is absolutely Satanic, and these books over here validate those issues,” Fatah told The Toronto Sun.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Open mic and less nuclear security

By: Robert Maginnis – Human Events

An open-mic comment by President Barack Obama gives the Russians an early Christmas and the American people reason to reject the president’s radical nuclear security strategy.

Obama’s comment came last week after a meeting with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. Obama said, “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [Vladimir Putin] to give me space.”

“Yeah, I understand.  I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” Mr. Medvedev said. 

Obama continued, “After my election I have more flexibility.”

“But flexibility to do what?” Republican presidential candidate Governor Mitt Romney asked in Foreign Affairs Magazine.

Romney opined, “The Russians clearly prefer to do business with the current incumbent of the White House” because Obama has “been pliant on missile defense and other areas of nuclear security.” 

Congressional Republicans are also alarmed by Mr. Obama’s nuclear security performance.  In February, 34 members wrote the president a letter, “to share our deep concern … that you specifically instructed the National Security Council to undertake a study that could result in U.S. nuclear weapons reductions of up to 80%.”  

The members of Congress labeled it “inconceivable” that the president would consider shrinking our nuclear arsenal when, according to their letter, every other nuclear weapons state has an active nuclear weapons modernization program.  Obama has not responded to the letter.

Last week, Mr. Obama restated his nuclear vision: “Stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking a world without them.”  This vision was the basis for Obama’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, which outlines the administration’s strategy for reducing “nuclear dangers.”

Last summer, Mr. Obama explained, he launched a study to implement his NPR.

 “Even as we have more work to do, we can already say with confidence that we have more nuclear weapons than we need,” he said. 

The president’s nuclear security performance, based on his own five NPR strategic objectives, raises a number of challenges.

First, preventing nuclear proliferation and terrorism.  While Obama has taken steps to address this objective, the scope of the problem is daunting.  It takes 55 pounds of highly enriched uranium or 17 pounds of plutonium to build a crude Hiroshima-style bomb.  The world is awash in both materials – enough material spread throughout 38 countries for more than 100,000 nuclear weapons, not including the material already making up 20,000 current weapons and inside 440 reactors.

Only a binding, universal regime has any chance of halting proliferation and controlling the global threat of atomic terrorism.  But too few nations are willing to invest the effort and expense to make a universal regime work, which prompts the question: how does our president intend to prevent nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism without universal support? 

Second, reducing the role of nuclear weapons.  Obama unilaterally changed the role of our  nuclear weapons from “critical” to “fundamental,”  meaning the U.S. will not threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.  Our nuclear  weapons’ “fundamental” role is now solely to deter nuclear attack. American actions are now more predictable, our defenses are accordingly weakened. 

Third, maintaining strategic deterrence and stability with a reduced nuclear force.  Obama worked with Russia to secure the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which reduces our strategic warheads, deployable delivery vehicles and launchers.  It also permits only a single warhead on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). 

But New START also gives Russia the advantage, forcing us to downsize our arsenal while leaving Russia’s deployed force untouched.  New START limits each side to 1,550 deployed warheads;  currently, the U.S. has 1,800 and Russia has 1,537. 

It also imposes a limit of 700 deployed ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers.  The U.S. has 883 compared to Russia’s 521, according to the U.S. State Department.

Further, the congressional letter to Obama states that China and Russia are engaged in aggressive nuclear force buildups in both quantity and quality.  How does the president’s New START and anticipated downsizing plan maintain strategic deterrence while our enemies are aggressively growing their own forces?

Fourth, strengthening regional deterrence and reassurance of U.S. allies.  Obama seeks to strengthen regional deterrence by enhancing conventional capabilities, but there are seldom enough conventional anti-missile systems to satisfy fearful allies.

Then there are nations like Saudi Arabia which promise to build a nuclear force should Iran go nuclear, and similar discussions are ongoing in Japan and South Korea as the North Korean nuclear threat grows. 

How does the president plan to strengthen regional deterrence with insufficient conventional assets and a growing nuclear threat?

Finally, sustaining a secure and effective nuclear arsenal.  Obama promises to do this by adhering to four principles: no nuclear testing, no new nuclear warheads, studying warhead sustainment options, and a strong refurbishment or re-use program. 

Under President Obama, the U.S. would keep a status quo arsenal even though our weapons and infrastructure are aged and our platforms require major modernization.

In 2010, President Obama pledged to support the U.S. nuclear weapons modernization program to win votes for New START.  But according to Congressional Republicans, his 2013 budget reneges on his pledge to support nuclear modernization.

President Obama’s stewardship of our nuclear arsenal endangers America. Downsizing our capability and feeding insecurity among our partners, he invests too much energy chasing his nuclear-free dream.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Descendants of grand mufti want to build peace center at razed Jerusalem hotel

By: Akiva Eldar – Haaretz.com

The descendents of Haj Amin al-Husseini, who led terror attacks on the Jewish community in Mandatory Palestine and collaborated with the Nazis while serving as mufti of Jerusalem, would like to build a peace and coexistence center for Arabs and Israelis on land the mufti owned.

The family is seeking, at least in part, to keep the land from being used to house settlers.

The land, on which the Shepherd’s Hotel in East Jerusalem was later built, was sold by Israel’s Custodian of Absentee Property, and ended up in the hands of U.S. businessman Irving Moskowitz, known for his support of settlers.

Israel’s High Court of Justice on Monday denied the petition submitted by Muna Husseini, the granddaughter of al-Husseini against the sale.

The High Court accepted the position of the state who claimed that the petition against the sale of the property, that used to belong to the mufti, was submitted too late by the absentee landlords.

Now, the way is clear for Moskowitz to carry out his plan to set up a new Jewish neighborhood on the grounds. The act is expected to trigger Palestinian protests and international criticism.

Muna Husseini, a 45-year-old U.S. citizen who lives in England, arrived from London Sunday ahead of a High Court of Justice hearing over the nine-dunam compound in the Sheikh Jarrah area of East Jerusalem.

Muna Husseini told Haaretz that the Husseini family, which still claims ownership of the land, had conveyed its proposal for a coexistence center to Moskowitz, who rebuffed it.

She said the family wants to donate the land to the cause of the advancement of intercultural and inter-religious dialogue, and is also seeking to prevent the establishment of a settlement there.

Muna Husseini said Husseini descendents living in the United States, Canada and Australia have reported the family’s proposal to their governments and have warned that the establishment of a Jewish neighborhood on the land will increase controversy in the city.

The 18 grandchildren of Haj Amin al-Husseini, one of the most prominent Arab leaders in Mandatory Palestine, have decided jointly to give up their rights to the land, which they believe were not abrogated by the custodian’s sale of the land, and say they are expecting Israel to turn the compound into a symbol of peace.

Israel Prize-winning sculptor Dani Karavan has volunteered to build an artistic installation at the site that will symbolize the desire for peace, together with Israeli and Palestinian artists.

The Jerusalem municipality’s 2009 decision to allow a Jewish neighborhood to go up on the site sparked harsh criticism of Israel in the United States and the European Union. Washington demanded that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stop the project on the grounds that it disrupted the demographic balance in East Jerusalem and thwarted efforts to renew negotiations with the Palestinians.

In a petition to the High Court of Justice in early 2011, Husseini said the Custodian of Absentee Property did not have the right to sell the land, because the absentee property law was not intended to apply to East Jerusalem. The petition also claimed the lot was sold without a tender and without due process to a company that transfered the rights to the Ateret Cohanim association, which sold the land to a California company called C&M Properties, owned by Moskowitz.

The High Court agreed to discuss the question of ownership. The petition states that the Husseini family plot was rented out at the beginning of the 1960s and that the Shepherd’s Hotel was subsequently built on it.

The hotel was demolished last year.

According to Mona Husseini, the Custodian of Absentee Property rejected a request by the Husseini family in the early 1980s to purchase the land.

The State Prosecutor’s Office has asked the High Court to reject the Husseini family petition on the grounds that it was not submitted in a timely fashion and that the law on absentee property was enacted before East Jerusalem was annexed and does apply to absentee land in the territories.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

World leaders: Nuclear terrorism a ‘grave threat’

By: The BBC

World leaders have called for closer co-operation to tackle the threat of nuclear terrorism at a summit on nuclear security in Seoul.

A communique at the end of the summit reiterated a joint call to secure “vulnerable nuclear material”.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak said nuclear terrorism remained a “grave threat”, while US President Barack Obama said action was key.

The meeting was dominated by North Korea’s plan to launch a rocket.

North Korea says the long-range rocket will carry a satellite when it goes up in April. The US says any launch would violate UN resolutions and constitute a missile test.

Iran’s nuclear programme was also on the minds of the summit participants, with Mr Obama pledging to meet the leaders of Russia and China on the sidelines to work towards a resolution.
‘Bad actors’

At the meeting, world leaders discussed measures to fight the threat of nuclear terrorism, including the protection of nuclear materials and facilities, as well as the prevention of trafficking of nuclear materials.

A joint communique reaffirmed their commitment to nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

“Nuclear terrorism continues to be one of the most challenging threats to international security,” it said.

“Defeating this threat requires strong national measures and international co-operation given its potential global, political, economic, social and psychological consequences.”

But it omitted a reference made in a draft communique last Thursday on the need for “concrete steps” towards a world without nuclear weapons, AFP news agency reports.

There are currently no binding international agreements on how to protect nuclear material stored peacefully inside its home country, says the BBC’s Lucy Williamson in Seoul. An amendment seeking to do that is still unratified after seven years.

Addressing the summit, Mr Obama warned there were still “too many bad actors” who were threatening to stockpile and use ”dangerous” nuclear material.

“It would not take much, just a handful or so of these materials, to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people and that’s not an exaggeration, that’s the reality that we face,” he said.

“The security of the world depends on the actions that we take.”

Mr Hu called for “an international environment conducive to boosting nuclear security” to be created and Mr Lee called for concrete action to tackle a threat that posed “a grave challenge” to peace.

The summit was attended by almost 60 leaders from around the world.
Rocket launch

Meetings on Monday were overshadowed by North Korea’s planned launch, scheduled to take place between 12 and 16 April.

Pyongyang says it is intended to mark the 100th anniversary of the birth of North Korea’s founding leader Kim Il-sung.

On Tuesday, a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said that the launch would go ahead as planned and criticised Mr Obama’s stance as ”confrontational”.

North Korea “will never give up the launch of a satellite for peaceful purposes”, the spokesman said in a statement in the official KCNA news agency.

A KCNA report also described the ”weather satellite” Pyongyang planned to launch as useful for ”the study of weather forecast needed for agriculture and other economic fields”.

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda, speaking at the summit, called on Pyongyang to cancel the rocket launch, saying that it would violate UN Security Council resolutions.

“As such, the international community strongly urges North Korea to exercise restraint and cancel the launch,” he said.

The resolutions were passed after a similar launch in April 2009. Japan is particularly concerned as that rocket was launched over the country three years ago.

The US and Chinese presidents met on Monday on the sidelines of the summit and agreed to co-ordinate their response to any “potential provocation” if Pyongyang went ahead with the launch.

South Korea and the US say North Korea risks further sanctions and isolation if it does not cancel its plans. Seoul has also warned it will shoot down the rocket if it strays over South Korean territory.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Iranian proxy a threat to our homeland

By: Robert Maginnis – Human Events

Hundreds of terrorists could emerge from the shadows to terrorize America if Israel or the U.S. attack Iran’s nuclear sites, current and former law enforcement officials warned the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security.  The committee chairman said our government has a duty to “prepare for the worst.”

 Last week committee chairman Rep. Peter King (R-NY) hosted hearings on the domestic security threat posed by the Iranian proxy terror group Hezbollah (“Party of God”).  King called the group “one of international terrorism’s most violent murder gangs.” A former FBI assistant director testified that Hezbollah is the “A Team” of terrorist organizations, and another witness said it is a greater threat to America than al-Qaeda.

 We don’t know with certainty that Iran would unleash Hezbollah in response to an attack, but according to James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, that is a possibility.

 Clapper testified that last fall’s foiled assassination plot by Iranian operatives targeting the Saudi Arabian ambassador to Washington reflects the reality that “some Iranian officials — probably including supreme leader Ali Khamenei — have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the U.S. in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime.”

 Perhaps the recent spate of Iranian inspired attacks carried out against Israeli and Western targets validate Iran’s changed “calculus.”  Over the past six months Iranian proxies attempted or carried out terrorist plots in Azerbaijan, India, Georgia, Thailand and in Washington.

 Consider four reasons Hezbollah is a threat to our homeland.

 First, Hezbollah is aligned with Tehran’s special forces.  The Qods Force, the special forces branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, is responsible for clandestine foreign operations.  It created Hezbollah in 1982 as a strategic extension of the Islamic Republic and its foreign operations.

 Today the Qods Force operates training camps in Lebanon for Hezbollah fighters and provides roughly $100-200 million per year in financial support, according to the Congressional Research Service.  That relationship explains Iran’s influence and why on command the terror group might unleash its American-based cadre in response to an attack on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

 Second, Hezbollah is the world’s most capable and expansive terrorist organization, with extensive activities inside America. Former CIA chief George Tenet said Hezbollah is “an organization with capability and worldwide presence, which is [al Qaeda’s] equal…. The training they received puts them in a state-sponsor supported category with a potential for lethality that is quite great.”

 In 2010, the Obama administration identified Hezbollah as “the most technically capable terrorist group in the world,” and the group has “thousands of supporters, several thousand members, and a few hundred terrorist operatives.”  Hezbollah’s technical sophistication was evident in the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Israeli and Jewish targets in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

 The New York Police Department studied the attacks in Argentina.  Iran sent “diplomatic” personnel — likely Qods agents who are known to operate out of embassies — years in advance to integrate into society before coordinating the operations. Then Hezbollah agents came from abroad to execute the job with logistical support from local Lebanese Shiite facilitators.

 Mitchell Silber, NYPD’s director of intelligence analysis, juxtaposed the Argentina attacks with recent events in New York City.  Silber testified regarding six events between 2002 and 2010 involving Iranian personnel conducting hostile reconnaissance.  Some of the Iranians were expelled for spying, but others were released without incident.

 Third, Hezbollah is closely aligned with the underworld.  It is involved in the global drug trade, which funds its operations and gives it the opportunity to build relationships with the most sophisticated organized crime syndicates in the world.

 Hezbollah is a mature criminal enterprise, according to Michael Braum of Spectre Group International, LLC, who testified that Hezbollah routinely ships tons of cocaine to Africa and then on to markets in Europe. It launders hundreds of millions of dollars per month in drug proceeds in the Beirut-based Lebanese Canadian Bank, a recent Department of Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network finding.

Matthew Levitt with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy testified about other Hezbollah-run criminal enterprises.   One effort shipped weapons to Lebanon which involved a senior Hezbollah political official; another case involved the purchase of FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, for the “resistance” in Iran or Syria; and a third case involved weapons stolen from Iraq and stored in Mexico by an active member of Hezbollah.

 Given this track record, does anyone doubt Hezbollah could easily penetrate our Southwest border in order to launch a terror campaign?

 Finally, Hezbollah has significant support inside America. This support includes operatives with military training, and a much larger pool of sympathizers who fund and logistically support the group.

 A 1994 FBI report confirmed Hezbollah’s domestic support base. The report states, “Should the decision be made to strike within the U.S. borders, Hezbollah has the infrastructure present to support or carry out a terrorist act.”

 A 2000 FBI case known as “Operation Smokescreen” cracked a Hezbollah cell operating in Charlotte, NC that stretched as far as Lebanon.  Chris Swecker, a former FBI agent who worked the case, testified there were 25 Hezbollah supporters charged with smuggling, stolen property, fraud, supporting a terrorist organization, and money laundering.

 The Charlotte cell had the infrastructure, discipline, financing, motivation and inspiration to be more than a cell involved in criminal activities and terrorist financing, with direct contact with the highest leadership of Hezbollah.

Last month, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said “the Iranian leadership will not ask Hezbollah to do anything” if Israel bombs Iran’s nuclear facilities.  Rather Nasrallah said “on that day, we have to sit down and think before we decide what to do.”  No doubt Nasrallah will reflect on Iran’s ongoing support and the threat posed by the U.S. to its lifeline Syria when deciding what “to do.”

 No one knows whether Hezbollah will attack America’s homeland, but as Rep. King said, we must “prepare for the worst.”

 We do know Hezbollah is a growing, clear and present danger within our borders.  We need immediate action by law enforcement to reduce this internal threat before any major conflict in the Middle East begins.  Merely having them under surveillance is not enough, as the terrorist attacks this past week in France demonstrate.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

U.S. needs a winning North Korea strategy

By: Robert Maginnis – Human Events

The next U.S. president must embrace a North Korea strategy that denies the rogue atomic-tipped missiles while avoiding a repetition of our recent policy fiascos.

In February, North Korea agreed to freeze nuclear and missile programs in exchange for food aid.  But last Friday, Pyongyang scuttled that agreement by announcing plans to launch a satellite atop a three-stage missile designed to eventually carry nuclear weapons. 

Of course, North Korea’s satellite launch plan is a ruse to test a long-range missile, a violation of its international obligations. Everyone knows Pyongyang will never abandon its nuclear and missile programs because they are the regime’s means for blackmail and regime survival.

North Korea can blackmail because it is unpredictably dangerous. It fields a massive 1.2 million man army, sells weapons to unsavory nations like Iran and boasts a nuclear arsenal that is making undeniable progress toward a deliverable atomic weapon.  Former U.S. Ddefense Secretary Robert Gates said in 2011 North Korea is becoming a “direct” threat to the U.S. 

America’s strategy regarding the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which dates back to the 1953 Korean War armistice, is to deter an attack on South Korea and delegitimize the North Korean government.  That strategy began to shift in the 1990s with the advent of North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programs.

But America’s strategy has failed to arrest the hermit kingdom’s dangerous circular blackmail trap as illustrated by the latest satellite launch announcement.   That “trap” begins with the regime’s promise to freeze its military programs in exchange for concessions and then violates the agreement, threatens war in response to the international community’s inevitable sanctions and then returns to negotiations for more concessions. 

Consider the history of North Korea’s “circular blackmail trap.”

The U.S. learned about North Korea’s nuclear program in 1982.  But the first indication Pyongyang might be seeking an atomic weapon wasn’t acknowledged until 1991.  That year a declassified State Department document, “North Korean Nuclear Program,” opined that North Korea could have a nuclear weapon by the mid-1990s.

That news led to the first American effort to stop the country’s nuclear weapons program.  The Clinton administration negotiated the Agreed Framework of 1994 by which Pyongyang promised to freeze its reactors in exchange for light-water reactors and other economic/energy benefits.  But by 1999 another declassified government report stated “There is significant evidence that undeclared nuclear weapons development activity continues [in North Korea].”

In 2002 the U.S. accused North Korea of violating the “freeze” and subsequently Pyongyang abandoned the 1994 Agreed Framework and in 2003 withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Later that year the so-called Six-Party talks began, which led to a 2005 North Korean agreement to abandon nuclear weapons once again in exchange for economic and security guarantees.

A year later North Korea scuttled the Six-Party agreement by conducting a test of a nuclear explosive device. The United Nations responded to the test by adopting Resolution 1718 demanding Pyongyang abandon nuclear weapons and return to the NPT. 

By early 2007, North Korea agreed once again to disable all nuclear facilities in exchange for more economic, energy and humanitarian assistance. But within a year, it tested a nuclear reactor and barred nuclear inspectors. 

Then in 2009, North Korea continued its provocative actions with the launch of an intercontinental-capable Taepodong-2 rocket and a second nuclear device test.  These actions earned another UN condemnation and Pyongyang responded by again expelling the nuclear inspectors and abandoning the Six-Party talks.

The following year was noteworthy for three provocative actions. North Korea sank the South Korean ship the Cheonon, unveiled its secret uranium enrichment capability to an American delegation, a taunting move, and shelled South Korea’s Yeonpyeong Island in November 2010.

North Korea’s actions must be understood within the context of its motivation: regime survival. 

Regime survival is the motivation of the rogue’s newest dictator, Kim Jong-Un who took over from his father, Kim Jong-Il, who died in December. Kim’s actions are focused on building credibility for his fledgling rule, which explains the satellite launch fiasco and serves several important functions for the young dictator.

The launch will be part of events planned to commemorate founder Kim Il-Sung’s birthday on April 15th, the young Kim’s grandfather and a national icon with whom he needs to identify.  It can also be seen as an act of brinkmanship to boost the new leader’s rule, reinforce unity at home, showcase the North’s military capability and pressure Washington to increase aid in exchange for renewed talks, especially now that President Obama is vulnerable in a reelection battle and has his hands full with the Iran crisis. 

The timing of the launch announcement (March 16) also raises Pyongyang’s profile before the gathering of world leaders in Seoul on March 26 to discuss nuclear terrorism.  Pyongyang accused Seoul of hosting the summit to criticize North Korea, another means to reinforce unity at home by portraying the world against North Korea.

What should be America’s North Korea strategy? Obviously sanctions won’t persuade Pyongyang to give up its nuclear and missile programs, and neither will diplomacy.  There is always the unlikely chance the regime will implode, or that China will use its considerable influence to restrain the rogue’s threatening actions.

There is also the option of learning to live with a nuclear North Korea, but that likely means a regional arms race, greater defense spending for America to counter an Asian cold war threat and living with a credible nuclear threat to our homeland plus more blackmail payments. 

Alternatively, America can get tough.  We can interdict suspect shipments of illicit weapons to places like Iran, bomb nuclear sites North Korea refuses to shutter, shoot down North Korean missiles, and target regime leaders like President Ronald Reagan did Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 1986.  Pyongyang understands force, but it may launch a war in response, a risk we take.

America needs a strategy that denies North Korea atomic-tipped weapons,and getting tough might be the only viable course of action.  The status quo is unacceptable.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

Uganda to head new military force to hunt for Kony

By: The Jerusalem Post

Uganda will head a new four-nation military force to capture Joseph Kony, the fugitive warlord whose global profile has soared in recent days due to a celebrity-backed Internet campaign to bring him to justice.

Announcing the creation of the regional military force on Friday, Ugandan Defence Minister Crispus Kiyonga said it had been conceived before the web campaign to hunt down Kony and the remnants of his Lord’s Resistance Army took off.

“We are creating a brigade of about 5,000 troops, with the commander provided by Uganda,” Kiyonga told reporters. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic and South Sudan would take part in the force, he said.

One hundred US military advisers deployed to Uganda were already helping hunt for Kony, but the task force needed more international support, Kiyonga said.

“We still need more help because these soldiers are moving big distances, most of the time on foot. If we could have airlift capacity it would make things faster,” he said.

A video about Kony posted on YouTube by a California film-maker has been viewed by tens of millions of people, promoted on Twitter with tags that include #Kony2012 and endorsed by the likes of Justin Bieber, George Clooney and Oprah Winfrey.

The 30-minute video has brought unprecedented international attention to Kony, accused of terrorizing northern Uganda for two decades, but it rubbed raw scars when it was screened this week in Lira, a small town haunted by LRA atrocities.

Kony is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, accused of abducting children to use as fighters and sex slaves and said to have a fondness for hacking off limbs.

Violence has subsided since 2005 and Kony is believed now to command only hundreds of followers, scattered in remote jungle hideouts.

The defense minister said the LRA had been reduced to a force of between 200 and 250 fighters split up into groups of about 10 and 20.

Kiyonga called for international assistance for the task force in the form of technology, equipment and wages for troops.

“Those who can help us should help us so that we move faster, with technology and equipment,” he said. It was not clear when the force would start its operations.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.

The bin Laden plot to kill President Obama

By: David Ignatius – The Washington Post

Before his death, Osama bin Laden boldly commanded his network to organize special cells in Afghanistan and Pakistan to attack the aircraft of President Obama and Gen. David H. Petraeus.

“The reason for concentrating on them,” the al-Qaeda leader explained to his top lieutenant, “is that Obama is the head of infidelity and killing him automatically will make [Vice President] Biden take over the presidency. . . . Biden is totally unprepared for that post, which will lead the U.S. into a crisis. As for Petraeus, he is the man of the hour . . . and killing him would alter the war’s path” in Afghanistan.

Administration officials said Friday that the Obama-Petraeus plot was never a serious threat.

The scheme is described in one of the documents taken from bin Laden’s compound by U.S. forces on May 2, the night he was killed. I was given an exclusive look at some of these remarkable documents by a senior administration official. They have been declassified and will be available soon to the public in their original Arabic texts and translations.

The man bin Laden hoped would carry out the attacks on Obama and Petraeus was the Pakistani terrorist Ilyas Kashmiri. “Please ask brother Ilyas to send me the steps he has taken into that work,” bin Laden wrote to his top lieutenant, Atiyah Abd al-Rahman. A month after bin Laden’s death, Kashmiri was killed in a U.S. drone attack.

The plot to target Obama was probably bluster, since al-Qaeda apparently lacked the weapons to shoot down U.S. aircraft. But it’s a chilling reminder that even when he was embattled and in hiding, bin Laden still dreamed of pulling off another spectacular terror attack against the United States.

The terrorist leader urged in a 48-page directive to Atiyah to focus “every effort that could be spent on attacks in America,” instead of operations within Muslim nations. He told Atiyah to “ask the brothers in all regions if they have a brother . . . who can operate in the U.S. [He should be able to] live there, or it should be easy for him to travel there.”

U.S. analysts don’t see evidence that these plots have materialized. “The organization lacks the ability to plan, organize and execute complex, catastrophic attacks, but the threat persists,” says a senior administration analyst who has carefully reviewed the documents.

The bin Laden who emerges from these communications is a terrorist CEO in an isolated compound, brooding that his organization has ruined its reputation by killing too many Muslims in its jihad against America. He writes of the many departed “brothers” who have been lost to U.S. drone attacks. But he’s far from the battlefield himself in his hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, where he seems to spend considerable time watching television.

The garbled syntax of bin Laden’s communications may result from their being dictated to several of his wives, according to the U.S. analyst. And his rambling laundry list of recommendations illustrates the problems of communicating with subordinates when it could take several months to receive an answer. The al-Qaeda leader had a “great fear of irrelevance,” the analyst believes.

Because of constant harassment and communications difficulties in Pakistan’s tribal areas, bin Laden encouraged al-Qaeda leaders to leave north and south Waziristan for more distant and remote locations.

Bin Laden had an unlikely managerial focus, for such a notorious terrorist. He discusses the need for “deputy emirs” and “acting emirs” to run regional operations when the local boss is away, and he suggests that emirs should serve two-year terms and write an “annual report to be sent to the central group detailing the local situation.” He allowed a relatively frank exchange with his subordinates, who voiced criticisms about the organization’s errors.

Though open to internal debate, bin Laden and his aides had rigid views about Muslim theology. Atiyah sent his leader a strident letter in June 2009 detailing what he saw as doctrinal errors among other jihadists.

Bin Laden’s biggest concern was al-Qaeda’s media image among Muslims. He worried that it was so tarnished that, in a draft letter probably intended for Atiyah, he argued that the organization should find a new name.

The al-Qaeda brand had become a problem, bin Laden explained, because Obama administration officials “have largely stopped using the phrase ‘the war on terror’ in the context of not wanting to provoke Muslims,” and instead promoted a war against al-Qaeda. The organization’s full name was “Qaeda al-Jihad,” bin Laden noted, but in its shorthand version, “this name reduces the feeling of Muslims that we belong to them.” He proposed 10 alternatives “that would not easily be shortened to a word that does not represent us.” His first recommendation was “Taifat al-tawhid wal-jihad,” or Monotheism and Jihad Group.

Bin Laden ruminated about “mistakes” and “miscalculations” by affiliates in Iraq and elsewhere that had killed Muslims, even in mosques. He told Atiyah to warn every emir, or regional leader, to avoid these “unnecessary civilian casualties,” which were hurting the organization.

“Making these mistakes is a great issue,” he stressed, arguing that spilling “Muslim blood” had resulted in “the alienation of most of the nation [of Islam] from the [Mujaheddin].” Local al-Qaeda leaders should “apologize and be held responsible for what happened.”

Bin Laden also criticized subordinates for linking their operations to local grievances rather than the overarching Muslim cause of Palestine. He chided his affiliate in Yemen for saying an operation was a response to U.S. bombing there. He even scolded the organizers of the spectacular December 2009 suicide attack on the CIA base in Khost, Afghanistan, for describing it as revenge for the killing of Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud. “It was necessary to discuss Palestine first,” lectured bin Laden.

Bin Laden’s focus on attacking the U.S. homeland led to sharp disagreements with his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who favored easier and more opportunistic attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and other areas.

Bin Laden told Atiyah that al-Qaeda’s best chance for establishing an Islamic state was Yemen, which he described as the “launching point” for attacks on the Persian Gulf oil states. “Control of these nations means control of the world,” he wrote. But he worried that the push in Yemen would come too soon, and he advised his colleagues to wait three years, if necessary, before making a decisive move. By fighting too hard in Syria in the early 1980s, he noted, the Muslim Brotherhood “lost a generation of men.”

Bin Laden and his aides hoped for big terrorist operations to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001. They also had elaborate media plans. Adam Gadahn, a U.S.-born media adviser, even discussed in a message to his boss what would be the best television outlets for a bin Laden anniversary video.

“It should be sent for example to ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and maybe PBS and VOA. As for Fox News let her die in her anger,” Gadahn wrote. At another point, he said of the networks: “From a professional point of view, they are all on one level — except [Fox News] channel, which falls into the abyss as you know, and lacks objectivity, too.”

What an unintended boost for Fox, which can now boast that it is al-Qaeda’s least favorite network.

Please note: These stories are located outside of Prophecy Today’s website. Prophecy Today is not responsible for their content and does not necessarily agree with the views expressed therein. These articles are provided for your information.