Home Site Map   Don's Page Contact Us


Maranatha Revival Crusade, PO Box 218, APPLECROSS, Western Australia   6953       


Main Menu


Contact Us
Don's Page
Site Map

New Postings


MRC Articles
Millennium Alert
Maranatha! Hope of Glory

Our World

Preparations for War
The New World Order
International Economic Order
Israel & US

God's Word




MA#40 – “DIVIDE JERUSALEM!”  - June 2009








He has desired it for His dwelling.”




“This is My place of rest for ever;

here I will dwell, for I have desired it.

‘I will abundantly bless her with provisions;

I will satisfy her needy ones with bread;

I will clothe her priests with salvation;

and her humble, devout ones will sing for joy. 

There I will cause the horn of David

(the strong one, Messiah) to spring forth.

I have prepared a lamp for My Anointed One.

His enemies I will clothe with shame;

while on Himself, His crown shall shine’.” 

(Isaiah 40:28. Psalm 132:13-18)





Today the stage is being set for the War over Zion, the City of God.

Again, Yahweh the Almighty One says:

“Look! I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that causes reeling to all the people around. Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem. And on that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem a very heavy rock for all the nations. All who try to move it will be severely injured.” (Zechariah 12:2-3)

But “God will save Zion and build the cities of Judah, that they may dwell there and possess it. And the descendants of His servants will inherit it, and those who love His Name will dwell in it.” (Psalm 69:35-36)

Today, prophetically and strategically events are moving at a very fast pace. The climax of the age is upon us!  The nations are sliding deeper and deeper into corruption, violence, rebellion and iniquity. The Day that God has appointed to judge the world – the Great Tribulation – draws nearer ever day. And the coming of the Saviour for His people is at hand.

Today the western nations are increasingly leading the world in aligning themselves up against the Word of God and His righteousness.

“The kings of the earth take their stand, and the rulers take counsel together against YHWH and against His Anointed - His Messiah: ‘Let us break Their chains,’ they say, ‘and throw off Their fetters!’” (Psalm 2:2-3)

The United States and Britain are sinking fast. China, Russia and the Islamic nations are preparing for their appointed roles. The Beast is arising in Europe for his role. More and more nations are seeking nuclear energy, and weapons; they are preparing for World War 3. Immense destruction and depopulation is ahead.

Many people are asking, “Is Barack Obama the Messiah, or the Antichrist?”  He’s neither!  He’s an accomplice of the New World Order builders who are preparing for a nuclear war which will bring the nations to their knees. And then the totalitarian dictatorship of the real Antichrist – the Man of Sin – will take the surviving world by storm.

But today, Y’shua, Jesus the Messiah, says to His saved people:

“When these things begin to take place, straighten yourselves and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.” (Luke 21:28)

Let’s take a look at how the mystery of iniquity is developing at the centre of the world - the Middle East.



The US-Israeli talks on May 18/09 were outwardly “friendly and earnest.” The “fireworks” that many expected, did not happen, but there were strong differences on which the two had to agree to disagree.

President Obama stood by his demand for a Palestinian state while Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu continued to refuse to endorse the “two-state solution.”

Debka reported: “Obama stressed that a nuclear-armed Iran would be a threat not only to Israel and the US, but a destabilizing factor for the world and the region. However, he said, he is in the process of reaching out to Iran and is confident he can persuade its leaders that a nuclear bomb is not in their interest either. He refused to set a deadline for their dialogue, and spoke of a few months. “These talks can’t go on forever while Iran moves ahead with its nuclear program,” he said, adding: “At the end of the year we’ll see where we stand.”

Netanyahu was less sanguine: “A nuclear-armed Iran which calls for Israel’s destruction is unacceptable, and it would give terrorists a nuclear umbrella.”

The US president called on Israel to stick to the road map as “ratified at Annapolis” (which Netanyahu has rejected). “However hard this is,” Obama said, “Israel must stop settlement activity. And the Palestinians must fight terror,” he said, while pledging US involvement in peace talks as a strong partner.

Netanyahu replied saying that he was ready to start talks with the Palestinians immediately. He wanted the Palestinians to rule themselves, but peace means they must recognize Israel as a Jewish state with the right to defend itself and live in security.”




Reports say that Obama is keen on developing an expanded road map to bring moderate Arab governments into the peace process with Israel, and to start introducing normal relations on a regional level. Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, he said, should be constructively involved in the Israel-Palestinian peace track and do more to develop relations with Israel.




Shortly after the Obama-Netanyahu meeting, reports said the US would present a new peace initiative during an Obama speech in Cairo, Egypt, on June 4.

The initiative would include Arab nations alongside Israel and the Palestinian Authority in peace negotiations. And the speech would include a President Obama statement to the effect that “it is time to divide Jerusalem and to make part of the holy city the capital of a Palestinian state.” Provisions in the initiative, such as making Jerusalem the twin Palestinian-Israeli capital, were to be imposed on Israel.

But says “the White House was forced to rebut these reports as a major misapprehension. There never was such a plan.”

Jordan’s Abdullah II’s advisers at court were evidently responsible for planting the tale of a new Obama peace initiative to be purportedly unveiled on June 4.

This false story was picked up by Israel’s often anti-Netanyahu media, although its source was dubious - the London-based Arabic al Quds al-Arabi, which is a platform for radical Muslim quarters such as Hamas.

The fiction gained wings from the lack of authoritative information on the content of the conversation between Obama and Netanyahu on May 18.

This mistaken story forced White House spokesman Robert Gibbs to produce a damper on May 22. He said, “I know there has been some conjecture that included in this speech will be some detailed comprehensive Mideast peace plan; and it is not the intention nor was it ever the intention of this speech.” He made it clear that Obama’s speech would deal with Washington’s relations with the Muslim world.

Although the partition of Jerusalem will ultimately be required by the US administration, as it has been demanded already by the French President, the EU, most Arab nations, and much of the world including the United Nations, Obama is not pressing for that just now.

According to Debka, Obama did not demand the division of Jerusalem in his recent talks. But his demand for a two-state solution does imply there must be a division of Jerusalem also.




Ahead of the May 18 talks, President Obama sent a message to Netanyahu demanding that Israel not surprise the US with an Israeli military operation against Iran.

Obama wants space to engage in negotiations with Tehran without the threat of a surprise Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear sites hanging over the talks.





Netanyahu promised a no Israeli surprise attack against Iran for six months, and said that Israel would not disturb Washington’s plans for dialogue with Teheran over its nuclear program in any way. In exchange the Israeli leader wanted Obama to agree to a deadline for the nuclear dialogues with Iran to end.

A top Jerusalem official said, however, that Israel was concerned that after realizing his attempts at dialogue with Iran had failed, Obama would refuse to acknowledge it, and that Israel would then be left alone to deal with the threat posed by Tehran.






May 19/09. DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report that the gap between the US President and the Israel PM on Iran was wider even than on the Palestinian issue. Overshadowing their outwardly friendly conversation was the Obama’s growing inclination to meet Iran halfway on uranium enrichment and call off UN and American sanctions if Tehran allows international monitoring of the process.

Debka’s intelligence sources report that Obama is seriously considering taking up an Anglo-German proposal for an international monitoring mechanism strict enough to preclude Iran’s attainment of weapons-grade enriched uranium.

The president was convinced by American intelligence and nuclear experts that this can be done. He also believes that nothing will persuade Tehran to cede its right to enrichment activity on its own soil.

Israeli intelligence and military experts take the opposite view. They believe the Anglo-German plan gives Iran the perfect cover for concealing its race for a nuclear bomb, a misgiving shared by the political and military establishments of the moderate Arab governments in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.

It is their view that if Obama adopts this plan, Iran can be sure of arriving at a nuclear weapon capability by the end of 2010.

This dispute did not come up in the Obama-Netanyahu conversation. Both skated around the Iranian nuclear threat separately, without touching on options outside diplomacy. The US president said he was in the process of “reaching out” to Iran and was confident he could persuade Tehran’s rulers that a nuclear weapon was not in their best interest if they wanted to be fully accepted as part of the international community. He did not mention uranium enrichment or a military option against Iran. Neither would he accept a definite deadline for the negotiations with Tehran, except to say that “at the end of the year, we will see where we stand.”

Asked later to comment, Netanyahu said: “We will defend ourselves.”

Seen from outside Washington, by Iran’s neighbors, Israeli and Arab alike, President Obama has given Iran the gift of seven clear months for developing its nuclear capabilities and enrichment undisturbed.

The only thing left to the Israeli prime minister was to commend “the president’s firm commitment that Iran will not attain a nuclear weapon.”




Obama made it clear that if Israel wants America’s help with its security  goals  regarding  Iran, then Israel must accept and be active participants in establishing a Palestinian state.  The President said:

“So let me just summarize by saying that I think Prime Minister Netanyahu has the benefit of having served as Prime Minister previously. He has both youth and wisdom - and I think he is in a position, not only to achieve the security objectives of Israel, but also to bring about historic peace. And I’m confident that he’s going to seize this moment. And the United States is going to do everything we can to be constructive, effective partners in this process.”

Iran’s leaders have so far rebuffed Obama’s efforts to reach out to them and have toughened their rhetoric.

Netanyahu firmly separated Iran and a Palestinian state. He said if Iran acquired nuclear weapons, “it could give a nuclear umbrella to terrorists, or worse, it could actually give terrorists nuclear weapons.”

Then Netanyahu revealed his position on a Palestinian state in no uncertain terms. He said: “I think that the Palestinians will have to recognize Israel as a Jewish state; will have to also enable Israel to have the means to defend itself. And if those conditions are met, Israel’s security conditions are met, and there’s recognition of Israel’s legitimacy, its permanent legitimacy, then I think we can envision an arrangement where Palestinians and Israelis live side by side in dignity, in security, and in peace.”


In what was seen as a rebuff to the Obama administration, Iran test-fired a new advanced missile two days after the Obama-Netanyahu meeting.

May 20/09. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced the test-fire, saying the new missile which has very advanced technology and was launched from Semnan, 125 miles east of the capital Tehran, has a range of about 1,200 miles (2000km), and it landed precisely on the target.

This puts Israel, southeastern Europe and US bases in the Middle East within striking range.

The announcement did not reassure the US government, coming just two days after President Barack Obama declared a readiness to seek deeper international sanctions against Iran if it shunned US attempts to open negotiations on its nuclear program.

Sanctions upon sanctions imposed on Iran for nearly a decade have served only to buy Iran more time to build its nuclear program rather than halt its progress.

An Israeli report says the Tehran regime was im-proving the accuracy and extending the range of its surface-to-surface missiles to build an image of power in the Middle East that is beyond its real ability to participate in dictating the regional agenda.”





May 20/09. DEBKAfile’s military sources report that Israel, the US and Europe were taken aback by Iran’s successful launch on May 20, of a two-stage, solid-fueled 2,000-kilometer range missile, but most of all by the accuracy of its aim in destroying its target.

Western military sources told us: “Iran is at least two or three years ahead of Israel’s missile defences.”

Israel’s Arrow 2 anti-missile missile system can intercept a missile like this only when it is very close to Israel. Arrow 3, which is designed to knock such missiles out, won’t be operational for several years.

Until now, the Americans and Israelis were confident that insurmountable technical difficulties prevented Iran’s missile industry from achieving an accurate guidance system. They believed Iran’s earlier missiles if fired against Israel would veer off target. This assumption was nullified by the Sejil-2 launch.



The “two-state solution,” supported by the US and most of the world, calls for a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, leaving Israel barely 11 miles wide in some areas.

Although Obama emphasized the two-state peace accord with the Palestinians, (and Netanyahu refused to endorse it); it has become clearer that Obama has been persuaded by his awareness that the Palestinian divisions are too profound to hope for early results.

He seems to have decided that, for now, it would be better to stick to the less ambitious goals of developing the West Bank economy and its governing institutions and security apparatus, as advised by Netanyahu and by Middle East Quartet envoy Tony Blair.

But clearly, the two-state solution is high up on the administration’s agenda. Most of Obama’s post summit comments on the Palestinian issue have repeated his contention that resolving the long and bitter conflict between Arab Palestinians and Israeli Jews in the near term will somehow help deflect the Iranian threat.





Many news sites, including The Times of India reported that the Israeli Prime Minister vowed on 21st May, Jerusalem would remain Israel’s capital “forever.”

“Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It has always been, and will remain so forever, and will never be divided,” Binyamin Netanyahu said at a ceremony marking the occupation and annexation of east Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War. “The ties of the Jewish people and Jerusalem goes back thousands of years ... Jerusalem will always remain united under our sovereignty.”

The report goes on: Palestinians slammed Netanyahu’s remarks as undermining the principle of a two-state solution which has formed the bedrock of the peace process over the past two decades.

“East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian just like all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since June 4, 1967,” President Mahmoud Abbas’ spokesman Nail Abu Rudeina said. “Such declarations defy the idea of a two-state solution,” he said, urging President Barack Obama to intervene in order to halt “the Israeli policies and these declarations that destroy all efforts to reach a just and comprehensive peace in our region.”

But Israeli MPs from the ruling right-wing coalition, on 21st May, submitted a bill aimed at blocking any concessions to Palestinians on the status of Jerusalem. The projected legislation would require any change in the city’s boundaries to have the backing of a majority of 80 of the 120 parliamentary deputies, compared with 61 at present.  The MPs said the aim is to “guarantee the unity of the city.”

The previous government had indicated the Jewish state might be willing to give up sovereignty on some Arab neighbourhoods of east Jerusalem. But the Netanyahu government, which was sworn in on March 31, has ruled this out and he has stoked international criticism because of his refusal to endorse the creation of a Palestinian state.

Jerusalem’s population at present is 760,800, (492,400 Jews and 268,400 Arabs). - May 22/09)





May 24/09. In response to Netanyahu’s declarations on Jerusalem Day that the capital will remain undivided, French President Nicolas Sarkozy stated, “In France’s eyes, Jerusalem should, within the framework of a negotiated peace deal, become the capital of two states.”

In a dramatic speech to the Knesset last year during his visit to Israel, Sarkozy stated that there will be no peace in the Middle East without Israel’s ceding sovereignty over eastern Jerusalem.

The French president, whose grandfather was a Jew, also drew protests from Arab legislators when he praised Israeli democracy and quoted Biblical verses that the Almighty promised the Land of Israel to the Jews.

President Sarkozy’s latest response came as his government backed the new Palestinian Authority government formed by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, and called on it to resume talks with Israel.

A French government spokesman stated that the PA should accept the offer “without delay” and should comply “with the commitments made under the Roadmap, and implement the Palestinian reform and development plan with a view to the creation of an independent, sovereign, viable, democratic and modern Palestinian state existing in peace and security alongside Israel.”  -




May 25/09.  The US State Department says that the future status of Jerusalem would be determined through peace negotiations, despite Netanyahu’s declaration last week that the capital would “never again be partitioned and divided.”

“Jerusalem is a final status issue. Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to resolve its status during negotiations. We will support their efforts to reach agreements on all final status issues,” a State Department spokesman said when asked to respond to Netanyahu’s proclamation that Jerusalem would always remain under Israeli sovereignty.




President Obama’s plan, of course, is based on the concept of ‘two nations for two peoples,’ which translates into Israel turning over the eastern portion of Jerusalem to serve as the capital of a Palestinian state.

In actuality, Obama thinks the solution will be found by ‘internationalizing’ Jerusalem, and turning it over to United Nations control - a solution that the American president apparently believes will be more palatable to Israel than turning Jerusalem over to the PA directly. Obama wants to see the United Nations flag fly over the Old City holy sites of Jerusalem.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II said the president put forward this proposal during his visit to the White House in April.




May 22/09. Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu vowed at the Mercaz HaRav yeshiva in Jerusalem that the Israeli flag will continue to fly over the Western Wall (Kotel).

The first prime minister in years to appear at the venerable yeshiva on Yom Yerushalayim (Jerusalem Day), Bibi ignored Barack Obama’s apparent trial balloon - the idea of the United Nations flag flying over the Old City holy sites.

Netanyahu declared, “The flag that flies over the Kotel is the Israeli flag ... Our holy places, the Temple Mount — will remain under Israeli sovereignty forever.”

Between 1949 and 1967, the religious sites in the City, as well as all of Judea and Samaria, had been under the control of Jordan, which forbade entry of Jews to the Western Wall (Kotel) and other holy places, as well as barring Christians from churches. In 1967, Israel immediately opened all holy sites to all religions after the entire city was re-united under Israeli sovereignty after nearly 2,000 years.





May 20/09. Messianic writer, Joel Rosenberg, exclaims: “No, Mr. President, it is not time to divide the city of God! Jerusalem is and should be the eternal, undivided capital of the Jewish people and the Jewish state.

Dividing Jerusalem will not make peace. Rather, it would send a message to every radical Islamic jihadist around the world that Israel is weak, that the Jews won’t even defend the sovereignty of their own capital, that there is “blood in the water,” and that it is time to strike Israel and wipe her off the map.

“Dividing Jerusalem would trigger an apocalyptic war in the Middle East the likes of which the region has never seen. Already, the Radicals believe Israel is doomed to destruction. Hearing that the American President is now ready to apply intense pressure against the Israelis to divide their capital will only embolden the Radicals and convince them further that Allah is on their side, the wind is at their back, and that they will soon triumph over the Jews and Christians.

“Right at the moment when the US and Israel need to be working with Arab states in unity against the Iranian nuclear threat, this White House is systematically turning against Israel.

Despite all the smiles and boilerplate rhetoric from senior administration officials over the last few days while Prime Minister Netanyahu has been in town — promising to stand with Israel and maintain her security — what the administration is actually advancing in terms of policy is dangerous and destabilizing. They are playing with fire.   -




King Abdullah II of Jordan has tried to bring Syria on board a new Middle East peace plan.

The king held talks in Damascus with Syrian President Bashar Assad in early May, just days after the monarch had spoken of a “combined approach” to tackle the Mideast conflict that would involve not only Israel and the Palestinians, but Arab states as well.

The plan, Abdullah said, was spearheaded by the US, and would have Israel, Syria, Lebanon and other nations sitting down together to hammer out a deal that would settle Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians, Syria and Lebanon in exchange for full recognition of Israel by 57 Muslim nations.

Abdullah said the new plan emerged during his White House meeting with President Barack Obama in April.

Washington is now fine-tuning the move that would involve not just “Israelis and Palestinians sitting at the table, but Israelis sitting with Palestinians, Israelis sitting with Syrians, Israelis sitting with Lebanese,” Abdullah said in an interview with The Times of London.  .

Bashar Assad says, unless Israel gives up the Golan Heights, there will be no peace-negotiations with Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel will not give up the Golan Heights!

The Bible says: “The oracle concerning Damascus. Look! Damascus is about to be removed from being a city, and it will become a heap of ruins.” (Isaiah 17:1)





On May 15 Jordan’s King Abdullah also pressed Binyamin Netanyahu to immediately declare his acceptance of the Arab peace initiative and to take necessary steps to commit to the establishment of a Palestinian state. He called on Netanyahu to halt West Bank settlement building and refrain from actions that would change the facts on the ground

Abdullah said an Arab initiative presented a historic opportunity to reach a comprehensive peace deal in the Middle East. The Arab peace plan would offer Israel relations with the 23 Arab League members in exchange for its withdrawal from land it captured in the 1967 Six Day War, as well as a just solution for Palestinian refugees and the establishment of a Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital.

The king said there is consensus in the international community that there is no alternative to the two-state solution.






May 17/09. At the start, in the middle, and at the end of his recent visit, the head of the Roman Catholic Church voiced his strong support for the creation of a Palestinian state on Jewish lands.

Speaking at PLO Chief Mahmoud Abbas’ palace in Bethlehem, where he went to conduct a large mass, the pontiff spelled it out: “The Holy See supports the right of your people to a sovereign Palestinian homeland in the land of your forefathers, secure and at peace with its neighbours, within internationally recognized borders. In particular I call on the international community to bring its influence to bear in favor of a solution.” 

Israelis wondered how the head of a so-called Christian Church could have so wholeheartedly swallowed the Bible-refuting lies.                                                                                                                        

The wartime past of the Pope has threatened to overwhelm his mission to the Holy Land and the Vatican issued a surprise denial that the pontiff had served in the Hitler Youth.

The Vatican described him as man of strong anti-Nazi credentials and a peacemaker after critics were angered that he failed to express remorse for the Holocaust and apologize for what they see as Catholic indifference during the Nazi genocide.

The Pope continued to speak out against the views of Israel’s Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu. The pontiff’s support for a two-state solution is in line with the international community but not Israel’s new Prime Minister, who says the Palestinians are not ready to rule themselves. 

The Pope visited sites in Jerusalem holy to Muslims, Jews and Christians. He went first to the Dome of the Rock, the first pontiff to do so. It is located on the Temple Mount - a site sacred to all three monotheistic religions, and met the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Mohd Hussein.

Then the Pope followed Jewish tradition at the Western Wall, inserting a written prayer in the cracks between the 2,000-year-old stones.

And he emphasized “the ties that bound Christianity with Islam and with Judaism.”




In his opening comments after disembarking at Israel’s international airport, Benedict called for the creation of a Palestinian state with the hope that Israelis and Palestinians “may live in peace in a homeland of their own within secure and internationally recognized borders.”

If Pope Benedict XVI so fervently supports a Palestinian state – which would split sections of Israel – he also should divide Rome, charged the leader of a coalition of more than 350 Israeli rabbinic leaders and pulpit rabbis.

“I was shocked to hear that the first thing the pope had to say when he landed in Israel was that the Holy Land must be divided to make room for a Palestinian state,” said Joseph Gerlitzky, rabbi of central Tel Aviv and chairman of the Rabbinical Congress for Peace, which includes some of Israel’s most prominent Jewish leaders.

“I suggest that he divide Rome. The Holy Land was promised to the Jewish people and absolutely no human being on this earth has a right to relinquish even one inch of this land,” Gerlitzky stated.

Gerlitzky’s comments were just a taste of the criticism directed at the pope from Israeli lawmakers and religious leaders here, some of whom were disappointed with segments of Benedict’s closely scrutinized visit to the Holy Land.

Israeli newspapers today were filled with criticism. “One would have expected the Vatican’s cardinals to prepare a more intelligent text for their boss,” one columnist wrote.

Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin said in a radio interview, the Vatican and its German-born pope had “a lot to ask forgiveness from our people for.”                                                                                                                                      –





May 20/09. The European Union welcomed President Barack Obama’s appeal to Israel to commit to a two-state solution — Jewish and Palestinian nations living side by side — calling it the “way forward” to peace in the Middle East.

A day after Obama met with Netanyahu, the EU presidency was clearly heartened by the American president’s insistence that Israel abide by peace commitments it has made in the past.

The EU’s relationship with Israel has been in turmoil in recent months.

Last December, the EU agreed in principle to a broad “upgrade” of relations with Israel in political, economic and trade terms. But the war in Gaza changed all that, especially because of Israel’s ‘no’ to repeated EU demands for free access to the area for humanitarian deliveries. Upgrading relations with Israel is now such a divisive issue in the EU that talk of it has been suspended altogether.

Additionally, Washington’s new outreach to Iran and the emergence of a more hawkish government in Jerusalem have become significant new realities.

In recent weeks, senior Israeli officials have fanned out across Europe to spread the word that Iran’s nuclear ambitions must take precedence over talk about a two-state solution — a point Netanyahu stressed in his talks with Obama.

The Israeli view is that the international community must deal with Tehran first, saying it poses a threat not just to the Jewish state but also to Arab nations in the region. That view is not finding much support in Europe.




If there is to be a Palestinian state, US and European leaders should ask, what kind of state will it be? Would it be allowed to have an army, or a “police force” that would effectively serve as an army? Should Israel stand for another armed force in its neighborhood? Would a Palestinian state be permitted to have an airport and overland access to countries that might supply it with terrorists and weapons?

A recent Washington Times editorial put it well: “The Obama administration should focus less on creating a Palestinian state and more on helping Palestinians earn the right to statehood.” That is exactly the right order.

Netanyahu pointed out to Obama that both Hizb’ullah and Hamas — Israel’s two most active Muslim enemies in recent years — receive substantial military and financial assistance from Iran. Until something concrete is done to change that reality, no peace accord with the Palestinians can succeed, he vigorously argued.




May 20/09. Who favors a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict?

President Obama does, of course, as he made very clear. So does former President George W. Bush, who began advocating Palestinian statehood in 2002 and continued until his final days in office. The Democratic Party’s national platform endorses a two-state solution; the Republican platform does, too. The UN Security Council unanimously reaffirmed its support a few days ago. The European Union is strongly in favor as well — so strongly that the EU’s foreign-policy chief, Javier Solana, has been warning Israel that its relations with Europe “will be very, very different” if it drops the two-state ball.

Pope Benedict XVI called for a Palestinian state during his recent visit to the Holy Land, thereby aligning himself — on this issue, at least — with the editorial boards of The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, and The Los Angeles Times. And, for that matter, with most Israelis. A new poll shows 58 percent of the Israeli public backing a two-state solution; prominent supporters include Netanyahu’s three predecessors — former prime ministers Ehud Olmert, Ariel Sharon, and Ehud Barak — as well as President Shimon Peres.

The consensus, it would seem, is overwhelming. As Henri Guaino, a senior adviser to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, put it in speaking to reporters: “Everyone wants peace. The whole world wants a Palestinian state.”

But it isn’t going to happen … To this day, the charters of Hamas and Fatah, the two main Palestinian factions, call for Israel’s liquidation. “The whole world” may want peace and a Palestinian state, but the Palestinians want something very different. Until that changes, there is no 2-state solution. -




May 15/09. ( Palestinian representative in Lebanon, Abbas Zaki, says the two-state solution is his preferred approach, as it will lead to Israel’s collapse. 

Speaking with Lebanese Television, Zaki said that any ceasefire deal with Israel is not desirable. Instead, “we must go towards the two-state solution, a solution that even [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinajad supports.”

“In my opinion,” Zaki explained, “with such a solution, Israel will collapse. Because if they get out of Jerusalem, what will be left of all their talk about the Promised Land and the Chosen Nation?  What will be left after all the sacrifices they gave and then they are told to leave?”

Zaki said that Jews and Israelis “perceive of Jerusalem as having a spiritual status. They relate to Judea and Samaria as a historic dream. If the Jews leave these places, the Zionist idea will begin to collapse of itself – and then we will move forward.”




A top US source said the matter of Netanyahu’s position on a two-state solution was still being worked on and that the White House expected an Israeli response on the settlement issue before Obama unveils his new peace initiative.

Obama views West Bank settlements as a real obstacle to peace, and expects Israel to stop such construction immediately. According to the report, Washington did not see any way to kick start peace negotiations while settlement expansion continued.

Netanyahu reportedly told Obama he wasn’t making a commitment to freeze settlements, saying it was impractical and politically impossible.

May 24/09.  The Obama administration wants to cancel a deal that President Bush made to allow Israel to construct homes in previously existing West Bank Jewish communities.

This is referring to a 2005 deal Bush made with then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that Israel can continue “natural growth” of West Bank settlements, meaning adding housing to current communities in that territory to account for growth in population.

The Obama administration, however, has made clear it wants to see Israel stop all construction in the West Bank, including natural growth.

While Obama reportedly is looking to get out of a deal agreed to by his predecessor, he seems to expect Netanyahu to stand by extreme concessions to the Palestinians made under his predecessor, Ehud Olmert.

According to sources in Netanyahu’s camp, President Obama communicated in his meeting with Netanyahu last week that he expects Israeli talks with the Palestinians to begin where negotiations were left off during talks led by Olmert.

In a Knesset meeting today, Netanyahu was quoted stating: “We do not intend to build any new settlements, but it wouldn’t be fair to ban construction to meet the needs of natural growth or for there to be an outright construction ban.”  -





May 27/09. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the US would present detailed plans on the peace process to the parties as part of its efforts to jump-start negotiations.

“We are going to be putting forward very specific proposals to the Israelis and the Palestinians. That’s what Senator Mitchell has been doing over the last couple of days,” Clinton said at a press conference following her lunch meeting with visiting Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit.

During the press conference, Clinton stressed the US position that settlement construction must stop, even though Netanyahu has indicated “natural growth” in major blocs was set to continue.

“The president was very clear when Prime Minister Netanyahu was here. He wants to see a stop to settlements - not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions,” she said. “That is our position, that is what we have communicated very clearly, not only to the Israelis, but to the Palestinians and others. And we intend to press that point.”






“Watch! For in those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all the nations, and bring them down to the valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will enter into judgment against them on behalf of My people and My inheritance, Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations; and they have divided up My land.”  (Joel 3:1-2)









(Organization of the Islamic Conference)


May 21/09. The Israeli paper Ha’aretz report that Palestinian sources say the Palestinian Authority would only be willing to relinquish Palestinian sovereignty over the Temple Mount as part of a final-status agreement in exchange for Islamic sovereignty over the site.

Palestinian sources said the PA would give up Palestinian sovereignty on the Temple Mount in exchange for Muslim sovereignty, management of the site by the Saudi-based Organization of Islamic Conference, whose 57 member states include Iran.

The OIC is signatory to the Arab Peace Initiative. The envisioned agreement would provide the Palestinians with backing from all Muslim states toward a historic compromise with Israel in a peace agreement.

According to the proposal, the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City will be under Israeli sovereignty, while the Muslim, Christian and Armenian quarters would be transferred to Palestinian sovereignty.

Israel objects to Palestinian sovereignty over the Armenian Quarter.

There is also a dispute building up over the Western Wall; the PA plans to demand that Israeli sovereignty applies only to part of the wall.

Nabil Abu Rudeina, spokesman for President Abbas, said that if Israel opts for peace and has a leader who is willing to make genuine compromises, a peace agreement could be reached within three to six months.

“During the meetings with US special envoy George Mitchell, we made it clear that there must be an Israeli recognition of the principle of two states for two peoples and a freezing of construction in the settlements,” the senior PA official said.

“The result of negotiations between Israel and the PA must be clear: the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, whose capital is East Jerusalem,” Abu Rudeina said.

“Why do the nations rage, and the people devise a vain thing? The kings of the earth take their stand, and the rulers take counsel together against YHWH and against His Anointed - His Messiah: ‘Let us break Their chains,’ they say, ‘and throw off Their fetters!’ He who is sitting in the heavens laughs. The Lord scoffs at them. Then He rebukes them in His anger and terrifies them in His fury, saying, ‘I, yes, I have installed My King on Zion, My holy hill’.”  (Psalm 2:1-6)




Israel may find Iran as one of the administrators of the Temple Mount, according to a new Palestinian Authority plan reported 21st May by the Hebrew-language newspaper Ha’aretz.

PA sources said giving up claims to the Temple Mount and handing over control to the 57-member Saudi-based Islamic Conference Organization is conditional on Israel’s agreeing to a final status agreement.

The PA recently has escalated its propaganda campaign that disassociates the holy site from any connection with Judaism, and claims it is solely a Muslim site.

Sovereignty over the Temple Mount, in Jerusalem, has been one of the foundations for a new Arab country that the PA wants following the proposed expulsion of more than half a million Jews from Judea and Samaria, as well as from Jerusalem neighborhoods that were established after the 1967 Six-Day War.

The PA’s official website as far back as 2005 rejected the Jewish connection with the Western Wall (Kotel), the remains of the wall that surrounded the Holy Temple area. Muslim legend claims that Mohammed tied his horse to the western wall, and ascended to heaven from the rock that is now in the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount.

NOTE: The name “Jerusalem” does not appear even once in the Koran, but Jerusalem appears in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) 669 times; and Zion, (which usually means Jerusalem, sometimes the Land of Israel) is used 154 times. So Jerusalem/Zion is used 823 times in all. The New Testament mentions Jerusalem 154 times and Zion 7 times.





May 24/09. President Barack Obama’s plans for a regional peace between Muslim countries and Israel received a jolt yesterday with Arab League secretary Amr Mussa’s rejection of the reported offer of Jordan’s King Abdullah II for a pan-Muslim peace with Israel.

After a meeting of OIC foreign ministers in Damascus, Mussa said, “This is not on the table. All talk of this is inaccurate.” He said that Muslim countries might recognize Israel if Israel were to accept the Saudi plan, but added, “We do not see any progress in the current circumstances.”  -


With regards to the right of return, the Palestinians reiterated their traditional position: Israel must acknowledge responsibility for the creation of the refugee problem. Abu Rudeina says the Palestinian position on the issue is identical to that of the Arab Peace Initiative: a just and agreed solution to the refugee question, on the basis of UN Resolution 194.

But other Palestinian sources say the PA will probably agree to an arrangement under which refugees will have the right of return to the Palestinian state, with Israel agreeing to absorb up to 100,000 Palestinians within its borders under family reunification.

Regarding borders, Abu Rudeina said that the principle of territorial exchange was agreed, although there are disagreements over the exact areas. He said that in the most recent talks the Palestinians agreed to an exchange involving 1.2% of West Bank land, while then prime minister Ehud Olmert demanded 6.5%.

“But the issue also depends on quality. If Israel receives land in the Jerusalem area or Bethlehem we will not agree to receive desert land in exchange,” he said.




May 20/09. Seventy-six out of 100 US senators this week signed a letter urging President Barack Obama to carefully weigh the risks to Israel’s security before pushing his new Middle East peace initiative.

The letter was sent to the President one day after his meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu, during which Obama pressed his guest to grasp hold of the “historic opportunity” to make peace by surrendering his people’s ancient lands.

In their letter, the senators appeared to side with Netanyahu’s view that Israel cannot even consider a Palestinian state until the Palestinians honour their commitments to halt all terrorism against the Jewish state. “We must also continue to insist on the absolute Palestinian commitment to ending terrorist violence,” they wrote. “The more capable and responsible Palestinian forces become, the more they demonstrate the ability to govern and to maintain security, the easier it will be for them to reach an accord with Israel.”

According to reports in the US media, Obama is determined to push forward with the creation of a Palestinian Arab state at the earliest possible date, and will try to mitigate the risk to Israel by calling for that Palestinian state to be demilitarized.

There was no mention of what the consequences would be if and when the Palestinians rejected or violated that condition. -



Forthright analyst for the Jerusalem Post, Caroline Glick writes:

May 21/09. On the face of it, Obama’s obsessive push for a Palestinian state makes little sense. The Palestinians are hopelessly divided. It is not simply that Hamas rules the Gaza Strip and Fatah controls Judea and Samaria. Fatah itself is riven by division.

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ appointment of the new PA government under Salaam Fayad was overwhelmingly rejected by Fatah leaders. (See report “Palestinian Political Turmoil” below): Quite simply, there is no coherent Palestinian leadership that is either willing or capable of reaching an accord with Israel.

According to media reports, Obama’s plan will require Israel to withdraw its citizens and its military to the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. It will provide for the free immigration of millions of Israel-hating Arabs to the Palestinian state. And it seeks to represent all of this as in accord with Israel’s interests by claiming that after Israel renders itself indefensible, all 57 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (including Iran) will “normalize” their relations with Israel. In short, Obama is using his peace plan to castigate the Netanyahu government as the chief destabilizing force in the region.

What would a strategy to contain the Obama administration’s pressure and maintain international attention on Iran look like?  Under the present circumstances, the Netanyahu government’s best bet is to introduce its own peace plan to mitigate the impact of Obama’s initiative.

Such a plan should contain three stages.

First, in light of the Arab world’s apparent willingness to engage with Israel, Netanyahu should call for the opening of direct talks between Israel and the Arab League, or between Israel and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, regarding the immediate normalization of relations between Israel and the Arab-Islamic world. Both Obama and Jordan’s King Abdullah claim that such normalization is in the offing. Israel should insist that it begin without delay.

The second stage of the Israeli peace plan would involve Israel and the Arab world agreeing and beginning to implement a joint program for combating terrorism. 

It should be abundantly clear to all governments in the region that there can be no long-term regional peace or stability as long as terrorists bent on destroying Israel and overthrowing moderate Arab regimes are allowed to operate. 

The final stage of the Israeli peace plan should be the negotiation of a final-status accord with the Palestinians. Only after the Arab world has accepted Israel, and only after it has agreed to join Israel in achieving the common goal of a terror-free Middle East, can there be any chance that the Palestinians will feel comfortable and free to peacefully coexist with Israel. 

Whether Netanyahu advances such a peace plan or not, what became obvious this week is that his greatest challenges in office will be to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons while preventing the Obama administration from blaming Israel for the absence of peace. -




May 21/09. Palestinian Authority officials said that they had been “surprised” to hear about US President Barack Obama’s new peace plan from the Israeli media, noting that Washington had not informed the PA leadership about the initiative.

One PA official said Abbas and his aides were currently studying the plan, which, he added, included “several positive points.” The official stressed, however, that some of the proposals mentioned in the plan were completely unacceptable to the Palestinians.

These proposals, he said, included the talk about resettling Palestinian refugees in Arab countries, swapping lands between the future Palestinian state and Israel, creating a demilitarized state and granting the Old City of Jerusalem the status of an international city.

“The Palestinian position on these issues is very clear,” explained another PA official. “We insist on the right of return for all refugees on the basis of UN resolution 194, and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with all of East Jerusalem, including the Old City, as its capital.”

The official said the PA had, in the past, rejected the idea of establishing a demilitarized state and swapping land with Israel. “The only way to achieve real and lasting peace is by forcing Israel to withdraw from all the territories that were occupied in 1967,” he said.    -




May 20/09. PA sources claim that following Jordan’s King Abdullah’s visit to Washington US officials said that any future Palestinians state would include Jerusalem as its capital, a halting of all settlement construction, as well as setting a clear timetable for the realization of the two-state solution and a commitment that the permanent peace agreement would be negotiated according to the understanding set by the Arab peace initiative.

The US plans to add “improvements” to the Arab peace plan. According to a recent report in the London-based Arabic-language newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi, the revised plan will include, reintegrating Palestinian refugees either in various Arab nations, or in the demilitarized Palestinian state, and Israel and the Palestinian Authority would agree to a land exchange.

The revised plan is also said to call for east Jerusalem to be made the new state’s capital – with the Palestinian Authority’s flag waving over it official institutions and the UN banner waving over the Old City and places sacred to Judaism, Islam and Christianity.

The US is also expected to demand Arab nations set a timetable to the normalisation of their diplomatic relations with Israel – a step meant to encourage Jerusalem to take practical steps towards forming a Palestinian state.






May 20/09. Ignoring warnings from Hamas and his own Fatah faction, PA President Mahmoud Abbas swore in a new government headed by current Prime Minister Salaam Fayad. In addition to his post as prime minister, Fayad will continue to hold the Finance portfolio.

Hamas and the majority of Fatah decided to boycott the new government, each for its own reasons.

In addition, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Palestinian People’s (Communist) Party said they had turned down an offer to join the government.

Hamas officials said that Abbas’ move was tantamount to a “death certificate” for Egyptian-sponsored reconciliation talks aimed at reaching agreement on the formation of a Palestinian unity government.

Despite Fatah’s decision to boycott the government, 10 members of the faction accepted ministerial portfolios on an individual basis. Their decision is viewed as a sign of the deepening crisis in Fatah, which is already in turmoil over its failure to hold its sixth general assembly for the past two decades.

Last week Abbas announced that he would convene the long-awaited conference in Jericho or Bethlehem on July 1, triggering a crisis in Fatah between those who favor holding the meeting in the West Bank and those who insist it should be held in one of the Arab countries.

“Fatah is strongly opposed to this government because we were not consulted about the make-up,” said Fatah operative Ashraf Juma’ah. “This is an illegitimate government and Fatah won’t vote in favor of it in parliament.”

Hamas legislator Salah Bardaweel said that the Fayad government did not represent the Palestinians. “Any government must be approved by a majority of members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, and this is what the Fayad government is lacking,” he said.

Abbas’ decision to form a new government in the West Bank was an indication of the ongoing “political, legal and constitutional chaos,” Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said. He accused Abbas of seeking to “deliberately sabotage” Fatah-Hamas negotiations aimed at achieving “national reconciliation.”





May 30/09. President Obama and his administration told PA President Mahmoud Abbas during a meeting on May 28, the US foresees the creation of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

According to Nimer Hamad, Abbas’ senior political adviser, the American administration iss very friendly to the position of the PA.  “Abbas heard from Obama and his administration in a very categorical way that a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital is in the American national and security interest,” Hamad said.

Another PA official told worldnetdaily that Obama informed Abbas he would not let Netanyahu “get in the way” of normalizing US relations with the Arab and greater Muslim world. “We were told they will not allow a Netanyahu government to hurt their efforts of rehabilitating US relations with the Arab and Islamic world, which is a high priority of Obama,” he said.





Today Jerusalem is a city of tension. Divided or not divided, it will remain a cup that causes reeling, and a heavy stone for the nations. (Zechariah 12:2-3)

“Peace” will be a non-starter, until after the Rapture, when the Antichrist will be revealed and beguile the nations with a seven-year “peace” treaty.                                                                                                                                  (2 Thessalonians 2:7-10)

The peace treaty, which is represented by the rider on a white horse has a short ride, and then world war (the rider on a red horse) breaks out. (Revelation 6:2-8)

Jerusalem (and all Israel) will be surrounded by the armies of the world. The city will be captured, plundered, and half the people displaced. (Joel 3:9-12. Zech 12:2-3; 14:2)

Many nations around will be left desolate as a result of the nuclear war that brings the battle to an end. (Ezekiel 29:10-13)

Antichrist, the leader of the revived Roman Confederation will take over Jerusalem and set up his royal pavilion there. (Daniel 11:40-45)

Jerusalem will become the capital for the New World Order - the regime of the Antichrist. This counterfeit Messiah will impersonate the promised “messenger of the covenant,” and claim to be the fulfilment of the prophecy:

“Look! I am sending My messenger, and he will prepare the way before Me. And the Master, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the Messenger of the Covenant in whom you delight, look! He is coming, says the YHWH of hosts.” (Malachi 3:1)

The reign of the Beast in Jerusalem will come to an end at the coming of Y’shua, the King of Kings, at the battle of Armageddon.

Jerusalem will be saved by the true Messiah, (Psalm 69:35-36), and the restored city will become “the Joy of the whole Earth.” (Psalm 48:2)

  “In the last days the mountain of the House of YHWH will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream into it. Many peoples will come and say, ‘Come, let us go up to the mountain of YHWH, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us His ways, so that we may walk in His paths.’

“For the Torah (instruction) will go out from Zion, and the Word of YHWH from Jerusalem. He will judge between the nations, and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they learn warfare any more.” (Isaiah 2:-4)



“And YHWH will be King over all the earth; in that day it will be acknowledged - YHWH is one; and His Name the only one.” (Zechariah 14:4)

“YHWH will reign over them in Mount Zion from that day and for ever.” (Micah 4:7)

“The kingdoms of the world have become the kingdom of YHWH our LORD and of His Anointed - the Messiah; and He will reign forever and ever’.”   (Revelation 11:15)


In case you have not read our book,


you may request a copy from your nearest  MRC address






Expression Web Templates

The One who is coming will come, He will not delay