Dark anniversary

By: The Jerusalem Post

The Islamic Republic of Iran was established 30 years ago. That black day in history should, perhaps, have been marked last month; for in January 1979, after a year of demonstrations by his Islamist opponents, the shah – sick with cancer and abandoned by the Carter administration – left Teheran for exile.

Former UN ambassador Bolton: Iran’s effort to perfect missile program goes hand in hand with nuclear program

Arguably, this month is the proper anniversary because it was in February 1979 that the Iranian military stood down and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ended his exile, returning from Paris to a tumultuous Teheran welcome.

As he was helped down the steps of the plane, Khomeini showed nary a flicker of emotion. He went directly to a cemetery where his “martyred” followers were buried. Millions clogged the route to get a glimpse of the 76-year-old cleric; it took three hours to make the 40-km. journey.

Shapur Bakhtiar, the interim prime minister appointed by the shah, said Khomeini was welcome but would have to respect the rule of law. Khomeini ordered him to resign. He went into exile. In 1991, Khomeini had him killed by Hizbullah.
RELATED

* The Warped Mirror: Iran’s Islamic revolution at 30

Sixteen days after Khomeini’s triumphant arrival, PLO chief Yasser Arafat became the first foreign visitor to pay him homage. The two men held hands; Arafat beamed and snuggled ever closer to Khomeini, whose revolutionary guards had been trained in PLO camps in Lebanon. When the cameras left, Khomeini lectured Arafat on the need to drop his nationalist facade and make the Palestinian struggle against Israel part of the larger worldwide jihad. And on February 17, he turned the former Israeli embassy in Teheran over to Arafat.

It took Khomeini a while to pacify all of Iran. A revolt by the Turkomans had to be put down; former generals and officials loyal to the shah had to be executed. And over the coming years the revolution would consume its own. Revolutionary committees were established to purge the government and military of bourgeois supporters whose religiosity was suspect.

Khomeini ordered thousands of executions. Well into the late 1980s and beyond, there were always new internal enemies to slaughter.

Some say that the true anniversary of the Iranian revolution should be marked on April 1 when, after a nationwide referendum, Khomeini proclaimed the Islamic Republic.

IRAN’S FALL into the benighted hands of Shi’ite extremists turned out to be a geo-strategic blow of historic proportions to Western interests. The mullahs not only created a theocracy at home, they exported their pernicious fanaticism abroad. The November 4, 1979 takeover of the US embassy, and the 444-day hostage crisis, profoundly undermined customary international law.

A share of the country’s vast oil wealth has been put at the disposal of its imperial goals – endowing the regime’s quest to build a nuclear bomb, funding terrorist movements and establishing proxies such as Hizbullah.

American policymakers misjudged Iran’s willingness to behave pragmatically in what came to be known as the Iran-Contra affair. In 1985, the Reagan administration secretly sold Iran $30 million worth of weapons to defend itself against Iraqi aggression, in the hope that a new leaf could be turned over in relations between the two countries – and as ransom for US hostages held by Iran’s Lebanese allies. Rather than warn the US away from such folly, Israel played an instrumental role in facilitating the scheme because Jerusalem also misjudged the depth of the mullahs’ intransigence and loathing of the “infidels.”

Khomeini died in 1989 and was replaced by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who now controls the ruling 12-man Council of Guardians. On Monday, when Iran launched into orbit its first domestically made satellite – reportedly a civilian version of the Shihab 3 ballistic missile – the supreme leader obtained further, tangible proof that international sanctions are little more than a nuisance to Iran’s imperial aspirations.

PRESIDENT Barack Obama says that if Iran is willing to unclench its fist, it “will find an extended hand from us.” But the mullahs are playing hard to get.

Today, diplomats from the US, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and China are scheduled to meet in Frankfurt to discuss Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons. The US needs to convince them that – whatever the new administration’s tactical differences from the previous one – Washington will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran.

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.

02/05/09

* Post-Soviet nations to form military force A Russian-led bloc of post-Soviet nations has agreed to establish a rapid-reaction military force to combat terrorists and respond to regional emergencies.

* Hamas officials leave Cairo without ceasefire A senior Hamas official said his group is leaving Cairo without an agreement on a long-term truce with Israel.

* Abbas wants EU peacekeepers in the Middle East The president of the Palestinian Authority urged Europe to play a bigger role in the Middle East.

* The political logic of Erdogan’s attacks on Israel When Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan very publicly condemned President Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum in Davos and then stalked off the stage in a huff, the incident was blamed on his short temper.

* Iran says US must accept nuclear program A senior adviser to Iran’s president says dialogue with the US will succeed only if the Obama administration accepts Tehran’s right to have a nuclear program.

* What Does Ethiopia’s Withdrawal Mean for Somalia’s Future? Ethiopian efforts in Somalia began with an unexpected intervention in December 2006 that rapidly reversed many territorial gains made by the Islamic Courts Union (ICU).

* Iran blocks more int’l news Websites Iran is furthering its efforts to block international news websites from delivering their reports to the country.

* Poll: Gaza war boosts Hamas support Israel’s war on Hamas in Gaza, which killed more than 1,300 people and left large swathes of the territory in ruins, has boosted the popularity of the Islamists.

* Lebanese Gaza aid ship taken to Ashdod Israel Navy forces boarded a cargo ship carrying activists and supplies from Lebanon to Gaza on Thursday and escorted it to the port of Ashdod.

* Google Latitude keeps tabs on friends’ locations Just because the Internet has broken down geographic barriers, don’t assume that Google doesn’t care about geography.

02/04/09

* Moscow welcomes President Obama’s plan for cut in nuclear weapons Russia moved swiftly today to extend a hand to President Obama over American plans for big cuts in nuclear weapons.

* Dark anniversary The Islamic Republic of Iran was established 30 years ago. That black day in history should, perhaps, have been marked last month.

* ‘Holocaust bishop’ told to recant The Vatican has ordered an ultra-traditionalist bishop to publicly recant his views denying the Holocaust.

* ‘Increase Iran sanctions over satellite’ Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Wednesday cautioned that the satellite launched into orbit by Iran on Tuesday proved its military potential.

* AU summit extended amid divisions An African Union (AU) summit in Ethiopia has been extended to a fourth day amid disagreements on the issue of creating a United States of Africa.

* Obama, Mideast and Islam – an initial assessment Why, just two weeks into a 209-week term, assess a new American president’s record on so esoteric a subject as the Middle East and Islam?

* Iran satellite move sparks fears Western powers have expressed serious concerns after Iran launched its first domestically-made satellite into orbit.

* China offers aid to impoverished NKorea North Korea’s state media said Wednesday that China has offered Pyongyang aid.

* France and Germany call for stronger EU-NATO ties “Real co-operation” between the European Union and NATO, as well as a closer EU – US coordination on security issues and improved relations with Russia are needed.

* Israel fears Syria might aid Hizbullah Israel is concerned that Syria will transfer anti-aircraft missiles to Hizbullah in Lebanon while the IDF is preoccupied with the escalation in violence in the Gaza Strip.

Will Obama Develop a ‘Palestinian Bias’?

By: Robert Maginnis – Human Events

Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany — President Obama appears to have joined the Jimmy Carter School of naivete in Obama’s support for Saudi Arabia’s Mideast peace proposal. That plan draws America into a regional tug-of-war and leaves Israel in a precarious position.

Last week, Obama set the stage for embracing the Saudi plan by ingratiating himself Carter-style to the Islamic world. “We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence [read 9/11] that is done in that faith’s name,” Obama told Al-Arabiya, a Saudi-controlled broadcaster based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. He promised to restore America’s partnership with the Muslim world and said it is “my job” to show America that Muslims “… simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.”

Perhaps Obama’s way of restoring America’s partnership with the Muslim world is to deliver Israel to them on a silver platter. He began that “job” last summer while visiting Israel when he said the Jewish nation would be “crazy” to refuse the Saudi peace deal.

Obama’s “crazy” reference could have been a statement out of Carter’s pro-Palestinian playbook. Since Carter mediated the 1978 Camp David Accords which paved the way for peace between Israel and Egypt, the former president has become a Palestinian apologist and an Israel-basher. He has compared Israel’s behavior toward the Palestinians to that of South Africa toward blacks in the days of apartheid, and he has met with Khaled Meshaal, the Palestinian terrorist leader of Hamas, against the U.S. Government’s advice.

Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard law school professor and Obama advisor, takes credit for keeping Carter behind the scenes during the campaign so as not to alienate Obama’s Jewish supporters. Now, Dershowitz predicts that Obama “will try to energize the peace process” and believes that Obama’s support in the pro-Palestinian community makes him “… an honest broker who, without compromising Israel’s security, can facilitate a kind of peace that will be both in the best interests of Israel and the best interests of the Palestinian people.”

It’s too early to tell whether Obama has joined Carter in his Palestinian bias. However, it’s clear the new president is serious about a new Mideast peace process. One of his first acts was to launch his envoy, former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, on a “listening tour” in the region. Mitchell reports back this week on his findings.

But energizing the peace process using the Saudi plan is the wrong idea. It puts America in the middle of a regional conflict between Arabs and Persians, which is what the Saudis have in mind.

Israeli interior minister Meir Sheetrit says the Saudi plan was prompted by a strengthening Iran and its proxy armies in Hamas and Hizballah. “The only way for the Saudis to isolate Iran is to make a peace agreement with Israel,” Sheetrit said. He continued, “We have to negotiate, and we have to leave the territories. This is the only way I see a better future for us.”

But Israel’s likely new Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, warned, “Any Palestinian state [which is part of the Saudi plan] that would be formed under the current conditions would become an Iranian state as we saw happen in Gaza.” Not surprisingly, on Feb. 1, Hamas leader Mashaal arrived in Tehran to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in an effort to garner more support for his group.

The Saudi plan which was introduced in 2002 by King Abdullah and now being pursued by Obama calls on Israel “… to withdraw completely from the lands occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem [and the Golan heights], returning to the lines of June 4, 1967; to accept a mutually agreed just solution to the refugee problem according to the General Assembly Resolution 194; and to recognize the independent state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital. In return, there would be an end to hostilities between Israel and all the Arab countries, and Israel would get full diplomatic and normal relations.”

The plan should be unacceptable to Israel. First, it is based on the false premise that the Palestinians are the rightful heirs of the land reoccupied by the Jews in 1967.
Palestinians are Arabs with a relatively brief national identity. After World War I, the Ottoman Empire was dismantled and “Philistia,” the portion of that empire which included present day Israel, was taken by the British. “Philistia” was changed to “Palestine” whose capital was Jerusalem, and the people referred to themselves as Palestinians. The true Palestine is present-day Jordan because over 60 percent of that country is “Palestinian.”

By comparison, the Jewish people have occupied the same land much longer than any other recognized people group. In 1425 B.C., their leader Joshua crossed the Jordan River and seized all of present day Israel except for the Gaza. That land remained in Jewish hands until 586 B.C., when the Babylonians took a remnant into exile.

The Jews returned to the land in 536 B.C. and remained there until 70 A.D. either under their own administration or as a vassal state. Many Jews lived there throughout the next millennia until the United Nations re-established Israel as an official Jewish homeland.

The Jewish people’s third manifestation as a state in the land started after World War I, when the League of Nations approved the British Mandate of Palestine with the intent of creating a “national home for the Jewish people.” In 1947, the United Nations approved the partition of the land between Jews and Arabs, but the surrounding Arab states refused to accept the U.N.’s Partition Plan. On May 14, 1948, Israel declared independence, and this was followed by war with its Arab neighbors. Israel expanded its borders with each new war to eventually include the West Bank, all of Jerusalem, Gaza, the Sinai (which was surrendered after the 1977 Camp David Accords) and the Golan Heights in order to provide a strategic buffer against more Arab attacks.

The proposed Saudi peace plan would return this land to the Palestinians and Syria. Unfortunately, this transfer will embolden Israel’s enemies as it did in Gaza and Southern Lebanon.

Once Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, the Palestinian terror group Hamas took over and began launching thousands of rockets at Jewish settlements, which prompted Israel’s just completed three-week Operation Cast Lead. Similarly, once Israel withdrew from Southern Lebanon in 2000, ending a 22-year military presence prompted by attacks staged from there by the Palestine Liberation Organization, Iran’s proxy terror group Hizbullah moved in to raise tensions which led to the 2006 rocket war with Israel.

The same will happen if the West Bank and the Golan are surrendered. It’s virtually guaranteed that the unpopular Palestinian Fatah government now running the West Bank will be replaced by a radical and more popular Hamas administration which would never accept Israel’s right to exist and would likely replicate the tensions with those in Gaza. And expect Hizbullah with Iran’s help will push Syria aside and quickly occupy the Golan with Shia terrorists like those in Southern Lebanon, who have vowed to destroy Israel as well.

Second, the Saudi proposal fails to define a “just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem.” Palestinians and their Arab supporters want those Arabs who fled the land in the wake of the 1967 war to have the right to return and retake their land. But if all the six million Palestinian refugees living in neighboring countries returned to Israel, the nation’s demographics would favor the Arabs. Israel would not survive as a Jewish nation.

Third, the Saudi plan gives East Jerusalem to the new Palestinian state for a capital. Jerusalem has long been a significant city founded and occupied by Jews much of its history. The late coming Palestinian claim to East Jerusalem with its holy sites is weak.

Finally, the Saudi plan gives Israel promises in exchange for tangible concessions. The Arab world promises it will end hostilities with Israel and establish normal relations. But how reliable are these promises? Besides, the Saudi plan doesn’t include Tehran which is a Shia Muslim nation, the Saudi’s chief regional rival and arguably Israel’s principle threat.

Some Israelis see the broader picture at play with the Palestinians and their sponsors. Retired Israeli major general Jacob Amidror, the former head of his army’s intelligence, believes the Palestinians will never be satisfied with anything short of Israel’s destruction. In 1996, Amidror asked George Tenet, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, “Do you know what the Palestinians want?” Amidror said the answer is one word: “More.”

President Obama needs to avoid becoming a Saudi puppet and Carter-like in his Palestinian bias. U.S. strategy and national interests would be better served through an agreed policy toward Iran. Here the Saudis and other Arab states could actually partner with us and de facto Israel to reduce Tehran’s influence via Hizbullah and Hamas. But whatever is done with the Mideast peace process, Israel must retain strategic depth, and it must get something more than a piece of paper filled with promises that history demonstrates is worthless.

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.

Google and Nasa back new school for futurists

By: David Gelles – The Financial Times Ltd.

Google and Nasa are throwing their weight behind a new school for futurists in Silicon Valley to prepare scientists for an era when machines become cleverer than people.

The new institution, known as “Singularity University”, is to be headed by Ray Kurzweil, whose predictions about the exponential pace of technological change have made him a controversial figure in technology circles.

Google and Nasa’s backing demonstrates the growing mainstream acceptance of Mr Kurzweil’s views, which include a claim that before the middle of this century artificial intelligence will outstrip human beings, ushering in a new era of civilisation.

To be housed at Nasa’s Ames Research Center, a stone’s-throw from the Googleplex, the Singularity University will offer courses on biotechnology, nano-technology and artificial intelligence.

The so-called “singularity” is a theorised period of rapid technological progress in the near future. Mr Kurzweil, an American inventor, popularised the term in his 2005 book “The Singularity is Near”.

Proponents say that during the singularity, machines will be able to improve themselves using artificial intelligence and that smarter-than-human computers will solve problems including energy scarcity, climate change and hunger.

Yet many critics call the singularity dangerous. Some worry that a malicious artificial intelligence might annihilate the human race.

Mr Kurzweil said the university was launching now because many technologies were approaching a moment of radical advancement. “We’re getting to the steep part of the curve,” said Mr Kurzweil. “It’s not just electronics and computers. It’s any technology where we can measure the information content, like genetics.”

The school is backed by Larry Page, Google co-founder, and Peter Diamandis, chief executive of X-Prize, an organisation which provides grants to support technological change.

“We are anchoring the university in what is in the lab today, with an understanding of what’s in the realm of possibility in the future,” said Mr Diamandis, who will be vice-chancellor. “The day before something is truly a breakthrough, it’s a crazy idea.”

Despite its title, the school will not be an accredited university. Instead, it will be modelled on the International Space University in Strasbourg, France, the interdisciplinary, multi-cultural school that Mr Diamandis helped establish in 1987.

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.

Water – another global ‘crisis’?

By: Richard Black – BBC News


Farmer in parched field

Sharper, more intense rains may reduce the water available to farmers

If you look at the numbers, it is hard to see how many East African communities made it through the long drought of 2005 and 2006.

Among people who study human development, it is a widely-held view that each person needs about 20 litres of water each day for the basics – to drink, cook and wash sufficiently to avoid disease transmission.

Yet at the height of the East African drought, people were getting by on less than five litres a day – in some cases, less than one litre a day, enough for just three glasses of drinking water and nothing left over.

Some people, perhaps incredibly from a western vantage point, are hardy enough to survive in these conditions; but it is not a recipe for a society that is healthy and developing enough to break out of poverty.

“Obviously there are many drivers of human development,” says the UN’s Andrew Hudson.

“But water is the most important.”

At the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), where Dr Hudson works as principal technical adviser to the water governance program, he calculated the contribution that various factors make to the Human Development Index, a measure of how societies are doing socially and economically.

“It was striking. I looked at access to energy, spending on health, spending on education – and by far the strongest driver of the HDI on a global scale was access to water and sanitation.”

Different lives

Two key questions arise, then.

Why do some communities have so little access to water? And how will the current picture change in a world where the human population is growing, where societies are urbanizing and industrializing, and where climate change may alter the raw availability of water significantly?

The UNDP is unequivocal about the first question.

“The availability of water is a concern for some countries,” says the report.

“But the scarcity at the heart of the global water crisis is rooted in power, poverty and inequality, not in physical availability.”

Statistics on water consumption appear to back the UN’s case.

Japan and Cambodia experience about the same average rainfall – about 160cm per year.

But whereas the average Japanese person can use nearly 400 litres per day, the average Cambodian must make do with about one-tenth of that.

Girl drinks from tap

The number of people with access to clean water is increasing

The picture is improving to some extent.

Across the world, 1.6bn more people have access to clean drinking water than in 1990.

But population growth and climatic changes could change the picture.

In some regions, “the scarcity at the heart of the global water crisis” could become one of physical availability, especially in places where consumption is already unsustainably high.

“There are several rivers that don’t reach the sea any more,” says Mark Smith, head of the water programme at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

“The Yellow River is one, the Murray-Darling (in Australia) is nearly another – they have to dredge the mouth of the river every year to make sure it doesn’t dry up.

“The Aral Sea and Lake Chad have shrunk because the rivers that feed them have been largely dried out; and you can see it on a smaller scale as well, where streams that are important for small communities in Tanzania may go dry for half the year, largely because people are taking more and more water for irrigating crops.”

Wet and dry

Last year the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) took an in-depth look at how the raw availability of water might alter in the future as climatic patterns change.

Its projections are derived from computer models of the Earth’s hugely complex climate system, and as such are far from being firm forecasts.

A warmer climate overall means a wetter climate; warmer air can hold more moisture.

Graph
Mountain glaciers act as “natural reservoirs”
Himalayan glaciers alone store water used by more than a billion people
Scientists measure the volume of glaciers in “mm SLE” – the amount that sea levels would rise if the ice melted

But weather patterns are likely to shift, meaning that water will be deposited in different places with a different pattern in time.

“In general we see drying in the sub-tropics and mid-latitudes, from southern Europe across to Kazakhstan and from North Africa to Iran,” recounts Martin Parry, who as co-chair of the IPCC’s working group on climate impacts oversaw the water report’s compilation.

“And the drying extends westwards into Central America. And there are equivalents in the southern hemisphere – southern Africa, Australia.”

In some populated parts of North Africa and Central Asia, he says, people may struggle simply to get enough to drink.

Other areas, meanwhile, are projected to receive more rain – considerably more, in some cases.

The question then is whether societies can make use of it.

“If you look at India, Bangladesh and Burma, there are indications of an increase in water availability,” says Professor Parry.

“But when you look in more detail you see that monsoonal precipitation will become more intense – there’ll be a heavier downpour but over fewer days – so you might just end up with more runoff, which could actually mean less availability of water to the community.”

Thirsty work

A changing climate is only one of the factors likely to affect the amount of water at each person’s disposal in future.

A more populated world – and there could be another 2.5 billion people on the planet by 2050 – is likely to be a thirstier world.

Those extra people will need feeding; and as agriculture accounts for about 70% of water use around the world, extra consumption for growing food is likely to reduce the amount available for those basic needs of drinking, cooking and washing.

Industry can also take water that would otherwise have ended up in peoples’ mouths.

FUTURE WATER STRESS
Water map

On the other hand, as a society industrialises it tends to become less reliant on farming – which could, in principle, reduce its local demand.

It is a tremendously complex picture; and forecasting its impacts makes simple climate modelling look a trivial task by comparison.

Researchers at the University of Kassel in Germany, led by Martina Floerke, have attempted it.

Their projections suggest that some regions are likely to see drastic declines in the amount of water available for personal use – and for intriguing reasons.

“The principal cause of decreasing water stress (where it occurs) is the greater availability of water due to increased annual precipitation related to climate change,” they conclude.

“The principal cause of increasing water stress is growing water withdrawals, and the most important factor for this increase is the growth of domestic water use stimulated by income growth.”

The modelling suggests that by the 2050s, as many as six billion people could face water scarcity (defined as less than 1,000 cubic metres per person per year), depending, most importantly, on how societies develop – a significant increase on previous estimates.

Ideas pipeline

The irony is that the richer societies are the ones most likely to be able to adapt to these changes – perhaps relatively easily.

A century ago, a 500km-long pipeline was built to bring water from the Western Australian coast to the parched inland goldfields around Kalgoorlie; the economics of gold made it viable.

Now that the coastal capital Perth is drying out, there is talk of building an even longer pipeline to bring water from the north of the state.

The state recently acquired a desalination plant – an effective, but expensive, way of increasing the raw supply of clean water. A number of Middle Eastern countries are doing the same; it is even being contemplated near London.

Rivers can be diverted huge distances, as China is contemplating. Spain and Cyprus can take water deliveries by ship.

But can all societies afford such measures?

Desalination plant

In any case, is adaptation possible to some of the really big projected changes, such as the rapid shrinking of Himalayan glaciers which may lose four-fifths of their area by 2030, removing what is effectively a huge natural reservoir storing water for more than a billion people?

“In principle you could do it, if you’re equipped to do the engineering,” says Mark Smith.

“But societies are going to have to get much better at deciding how they’re going to use their water.

“And very often, in developing countries where institutions are not well established, decisions are made in a very ad-hoc way – someone says ‘yes let’s use this much for irrigation’ but you’re already using that much for a sugar mill, and before you know it you’ve allocated more than you actually have.”

Two years ago I stood in a forest clearing in the west of the Amazon basin talking to researchers studying the deforestation and fires that are an increasing plague in the region.

They told me that some villages around there were experiencing water shortages.

How can that happen, I asked incredulously, in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, in one of the most luxuriously verdant places on Earth?

What had brought the shortages was a combination of increased human settlement, deforestation, and a drying of some streams, possibly related to climate change.

If even the Amazon can feel these pressures, it is difficult not to think that the same picture will be played out in much starker and possibly much messier colours in parts of the world that are already feeling the heat of dwindling supplies and growing needs.

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.

National Union candidate: Kahane was right

By: Kobi Nahshoni – Yedioth Internet

Eight days ahead of the general elections, and with polls predicting four Knesset seats for the National Union, Dr. Michael Ben-Ari – number four on the party’s list and a man who defines himself “Kahane’s student and follower” – is very likely to find himself in the Israeli parliament.

In a conversation with Ynet, Ben-Ari presented his proposed solution to the “problem” of Israeli Arabs, declared he would not be part of a Knesset that engages in negotiations with the Palestinians and explained his support for soldiers disobeying orders.

“I’m not the only one who represents (late Rabbi Meir) Kahane. He’s represented by a great many people today, within the Knesset and outside it,” Ben-Ari stated. “(Yisrael Beiteinu Chairman Avigdor) Lieberman masquerades as Kahane to win more mandates, (Likud MK) Limor Livnat also sounds like Kahane, and everybody realizes the need for a solution to the problem of Israeli Arabs – a subject which was once taboo.

“The saying, ‘Kahane was right,’ has already been used up. You can practically see how what Rabbi Kahane brought up 24 years ago has now become the central issue of this election campaign,” he added.

Ben-Ari explained that his plan was to open a “humanitarian corridor” for Arabs to places like Turkey or Venezuela, and raise money worldwide that would go towards providing them with an “acclimatization grant” in their new countries.

Are you referring to the entire Arab population in Israel ?

“I suppose not all of them are enemies. The Druze, for instance, are highly loyal and aren’t hostile. But the Arabs in Umm al-Fahm who dance on the rooftops when Jews are being slaughtered? What I’m suggesting isn’t cruelty or racism, but survivability. It’s either us or them. If we’re nice to them and keep dreaming of coexistence – they will fight us.”

According to Ben-Ari, transfer for Arabs is but a minor part of Kahane’s teachings. Among the other objectives he vowed to try and accomplish in the next Knesset is the elimination of “the High Court’s rule”:

“Dorit Beinish is the last Supreme Court president who represents the Left in Israel. The next president will have to be chosen in elections that represent the opinion of the majority in Israel.”

He added that “the Supreme Court will be made up of sensible jurists whose worldview falls in line with those of the people of Israel… the judges in Israel will act in favor of the Jews and the IDF soldiers, whose lives are more valuable than those of others.”

Seeking to rebuild the Temple
Ben-Ari stressed that his party would not be part of a government that would seek to promote diplomatic negotiations with Syria or the Palestinians. “But we believe that (Likud Chairman Benjamin) Netanyahu will want to build a government that will bolster outposts and lift the siege that has been imposed on the Judea and Samaria communities in recent years,” he stated.

When asked for his views regarding the current situation at the Temple Mount, Ben-Ari said that the National Union would act to institute Jewish sovereignty and Halacha law at the place.

“The reality at the Temple Mount is one of the State of Israel’s greatest expressions of weakness, and I believe that whoever controls the Temple Mount controls Israel,” he said.

“Regarding the reconstruction of the Temple – the party’s rabbis will decide when and how this should be done. My personal opinion is that it is a mitzvah to build a house for God and offer sacrifices there, and this should be carried out like any other mitzvah.”

Commenting on the question of soldiers disobeying orders to evacuate settlements, Ben-Ari unequivocally stated that disobedience was an obligation. “There is a specific Halacha ruling issued by Rabbi Shapira that a soldier must not evacuate settlements in the Land of Israel. I was proud of my students who refused to take part in the expulsion and were jailed for this. The willingness to cooperate with anything that the IDF does is a grave mistake.”

And how about refusal on the Left?

“The comparison between Israel lovers and conscientious objectors like Yesh Din, who have removed themselves from the people of Israel and are collaborating with the enemy, is downright cruel.”

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.

Gaddafi vows to push Africa unity

By: BBC News

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has vowed to pursue his vision of a United States of Africa, in his inaugural address as the new chairman of the African Union.

Col Gaddafi was elected by the heads of state of the 53-member union behind closed doors at a summit in Ethiopia.

A BBC correspondent at the summit says Col Gaddafi was seen to be the obvious choice, but some delegates are uneasy about his nomination.

Col Gaddafi replaces the Tanzanian President, Jakaya Kikwete.

Wearing a golden brocade robe and cap, Col Gaddafi sat with the traditional African leaders who accompanied him at the front of the room, rather than in the seat for the Libyan delegate.

New rules

Col Gaddafi in Addis Ababa, 1 February

Col Gaddafi attended the summit with an entourage of seven local monarchs

“I shall continue to insist that our sovereign countries work to achieve the United States of Africa,” he said in his inaugural speech.

But he admitted that African leaders were “not near to a settlement” on the issue.

He told fellow summit leaders that his unity project would be approved at the next meeting in July unless there was a majority against it, reports the BBC’s Elizabeth Blunt from Addis Ababa.

The AU normally relies on consensus in reaching decisions, but Col Gaddafi introduced what he described as the Islamic concept that “silence is approval,” she said.

Under this principle, at least two-thirds of AU leaders would have to actively oppose Col Gaddafi’s proposals, rather than simply ignoring his ideas, she added.

‘Fantasy’

But an expert on the African Union called the vision of the United States of Africa a “ludicrous fantasy on the part of [Col] Gaddafi.”

Kathryn Sturman at the South African Institute of International Affairs said many African leaders would not be prepared to give up their national sovereignty to join the proposed single-state federation proposed by the Libyan leader.

Ms Sturman said the chair of the group does not have any singular decision-making power, and cannot push through any changes without the consensus of the other leaders.

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi (1.2.09)

Compromise

During closed-door talks on Sunday, African leaders again postponed Col Gaddafi’s dream of closer union.

In a compromise, the summit agreed to transform the African Union Commission – which oversees the AU – into an AU authority with a broader mandate, outgoing chair Mr Kikwete said.

“In principle, we said the ultimate is the United States of Africa. How we proceed to that ultimate – there are building blocks,” Mr Kikwete said.

Malawi’s President Bingu wa Mutharika said governments wanting greater unity could go ahead on their own, without worrying about splitting Africa.

Erratic

The chairmanship of the African Union is a rotating position held by heads of state for one year.

It was the turn of a North African leader to chair the bloc, and Col Gaddafi was the only one present.

However, some African leaders believe the Libyan leader is too erratic to be AU chairman.

Before he arrived at the summit, he circulated a letter saying he was coming as the king of the traditional kings of Africa, our correspondent says.

Last August, he had a group of 200 traditional leaders name him the “king of kings” of Africa.

The summit’s main agenda – to boost Africa’s energy and transport networks – was pushed largely to the fringes, weighed down by the grim realities of the global economic downturn.

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.

Could ecoterrorists let slip the bugs of war?

By: Jeffrey A. Lockwood – Times Newspapers Ltd.

The terrorists’ letter arrived at the Mayor of Los Angeles’s office on November 30, 1989. A group calling itself “the Breeders” claimed to have released the Mediterranean fruit fly in Los Angeles and Orange counties, and threatened to expand their attack to the San Joaquin Valley, an important centre of Californian agriculture.

With perverse logic, they said that unless the Government stopped using pesticides they would assure a cataclysmic infestation that would lead to the quarantining of California produce, costing 132,000 jobs and $13.4 billion in lost trade.

The infestation was real enough. It was ended by heavy spraying. It is still not known if ecoterrorists were behind it, but the panic it engendered shows that “the Breeders” were flirting with a powerful weapon.

The history and future of insects as weapons are explored in my new book, Six-Legged Soldiers. As an entomologist, I was initially interested in how human beings have conscripted insects and twisted science for use in war, terrorism and torture. It soon became apparent that the weaponisation of insects was not some quirky military footnote but a recurring theme in human strife, and quite possibly the next chapter in modern conflicts.

Insects are one of the cheapest and most destructive weapons available to terrorists today, and one of the most widely ignored: they are easy to sneak across borders, reproduce quickly and can spread disease and destroy crops with devastating speed.

A great strategic lesson of 9/11 has been overlooked. Terrorists need only a little ingenuity, not sophisticated weapons, to cause enormous damage. Armed only with box-cutters, terrorists hijacked aircraft and brought down the World Trade Centre. Insects are the box-cutters of biological warfare – cheap, simple and wickedly effective.

Am I being an alarmist? I wish I knew. But I do know that few people have an inkling of how insects can – and have – been used to inflict human suffering and economic destruction. And I know that government officials admit that entomological attacks are, “not something that is yet on our radar”. So my goal in Six-Legged Soldiers is to find a measured concern that lies between complacency and panic.

Yet insects have shaped human history. In the 14th century, 75million people succumbed to flea-borne bubonic plague. But few people realise that the Black Death arrived in Europe after the Mongols catapulted flea-ridden corpses into the port of Kaffa. People fled, carrying bacteria, rats and fleas throughout the Mediterranean.

And it was lice, not enemy armies, that nearly broke the back of the Soviet Union when typhus made 30million people ill and killed 5million after the First World War.

Military strategists have seen the potential for warfare in all this. In the Second World War, the French and Germans pursued the mass production and dispersal of Colorado beetles to destroy enemy food supplies, and the Japanese military killed more than 400,000 Chinese by dropping plague-infected fleas and cholera-coated flies.

During the Cold War, the US military planned to produce 100million yellow fever-infected mosquitoes a month, and produced an “entomological warfare target analysis” of vulnerable sites in the Soviet Union and its allies’ terrotories. The dispersal and biting capacity of (uninfected) mosquitoes was tested by secretly dropping them over US cities.

America believed that insect-borne diseases were the bane only of underdeveloped nations until the summer of 1999, when West Nile virus arrived. A natural experiment in entomological warfare unfolded. over the next seven years, the technological might of the US could not stop mosquitoes carrying the disease across the nation, infecting nearly 7,000 people and killing 654.

Many insect-borne pathogens could afflict Western nations. But given the losing battle against West Nile virus, the greatest concern is its African cousin, Rift Valley fever. Originally discovered in 1931, this viral disease caused miscarriages in livestock while young animals suffered 10 to 70 per cent mortality rates. Mosquitoes spread the virus from Kenya. In 1997 a virulent strain appeared, able to infect the human nervous system. About 200,000 Egyptians fell ill, of whom 2,000 lost their sight and 598 died of encephalitis. Every region of the US has a mosquito species that is capable of carrying the disease.

Nor would it be difficult to introduce. According to biodefence experts, a terrorist with $100 worth of supplies, simple instructions and a plane ticket could introduce Rift Valley fever to the US or another target country with almost no chance of being caught. Western societies are understandably worried about disease, and terrorists would relish the opportunity to introduce deadly pathogens. But they are aware that we take our wealth as seriously as our health. The World Trade Centre was an icon of US economic prosperity. And agriculture accounts for a trillion dollars in economic activity as well as one in every six jobs in the US.

An entomological attack would not empty America’s larders completely but it could go a long way to emptying its wallets.

In economic terms, the 9/11 attacks resulted in direct losses of $27.2 billion. The Asian longhorned beetle, which arrived in 1996, with the emerald ash borer, found in 2002, together have the potential to destroy more than $700 billion worth of forests, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

What would be the cost of an insect-borne disease? If it destroyed enough orchards to cut the sale of orange juice by 50 per cent for five years, the US economy would lose $9.5 billion – approximately the cost of building the World Trade Centre from scratch.

Stacking a nation’s defences along its borders is a strategic error. The better model is that of public health. Rather than hoping to stop every sick traveller entering a country, a wise government would stockpile vaccines, train health professionals and educate the public.

The best “homeland defense” is flourishing human and agricultural health systems that can detect and deal with whatever comes in. Such an infrastructure would pay for itself. Even without terrorists, new diseases and insect pests will continue to arrive.

Western societies tend to think in terms of the short-term spectacle and heroic saviours of Hollywood action movies. Our disconnection from the natural world makes us believe that risk and benefit unfold at a blistering pace. For a terrorist group with patience, a slow-motion disaster in ecological time would be a perfect tactic against an enemy that thinks in terms of days or months, but would suffer across the generations.

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.

02/03/09

* Iran launches homegrown satellite Iran says it has launched its first domestically made satellite into orbit.

* Netanyahu: My gov’t will keep J’lem united Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu toured the Mount of Olives and the City of David on Monday afternoon.

* IDF warns south Gaza residents of impending response to Ashkelon rocket strike Residents of the southern Gaza town of Rafah said on Tuesday that they received telephone messages from the Israel Defense Forces warning them to leave their homes ahead of an impending airstrike.

* Low-key Israeli election campaign in final week A convoy of cars decorated with banners and blasting the music of Israel’s right-wing Likud party drove through the streets of Arab East Jerusalem letting everyone know: Bibi is coming.

* Ya’alon: Topple Iran to end global Jihad Former IDF chief of staff and Likud Knesset candidate Moshe Ya’alon on Tuesday said that there would be no end to global terrorism until the Islamic regime in Iran was removed.

* Water – another global ‘crisis’? If you look at the numbers, it is hard to see how many East African communities made it through the long drought of 2005 and 2006.

* UN official says global financial crisis has serious impact on Africa UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Africa Abdoulie Janneh said here on Tuesday at the 12th African Union (AU) Summit that the global financial crisis would have serious impact on African economies.

* Google and Nasa back new school for futurists Google and Nasa are throwing their weight behind a new school for futurists in Silicon Valley to prepare scientists for an era when machines become cleverer than people.

* Turkish PM vows to fight anti-Semitism Turkey’s leader said on Tuesday that criticism of Israel does not amount to anti-Semitism.

* Russian Patriarch may act cautiously on Vatican ties Strong conservative resistance could force the new head of the Russian Orthodox Church to move cautiously.