Feb 6, 2012
Let There Be No Mistake About Iran's Nuclear Intentions
The diplomatic chatter over an Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear program has reached new heights. There have been several secret meetings in the past week related to the topic. Israel has also sent out an order putting "Israeli facilities in North America and around the world...on high alert." According to an internal security document obtained by ABC News, "We predict that the threat on our sites around the world will increase…on both our guarded sites and 'soft' sites."
Probably the clearest indication that a strike is getting very near is the Obama administration publicly squabbling with Israel about the need for more time to allow diplomacy and sanctions to work. “There is still time and space to pursue diplomacy with Iran over its nuclear program," said State Department spokesman Mark Toner. He added that the U.S. “is absolutely committed to preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons.”
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta even gave a time frame for when an attack might take place. He said, "There is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May, or June before Iran enters what Israelis describe as a 'zone of immunity' to commence building a nuclear bomb."
It's a bit of a quandary why Panetta would offer this time window. Since America is one of Israel's closest allies, you wouldn't expect our military chief to let the cat out of the bag on such a vital military operation. There are two possibilities:
1. The Israelis are being tight-lipped about a strike, and Panetta is speaking out of frustration.
2. Israel and American forces are working together, and the actual date is within the next few weeks.
Israel and the U.S. are divided over the timing of a military strike for two key reasons. Obama is likely concerned about what a sudden rise in oil prices would do to his reelection chances. Israel is concerned about what a nuclear-armed Iran would do to its continuing existence.
The one thing that has been holding back the calls for immediate military action is Iran's claim that its nuclear program is only for the production of electrical power. Since Iran has a 100-year supply of cheap oil, it is ridiculous for Tehran to claim it needs nuclear energy to power its cities. Iran would have a better argument if it said the desire to switch to atomic energy was part of an attempt to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions.
Iran's willingness to suffer economic pain is more proof of its commitment to developing a bomb. The sanctions placed against Iran have triggered runaway. The rial, Iran's currency, has been in a freefall against the dollar. The market rate for dollars is now 50 percent below the official rate. The government is so worried about the value of the rial that it has blocked text messages using words like "dollar" and "foreign currency."
There is an ongoing effort to embargo Iranian oil. A plan is now in the works for Japan to cut Iranian crude purchases. Saudi Arabia has promised to increase production to fill the gap. Since oil sales account for about 80 percent of Iran’s foreign revenues, you would think that Tehran would say, "Hey, I guess we don't need nuclear power that badly." Iran's leaders are so stubborn in their position, they have threatened to cut off exports to Europe.
Another sign of Iran's intractable nuclear policy is the huge amount of money it is spending on protecting its nuclear research facilities. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has just presented to Parliament a plan to more than double military spending over the coming twelve months. Iran has already been a heavy shopper in the Russian arms market. The Iranian military has conducted an endless series of drills in the past few months.
There isn't going to be any great surprise the day the Israeli air force bombs Iran's nuclear facilities. What will probably be the shock will be how bad the situation will get after the fighting starts. Iran has already promised it would close off the Strait of Hormuz to oil shipping if was to come under attack. Since they've had over seven years to plan such a move, it's a given that there will be a devastating impact on the flow of one-fifth of the world’s crude.
What Kind of Love Is This?
A strange literary brain glitch seems to afflict mainstream news media types these days. I find the disorder asserting its influence even in news briefs found on the front pages of my hometown newspaper. Such is the case as follows.
Mohammed Shafia, 58; his wife, Tooba Yahya, 42; and their son, Hamed, 21, all originally from Afghanistan, have been found guilty in Canada of first-degree murder in the killings of Shafia’s three teenage daughters and another of his wives in a polygamous marriage because they dishonored the family by defying its rules on dress, dating, socializing and Internet use. (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette,
“In the News,” 1/30/12)
The story is front and center, yet a glaring fact is missing. It is as if the reporters are being blocked from finding the cause of the brutal killings that are almost routinely committed these days in the name of religious doctrine. The murders in the above news brief were, for example, reported in the following way by the Associated Press as passed along by NBC:
KINGSTON, Ontario—A jury on Sunday found an Afghan father, his wife and their son guilty of killing three teenage sisters and a co-wife in what the judge described as "cold-blooded, shameful murders" resulting from a "twisted concept of honor." The jury took 15 hours to find Mohammad Shafia, 58; his wife Tooba Yahya, 42; and their son Hamed, 21, each guilty of four counts of first-degree murder in a case that shocked and riveted Canadians from coast to coast.....”
Nowhere is the specific religious affiliation of the murderers mentioned. As a matter of fact, only one religion is mentioned, and that is through the use of the word "Christian" later in the piece. One of the teenagers murdered for her “twisted” concept of honor had condoms in her room and photos of herself wearing short skirts and hugging her Christian boyfriend, according to the story. The story broadcast by NBC actually never mentioned that religious reasons were at the core of the killings.
One might take from the story as presented that the reporting source wants us to infer that the girl was morally loose–as was her Christian boyfriend--and somehow deserved punishment.
What is it about the American media that causes an apparently unwritten rule that the use of the words "Muslim" and "Islam" are taboo in the contemporary journalistic lexicon?
The answer resides within the politically correct minds of those bent on shaping opinion in these dark days of setting the stage for the coming of Antichrist.
More to the point is the question posed by the title of this commentary: What kind of love is found in Islam, which we are told time and time again is a religion of love, not of hatred and violence?
It is a religion that commands–or at least condones—strapping bombs onto women and children and sending them out to kill as many as possible in the name of the religion’s god. When nearly three thousand people are murdered by nineteen adherents of the religion’s most fundamental tenets by flying airliners into buildings, the majority of Muslims celebrate in their streets. When every head of state and the governments–all of which are driven by Islamist rage--demand genocide to wipe the people of Israel from the map, good, loving Muslims around the world say nothing or agree that the Jews must go because the Koran demands it.
Killing teenage girls for the sake of Allah and a long-dead prophet of Islam because the youngsters want to assimilate into the culture that surrounds them is a growing crime in North America. Yet the news reports are completely silent about the real source of the beastly activity.
Of course, this shouldn’t surprise. Those who write and broadcast the stories are clueless pawns of the "prince of the power of the air.”
"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others” (Ephesians 2:2-3).
Islam is neither a religion of love nor of peace–which are rooted in the same source. God’s Word tells us about His (the REAL God’s) prescription for living in love and peace: “Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:6-7).