Sunday, July 12, 2009

Conflict growing between EU's Solana and Israel?

Javier Solana is calling for a UN Resolution for a forced peace and two state solution between Israel and Palestine. Israel has said that is a violation of existing codified international law. Quoting from the Ynet (Israeli) news service:

The Foreign Ministry rejected Sunday a call by EU foreign policy chief Javer Solana on the UN to recognize a Palestinian state by a certain deadline even if Israelis and Palestinians have not reached agreement among themselves.

"According to UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the Road Map and the treaties signed between the two sides, a solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only be reached through negotiations," said the ministry in a statement. (Roni Sofer)

The party appears to have a current potential for getting soon rough. Stay tuned!



Constance Cumbey said...

Excellent coverage of this over at 70th Week of Daniel Blogspot:


Len said...


From Palestinian Media Watch:

Bulletin: July 12, 2009

Fatah official:
"Our goal has never been peace.
Peace is a means; the goal is Palestine."

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

The PA will resume violence and terror against Israel when Fatah is "capable," and "according to what seems right," Fatah activist Kifah Radaydeh says in a PA TV interview. She states openly that peace is not a goal for Fatah:

"It has been said that we are negotiating for peace, but our goal has never been peace. Peace is a means; the goal is Palestine."

Radaydeh says that "armed struggle" has not been ruled out and will continue, depending on how "capable" the PA forces are.


"Fatah is facing a challenge, because [Fatah] says that we perceive peace as one of the strategies, but we say that all forms of the struggle exist, and we do not rule out the possibility of the armed struggle or any other struggle. The struggle exists in all its forms, on the basis of what we are capable of at a given time, and according to what seems right...

What exactly do we want? It has been said that we are negotiating for peace, but our goal has never been peace. Peace is a means; and the goal is Palestine. I do not negotiate in order to achieve peace. I negotiate for Palestine, in order to achieve a state."
[PA TV July 7, 2009]

It should be noted that when Fatah refers to "Palestine", it is routinely referring to all of Israel.

Some examples:

1. The Fatah flag still shows the map of Israel under rifles. The same symbol (see right) appears on the Fatah website ( and other official Fatah publications.

2. Fatah MP Najat Abu-Bakr said in a PA TV interview last year that Fatah's goal remains the destruction of Israel, but that their political plan is to focus on the West Bank and Gaza Strip:

"It doesn't mean that we don't want the 1948 borders [all of Israel]...but our current political program is to say that we want the 1967 borders." [PA TV, Aug. 25 2008].

3. A PA TV educational documentary broadcast monthly since 2007 includes the following words denying the existence of Israel:

"Another section in Palestine which is the Palestinian coast that spreads along the [Mediterranean] sea, from... Ashkelon in the south, until Haifa, in the Carmel Mountains. Haifa is a well-known Palestinian port. [Haifa] enjoyed a high status among Arabs and Palestinians especially before it fell to the 'occupation' [Israel] in 1948. To its north, we find Acre. East of Acre, we reach a city with history and importance, the city of Tiberias, near a famous lake, the lake of Tiberias [Kinneret- Sea of Galilee]. Jaffa, an ancient coastal city, is the bride of the sea, and Palestine's gateway to the world." [PA TV, August 2007-June 7, 2009, dozens of times]

4. Muhammad Dahlan, senior PA official, recently stressed that Fatah adamantly refuses to recognize Israel, and that even Palestinian Authority recognition is to have better standing internationally in order to receive foreign aid:

"I want to say for the thousandth time, in my own name and in the name of all of my fellow members of the Fatah movement: We do not demand that the Hamas movement recognize Israel. On the contrary, we demand of the Hamas movement not to recognize Israel, because the Fatah movement does not recognize Israel, even today... It's required of the government but not of Hamas; it's required of the government but not of the Fatah, so that this government will be able to offer the necessary assistance, to carry out the necessary reconstruction, to offer assistance to the sick, to bring relief to needy families... This can be dealt with [only] by a government that has relations with the international community, one that is acceptable to the international community, in order that we can work together and benefit from the international community." [PA TV March 17, 2009]

Len said...


Sunday, July 12, 2009
Israel blasts 'dangerous' EU call for deadline on Palestinian state

Israel blasts 'dangerous' EU call for deadline on Palestinian state

By Barak Ravid and Assaf Uni, Haaretz Correspondents, and Reuters Last
update - 23:23 12/07/2009

The Foreign Ministry on Sunday dismissed a call by the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, for the United Nations to set a deadline for the establishment of a Palestinian state as "dangerous."

"Resolutions 242 and 338 of the United Nations, the roadmap [peace plan] and agreements between Israel and the Palestinians all cautiously determine that
the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will only be reached through negotiations by the sides," the ministry said in a statement.

Speaking Saturday at a lecture in London, Solana said the UN Security Council should recognize a Palestinian state even if no peace accord had been reached between Israel and the Palestinians by the deadline.

The Foreign Ministry added: "Israel has called more than once for the
immediate renewal of the talks without preconditions.

"Another demand setting an artificial deadline endangers and harms the chances of actually reaching a bilateral agreement between Israel and the

The Palestinians have said they will not revive peace talks unless there is a halt to Israel's settlement activities in the West Bank.

Solana said on Saturday that, "After a fixed deadline, a UN Security Council
resolution should proclaim the adoption of the two-state solution." He added that this should include border parameters, refugees, control over the city
of Jerusalem and security arrangements.

"It would accept the Palestinian state as a full member of the UN, and set a calendar for implementation. It would mandate the resolution of other
remaining territorial disputes and legitimize the end of claims," Solana went on.

Advocating a return to Israel's borders before the 1967 Six-Day War with Egypt, Syria and Jordan in which it took the West Bank and other territories, Solana said mediators should set a timetable for a peace agreement.

"If the parties are not able to stick to it [the timetable], then a solution backed by the international community should be put on the table," he said.

Solana also praised Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "for finally
generating an Israeli consensus" on a two-state solution.

The EU, along with the United States, Russia and the United Nations, is part of the Quartet of Middle East Negotiators.

Len said...


Sunday, July 12, 2009

Abbas says he won't meet Netanyahu


Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas reiterated on Sunday his refusal to resume peace talks with Israel unless Binyamin Netanyahu's government accepted the two-state solution and agreed to freeze all construction in the settlements in the West Bank.

Abbas's remarks came in response to an appeal from Netanyahu made during the Sunday cabinet meeting in which the Israeli prime minister called for the
two leaders to revive the stalled peace process.

Abbas was speaking to reporters in Ramallah after meeting with visiting Romanian President Traian Basescu.

"Israel must recognize the two-state solution and stop all settlement activities in order to resume peace talks over final status issues," Abbas
said. "The final status issues are settlements, Jerusalem, borders,
refugees, water, security and prisoners."

Abbas said that both the Palestinians and the Israelis were required to fulfill their obligations in accordance with the road map plan for peace in
the Middle East.

"We care very much about the peace process," he added. "We are demanding that Israel fulfill its commitments under the terms of the road map, first and foremost recognizing the two-state solution and halting settlement
construction." He said that only then would the way be paved for the resumption of the negotiations with Israel over the final status issues.

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that the PA would not make any compromises regarding settlements.

"There can be no half-solutions with regards to the settlements, including so-called natural growth there," he said, referring to unconfirmed reports that the US and Israel have reached agreement on building new homes in some
of the settlements.

Erekat said that the continued construction in the settlements would sabotage the international community's efforts to persuade the Palestinians and Israelis to resume peace talks in the near future.

He said that Abbas sent a message to the US administration over the weekend reiterating his stance on the settlements and making clear that the Palestinians would not compromise regarding this issue.

"If the US administration can't force Israel to stop the settlements, how will it force Israel to abide by any agreement regarding final status issues
such as Jerusalem, borders, refugees, water, security and settlements?"

The cabinet meeting was held in Beersheba Sunday, just over 30 years after the May 1979 meeting of former prime minister Menachem Begin and former Egyptian president Anwar Sadat.

"Let's make peace, both diplomatic and economic," Netanyahu said at the start of the meeting, which was also meant as an act of solidarity with the Negev city.

"There is no reason why we can't meet anywhere in Israel," he said of himself and Abbas, "and since we are in Beersheba, I say, let's meet here."

Netanyahu stressed the Palestinians' "basic right to live in peace, security and prosperity," and said the government had "made great efforts in recent weeks to ease their lives. We've removed many roadblocks; we decided to
increase the operating hours of the Allenby Bridge for more goods; and I've decided to advance a series of projects with the Palestinians to promote
peace. But all these efforts can only bring us to a certain point, and the results will be multiplied a dozen-fold if there is cooperation from the
other side."

The prime minister called "on the leaders of the Palestinians and the Arab states: Let's meet and cooperate. We can bring many players on board."

Continued here:

Jerusalem Post staff contributed to this report.

Anonymous said...

Constance, thanks for posting the pictures of Bjorn, he doesn't look too broken up, in fact, he seems to be coping quite well.

In contrast, his abandoned wife and children are no doubt devastated. I can't imagine being left alone with small children to clothe, house and feed. They are the focus my prayers.

Constance Cumbey said...

To Anonymous 11:26 -- I very much agree. I am astounded at the brazen like quality of the behavior and further that purported Christians would aid and abet him in it with a mere sorry for having an obviously satanically oriented website.

It is my opinion that had Farmer truly believed what he posted on his sites before, even one/tenth of it, he would have been terrified to have engaged in this behavior. I can't help but believe that either he was scoping out our networks and/or was putting those pieces out to gain his bona fides to gain our confidence.


Anonymous said...

Constance, why have you not commented on Solana's statement that he will leave his post in Octobe? Is he leaving politics, or does he have another adgenda?


Constance Cumbey said...

I have heard Solana hint he would retire several times before and I also heard hints dropped from him that he was thinking of running for Mayor of Madrid. None of those ever materialized and he continued to accumulate powers. I have adopted a wait and see position, but personally, I suspect this is either a ploy to increase his powers faster and/or to help ease resistance to his candidate Felipe
Gonzalez for EU President to be allayed.


Rudi said...

Full Text of Solana lecture - THANK-YOU to 'nonymouse' from over at Fulfilled Prophecy

Ditchley Foundation lecture
by Javier SOLANA,
EU High Representative for the CFSP
"Europe's global role - what next steps?"

London, 11 July 2009

Anonymous said...

Synchronicity??? Numerology???

Please - Does anyone know of any Christian articles or books, or have any info that identify ways these dangerous teachings might possibly creep into a church or a Christian's life?

Thanks for any help.


paul said...

Dear K,
Constance Cumby's book, "The Hidden Dangers Of The Rainbow" is a good place to start.
She has it available for free online in PDF format.
I've got it on my desktop.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Bjorn's abandonment of his wife and children for his young 20 year old girlfriend:

Recently, I overheard a woman's rather humorous comment about another situation: "Unfortunately, this happens every day. Some men unzip their pants and their brains fall out."

Anonymous said...


When you interview Cliff Kinkaid Tuesday evening regarding Pope Benedict XVI's "evident endorsement" of New World Order machinery and system - please read him this reply from John-Henry Westen in his July 8, 2009 LifeSiteNews article:

Pope's New Encyclical Speaks AGAINST, not for One-World Government and New World Order

Newspapers, blogs, talk-shows on radio and television are full of discussion over Pope Benedict XVI's supposed call for a "new world order" or a "one-world government." These ideas are, however, neither based in reality nor a clear reading of the Pope's latest encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, the release of which yesterday spawned the heated discussion.

The Pope actually speaks directly against a one-world government, and, as would be expected from those who have read his previous writings, calls for massive reform of the United Nations. Confusion seems to have come from paragraph 67 of the encyclical, which has some choice pull-quotes which have spiced the pages of the world's news, from the New York Times to those of conspiracy theorist bloggers seeing the Pope as the Anti-Christ.

The key quote which has led to the charge reads: "To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago."


Anonymous said...

(Continued . . .)

However, in paragraph 41, the Holy Father specifically differentiates his concept of a world political authority from that of a one-world government. "We must," he says "promote a dispersed political authority." He explains that "The integrated economy of the present day does not make the role of States redundant, but rather it commits governments to greater collaboration with one another. Both wisdom and prudence suggest not being too precipitous in declaring the demise of the State. In terms of the resolution of the current crisis, the State's role seems destined to grow, as it regains many of its competences. In some nations, moreover, the construction or reconstruction of the State remains a key factor in their development."

Later in the encyclical (57) he speaks of the opposite concept to one- world government -subsidiarity (the principle of Catholic social teaching which states that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority) - as being essential. "In order not to produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature, the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity," says the Pope.

Another of the key quotes which is being extracted for shock value from the encyclical is this: "In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth."

Since long before his papacy, Joseph Ratzinger has vigorously fought the United Nations' vision of a 'New World Order'. As early as 1997, and repeated subsequently, Ratzinger took public aim at such a vision, noting that the philosophy coming from UN conferences and the Millennium Summit "proposes strategies to reduce the number of guests at the table of humanity, so that the presumed happiness [we] have attained will not be affected."

"At the base of this New World Order", he said is the ideology of "women's empowerment," which erroneously sees "the principal obstacles to [a woman's] fulfillment [as] the family and maternity." The then-cardinal advised that "at this stage of the development of the new image of the new world, Christians - and not just them but in any case they even more than others - have the duty to protest."

Benedict XVI in fact repeats those criticisms in the new encyclical. In Caritas in Veritate, the Pope slams "practices of demographic control, on the part of governments that often promote contraception and even go so far as to impose abortion." He also denounces international economic bodies such as the IMF and World Bank (without specifically naming them) for their lending practices which tie aid to so-called 'family planning.' "There is reason to suspect that development aid is sometimes linked to specific health-care policies which de facto involve the imposition of strong birth control measures," says the encyclical.

Any vision of a proper ordering of the world, of international economics or political cooperation, suggests the Pope, must be based on a "moral order." That includes first and foremost "the fundamental right to life" from conception to natural death, the recognition of the family based on marriage between one man and one woman as the basis of society and freedom for faith and cooperation among all peoples based on principles of natural law.

Constance Cumbey said...

To Anonymous 6:58 and beyond:

Many thanks for the material which will be most useful for tomorrow's program with Cliff Kincaid!


Anonymous said...

Hi Paul and many thanks for such a rapid response and valuable recommendation. :) I have both of Constance's books and refer to them frequently they are very helpful - thanks Constance.

I think what I'm hoping for is something specific to these two topics that might explain how they are masquerading and being marketed today.

It seems that IONS and Princeton and who knows who else take this synchronicity stuff quite seriously (the number stuff seems to be linked in with it), so much so that PEAR even offer a SyncTXT service to mobile phone owners - I sincerely hope this is just a silly gimmick but I fear not.


Constance Cumbey said...

Please remember, Cliff Kincaid is my guest tonight (Tuesday). Our topic is the alleged new papal statement advocating world government.


Anonymous said...

in my opinion Solana's call for deadline on Palestinian state is a cue to Obama's adminstration how the US should pressure Israel.

the peace in middle east I think will be enforced, as the verse says Jerusalem will be surrounded by armies, i think these armies are the international peacekeepers (Luke 21:20)

Len said...


On "The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow."

Dear Constance,

On Paul's advice I have downloaded your book. I have also purchased a copy (Used -- sorry:-).

Your preface reads:

"It is the contention of this writer that for the first time in
history there is a viable movement - the New Age Movement - that truly meets all the scriptural requirements for the antichrist and the political movement that will bring him on the world scene.

"It is further the position of the writer that this most likely is
the great apostasy or `falling away' spoken of by the Apostle Paul
and that the antichrist's appearance could be a very real event in our immediate future."

With all due respect, and you may have dealt with this in your later works, the New Age is not just a danger to Christians, and not just because of the "antichrist."

I have also recently purchased and begun Natan Sharansky's book, "Defending Identity -- Its Indispensible Role in Protecting Democracy." This book does not even have the words, "new age" in the index but that is what the idea combats because new age is about elimination of identity.

Identity is an important characteristic of religions and nations. Sharansky points out that it is essential to freedom rather than a foe of freedom as new agers contend.

I have just begun it but can already recomnmend it to readers here. Having read some of his other books, notably "The Case for Democracy," I can vouch for the author's intellectual brilliance and cogent ideas.

Anonymous said...

Constance, thank you for your "wait and see" reply about Solana. I appreciate your wisdom.


Constance Cumbey said...

Dear Len,

I have said from the very beginning, and my friend Dorothy can confirm it: "The New Age Movement might be a great place for you, providing you are a blonde, blue eyed pagan. If you are anything else -- African American, Oriental, Christian, Jewish, Moslem (excluding Sufis), you are in a whole heap of trouble."


Len said...


Re: Averting Their Eyes
Rick Richman - 07.14.2009 - 8:55 AM

[A post] on the meeting yesterday of 14 Jewish organizations with President Obama included this excerpt from a JTA report:

[Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations Executive Vice Chairman Malcolm] Hoenlein said that peace progress was likelier when there was “no daylight” between Israel and the United States. Obama agreed that it must always be clear that Israel has unalloyed U.S. support, but added that for eight years there was “no daylight and no progress.”

The following would be my summary of the progress over the past eight years — which Obama apparently ignored in his response to the group: