LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
March 25/15

Feast of Annunciation to the Virgin Mary
Bible Quotation For Today/Then Mary said, �Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word.�
Saint Luke 01/26-38: 'In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin�s name was Mary. And he came to her and said, �Greetings, favoured one! The Lord is with you. �But she was much perplexed by his words and pondered what sort of greeting this might be. The angel said to her, �Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David. He will reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.� Mary said to the angel, �How can this be, since I am a virgin? �The angel said to her, �The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God. And now, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month for her who was said to be barren. For nothing will be impossible with God.�Then Mary said, �Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word.� Then the angel departed from her."

Bible Quotation For Today/
Letter to the Galatians 03/15-22: 'I give an example from daily life: once a person�s will has been ratified, no one adds to it or annuls it. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring; it does not say, �And to offsprings�, as of many; but it says, �And to your offspring�, that is, to one person, who is Christ. My point is this: the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. For if the inheritance comes from the law, it no longer comes from the promise; but God granted it to Abraham through the promise. Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring would come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained through angels by a mediator. Now a mediator involves more than one party; but God is one. Is the law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law. But the scripture has imprisoned all things under the power of sin, so that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."

Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 24-25/15
New US �allegation�: Israel spied on closed-door nuclear talks, passed secrets to Congress/DEBKAfile/March 24/15
Obama Declares War on Israel/Bassam Tawil/Gatestone Institute/March 24-25/15
CIA Says Muslims Join ISIS Because of � Economics/Raymond Ibrahim/March 24/15
Prepare for the Yemeni Storm/Mshari Al-Zaydi/Asharq Al Awsat/March 25/15

Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 24-25/15
Canada to Extend Airstrikes against IS, May Go into Syria
US Senate will vote on sanctions bill if there is no Iran deal
Jewish establishment sounds alarm as White House rhetoric intensifies
Boehner 'shocked' and 'baffled' by report Israel spied on US talks with Iran
US accusations of Israeli espionage � why now?
Obama says differences with Netanyahu not personal
Airliner crashes in French Alps, 150 dead
Armenian Government Recognizes Turkish Genocide of Assyrians and Greeks
Syrian rebels open offensive for Idlib
Turkey probes top minister and mayor as ruling party rift grows
White House warns Israel that occupation must end
Arab-Israeli political leaders reject Netanyahu�s apology
Iraqi FM welcomes Saudi efforts to reopen embassy in Baghdad
Boko Haram kidnapped hundreds in northern Nigeria town: resident

Jihad Watch Latest News
Raymond Ibrahim: Jihadis Cleansing Pakistan of Christians
Boko Haram kidnapped hundreds in northern Nigeria town: residents
UK: Muslima takes 8-year-old son and 3-year-old daughter to Islamic State
Wives of slain jihadists from Australia beg for donations to the Islamic State
DHS Secretary: Reading Quran reminds me of quintessential American values
Tajik Muslims in Islamic State threaten jihad at home and at Kremlin

Saniora to STL: Hariri Told me about Murder Plots by Hizbullah
Naharnet/Al-Mustaqbal bloc leader MP Fouad Saniora said on Tuesday that his longtime friend, slain former Premier Rafik Hariri, confided to him that he had discovered several assassination attempts by Hizbullah against him. �Hariri was driving his car and I was sitting next to him when he suddenly turned towards me and said: 'You know Fouad, by now we have discovered several assassination attempts by Hizbullah against me',� Saniora told the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. Saniora told prosecutors Hariri confided to him of his concerns about his personal security around the end of 2003 or the beginning of 2004. Five Hizbullah members have been charged with plotting Hariri's Feb. 14, 2005 assassination in a massive explosion at the Beirut seafront but have not been arrested. Their trial in absentia began in January 2014 and is ongoing. Hizbullah denies involvement in the murder and the group's leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, has denounced the court as a conspiracy by his archenemies � the U.S. and Israel.
"Had the STL not been established, then assassinations would have continued," Saniora told the court.
The investigations into previous assassinations and crimes had never led to identifying the perpetrators, he said. �So there was a necessity to establish a competent, honest, transparent, neutral and impartial tribunal.��Some cabinet members at the time exerted efforts to stop the establishment of the STL,� he added. Asked whether he thought ex-President Emile Lahoud was in support of the court, Saniora said: �I don't think he welcomed its establishment.� In his testimony, the MP described Hariri as a �charismatic� leader whose opponents sought to "sabotage" his achievements.
�Hariri was able to attract officials' attention. He was very charismatic,� said Saniora, the most senior politician to testify at the STL near The Hague, Netherlands. Several videotapes were played by the prosecution showing Hariri's meetings with Arab and world leaders in the months that preceded his murder. Hariri �was capable through his charismatic personality, intelligence and knowledge to draw the attention of dignitaries and leaders,� said the lawmaker. Saniora confirmed to the court that the former premier's visits abroad upset his opponents.
�Every time he made an achievement during these visits such as building new relations � Hariri used to say God help us when we return to Beirut,� said Saniora. �The Lebanese-Syrian security regime sought to sabotage his achievements abroad,� the MP stressed. �Some people wanted to push the country forward while others wanted to keep it under their firm grip,� he said. The STL Defense then questioned Saniora on the case of the four Lebanese generals who were arrested in 2005 in connection to the Hariri murder. He said: �After all legal measures were taken, I, as premier at the time, was contacted to be informed that the four generals would be arrested.�
�My role in the arrest was limited to just being informed of the development and this is according to the law,� he explained. Former General Security chief Jamil al-Sayyed, former head of the Internal Security Forces Ali Hajj, former head of Army Intelligence Raymond Azar, and former head of the presidential guard Mustafa Hamdan were detained from 2005 until 2009 for their connection to the Hariri assassination.
They were released over a lack of evidence. The Defense is expected to continue its cross-examination of Saniora on Wednesday. On his first day of testimony, Saniora said that Hariri leaned on his shoulder and began to sob over insults directed to the former premier by Syrian President Bashar Assad. Unlike other March 14 officials who gave their testimonies at the court, Saniora shied away from naming the individuals involved in the Lebanese-Syrian security apparatus or those who targeted Hariri's reformist plan. He seemed to have been avoiding a clash with Hizbullah. Al-Mustaqbal is engaged in talks with the party since December to limit the sectarian tension caused by the war in neighboring Syria.

Rafik Hariri said Hezbollah was trying to kill him: Siniora
The Daily Star/Mar. 24, 2015 /BEIRUT: Former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri had told his political ally and confidante Fouad Siniora that he had uncovered multiple assassination attempts against him orchestrated by Hezbollah. In his second day of testimony before the Special Tribunal for Lebanon Tuesday, Siniora told the U.N.-backed court that sometime at the end of 2003 or the beginning of 2004, Hariri confided the disturbing revelation to Siniora."Suddenly he turned around towards me and said 'You know Fouad, we have by now discovered many assassination attempts by Hezbollah targeting me.' This was extremely sudden and astonishing for me," Siniora, also a former premier, told the court.

Report: Faisal Rebuffs Aoun's Presidential Candidacy
Naharnet/Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal allegedly reiterated to al-Mustaqbal Movement chief and former Prime Minister Saad Hariri his complete rejection to allow Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun to reach the Baabda Palace. Sources told As Safir newspaper published on Tuesday that Faisal's comments came during a meeting with Hariri in presence of Saudi King Salman bin Abdul Aziz shortly after the Lebanese official's visit to Lebanon in February. The sources told the daily that Hariri warned during the talks from the repercussions of the presidential vacuum and its impact on the country's stability. The Saudi leadership reportedly agreed to the Mustaqbal chief's fears, expressing concern that Lebanon would become an easy target amid any future developments in the region.
The sources said Hariri pointed out during the meeting that Aoun is a Christian leader who has his weight among the Lebanese, considering him a solution for the presidential deadlock.However, Faisal held onto his stance, refusing to �grant Aoun any chances� over his political stances and agreement with Hizbullah. Lawmakers from the March 14 and 8 alliances failed for the past 11 months to elect a successor to President Michel Suleiman's term over sharp differences on a compromise presidential candidate. Hizbullah and Aoun's Change and Reform bloc have been boycotting electoral sessions. Faisal first rejected the nomination of Aoun 10 months ago after Suleiman's tenure ended, expressing fear over his �hidden intentions.� Aoun continuously said that he will not announce his candidacy for the presidency if there was no political consensus on him.

Report: Bassil Canceled Saudi Trip over Dispute on Condemnation of Hizbullah
Naharnet /Foreign Minister Jebran Bassil had intended to travel to Saudi Arabia over the weekend but the visit was canceled the last minute over Riyadh's role in pushing for the adoption of a statement at the United Nations Human Rights Council that condemns Hizbullah, sources said.Bassil, a Free Patriotic Movement official, denied on Monday that he visited Riyadh to meet with Saudi officials or possibly al-Mustaqbal Movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri. But the sources that are close to FPM chief MP Michel Aoun told As Safir daily published on Tuesday that Bassil had intended to travel to Saudi Arabia but the visit was canceled over the country's insistence to include a clause that condemns Hizbullah in the closing statement of the Council's annual meeting in Geneva. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are reportedly leading the campaign to criticize Hizbullah's role in Syria. The party has sent its members to fight alongside troops loyal to Syrian President Bahsar Assad. Education Minister Elias Bou Saab, another FPM official, also denied on Monday that his recent trip to Saudi Arabia was �political.�Bou Saab has visited Riyadh three times in less than two months, said As Safir. He said that his latest mission to the Saudi capital was intended for discussions on issues linked to his ministry, adding that he only met his Saudi counterpart. The report in As Safir came as the daily said that Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal reiterated to Hariri his rejection to see Aoun reaching the Baabda Palace. The palace has been vacant since President Michel Suleiman's term ended in May 2014. The rivalry between Aoun and Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea and the interference of regional powers are to be blamed for the vacuum.

Report: Lebanese-Russian Arms Deal Hits Sanctions Snag
Naharnet/A deal that the Lebanese army had signed with Russia to buy anti-tank guided missiles and rocket launchers is facing an obstacle caused by the western sanctions imposed on Russia, As Safir daily reported on Tuesday. The newspaper said that the agreement with Moscow to buy Kornet missiles and the long range rocket launchers faced technical and political problems because Lebanese authorities failed to transfer 38 million dollars to Russia. The transfer could not take place over the sanctions imposed on Moscow due to the Ukrainian crisis. Meanwhile, As Safir quoted military sources as saying that Jordan's King Abdullah II informed Army chief Gen. Jean Qahwaji during his recent visit to Amman that both countries would fight terrorism with all their powers. The sources said that Qahwaji asked Abdullah to intensify Jordan's military aid to Lebanon. Qahwaji's request prompted the king to ask Jordan's military chief, who attended the meeting, to provide Lebanon with arms, ammunition and training, added the sources. As Safir expected a Jordanian delegation to visit Beirut soon for that purpose. Jordan delivered in February heavy military equipment to the Lebanese army to bolster its fight against jihadist militants crossing from Syria.

March 8 tried to prevent Siniora STL testimony: Future
The Daily Star/Mar. 24, 2015 /BEIRUT: The March 8 coalition has launched a smear campaign against former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora to try to dissuade him from testifying before the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, the Future bloc said Tuesday. In its weekly statement, the bloc, which is headed by Siniora, said the ex-premier�s testimony �explains the background and political dimensions of the media campaign launched by March 8 forces against Siniora in the days preceding the testimony.� Siniora began offering testimony to the The Hague-based court Monday, detailing a strained relationship between former premier Rafik Hariri and Syria. In his second day of testimony before the STL Tuesday, Siniora told the court that Hariri had confided to him that he had uncovered multiple assassination attempts against him orchestrated by Hezbollah. The Future bloc statement did not provide examples of the smear campaign it said was being waged against Siniora, but the MP has come under tremendous criticism after delivering a blistering attack on Hezbollah earlier this month. During a ceremony to mark the March 14 Movement�s 10th anniversary, Siniora railed against Hezbollah�s intervention in Syria and accused the party of destabilizing Lebanon. Hezbollah and other March 8 officials denounced the attack, with Tawhid party chief Wiam Wahhab going as far as accusing Siniora of being an Israeli agent. In its Tuesday statement, the bloc said the campaign was carried out to prevent Siniora from revealing information to the STL. The statement also expressed dismay at the recent �Persian empire� remarks made by an Iranian presidential adviser, and denounced what it said was Iranian interference in Lebanon�s affairs. �The bloc confirms that Lebanon is an independent and sovereign state that strictly rejects any interventions in its internal affairs,� the statement read.

Machnouk seeks US aid for security forces
The Daily Star/Mar. 24, 2015/BEIRUT: Interior Minister Nouhad Machnouk discussed Lebanon�s security problems with the director of the FBI and other American officials Monday in a bid to secure U.S. support for Lebanese security forces during a visit to Washington.
In a statement released Tuesday, Machnouk said he met with James Comey, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who praised Lebanon�s January crackdown on the Islamist block of Roumieh Prison. The U.S. is willing to offer Lebanon "technical assistance needed by the security forces in the fight against terrorism,� Comey reportedly told Machnouk, according to the statement. Comey�s comments followed a tour of the FBI�s training center. Machnouk later met with Congressman Darrell Issa, a Republican from California of Lebanese origin. Machnouk spoke to Issa, and an accompanying delegation of congressmen, about the political situation in Lebanon and the Syrian refugee crisis. He also met with a group of lobbyists of Lebanese origin who say they push for pro-Lebanese policies in Congress, according to the statement. That meeting, which was attended by Antoine Chedid, Lebanon's ambassador to the United States, focused on the Interior Ministry�s counterterrorism efforts and plans to address the presence of Syrian refugees. The delegation responded by vowing to coordinate with American officials over the delivery of aid and technical assistance to Lebanon�s security forces. During an evening event, Machnouk said Lebanon�s fight against extremists should be left to official security forces, and militias. �This is the main reason behind my visit to Washington - to provide technical assistance and training for security forces in order to strengthen them and enable them to counter terrorism in a more effective manner,� he said. Machnouk also offered support to the idea of a joint Arab force to combat extremist movements in the Middle East, saying that a reliance on Iran to combat ISIS is a �recipe for sectarian strife.�Iran�s role in fighting ISIS may even lead to a Sunni-Shiite war that could last for years, he added.

CIA Says Muslims Join ISIS Because of � Economics
Raymond Ibrahim/PJ Media
March 24, 2015
Speaking at the Council of Foreign Relations on March 13, CIA Director John Brennan said that �the Islamic State had �snowballed� beyond Iraq and Syria, estimating that at least 20,000 fighters from more than 90 countries have gone to join the militant group, several thousand of them from Western nations, including the United States.�
�Left unchecked, the group would pose a serious danger not only to Syria and Iraq, but to the wider region and beyond, including the threat of attacks in the homelands of the United States and our partners,� said Brennan.
Left unclear in his speech is why the Islamic State�which Obama and his crew regularly insist has nothing to do with Islam�is �snowballing�; why 20,000 �fighters� (AKA �Muslims�) are joining it.
Almost one year ago to the day, however, at the same Council of Foreign Relations gathering, Brennan did explain what makes Muslims from all around the world join the Islamic jihad (then under the rubric of �Al-Qaeda�). After assuring all in attendance that al-Qaeda�s ideology is �a perverse and very corrupt interpretation of the Qur�an�; that �al-Qaeda has hijacked� Islam; that �they have really distorted the teachings of Muhammad��Brennan still confirmed that, even so �that ideology, that agenda of al-Qaeda has gained resonance and following in many parts of the world.�
When asked why such a �perverse and very corrupt� understanding of Islam�one that has �distorted the teachings of Muhammad��so resonates among Muslims, the CIA responded by saying that it was being �fed a lot of times by, you know, political repression, by economic, you know, disenfranchisement, by, you know, lack of education and ignorance, so there�there are a number of phenomena right now that I think are fueling the fires of, you know, this ideology.�
Interestingly, if you watch the video clip of Brennan�s speech, you will note that he only �you knows� in the above quotation (four times) and right before it, when he says that al-Qaeda has �distorted the teachings of Muhammad, you know, for violent purposes.�
The rest of his talk is relatively smooth.
Could Brennan be self-conscious of his own equivocations�hence all these stilted �you knows� in one sentence?
Could he be aware of the Rand Corporation report on counterterrorism, prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2009? It found that �Terrorists are not particularly impoverished, uneducated, or afflicted by mental disease. Demographically, their most important characteristic is normalcy (within their environment). Terrorist leaders actually tend to come from relatively privileged backgrounds.�
Or consider the following excerpt from Understanding Terror Networks, by Marc Sageman, a former CIA officer who worked closely with jihadi groups in Afghanistan (emphasis mine):
There was a definite shift in degree of devotion to Islam in adulthood by the mujahedin [jihadis], preceding their recruitment into the jihad. This is not surprising given the fact that the global Salafi jihad is a Muslim revivalist organization. Of the 155 mujahedin on whom I could find relevant information, all but one were considerably more devout right before joining the jihad than they had been as children. More than 99 percent were very religious at that time, often donning Afghan, Pakistani, or traditional Arabic garb and growing beards�
�Devotion to Islam� is what causes Muslims to join the Islamic State. Despite this very obvious fact, Obama officials constantly deny it, offering more �sensible� motives. Thus during a recent interview on MSNBC�s Hardball, State Department spokesperson Marie Harf said that one of �the root causes that leads people to join these groups,� a reference to the Islamic State, is a �lack of opportunity for jobs.�
�Political repression,� �economic disenfranchisement,� �lack of education and ignorance,� and now a �lack of opportunity for jobs.� These, according to the Obama administration, are why countless, nameless Muslims from all around the world are waging jihad�not the commonsensical fact that jihad is integral to Islam, doctrinally and historically.
A final point of interest. This widespread tendency to project Western cultural explanations onto non-Western people is the height of arrogance and ethnocentrism�precisely what progressives and multiculturalists constantly warn against. Yet the irony is that such �open-minded� proponents of cultural relativism are also the ones most prone to ignore Islamic teachings. When Brennan, Harf et al insist that jihadis are really not motivated by religion but rather are products of political, economic, and social forces, is this total dismissal of the �other� and his peculiar motivations (in favor of familiar, Western paradigms) not the epitome of cultural arrogance?

Armenian Government Recognizes Turkish Genocide of Assyrians and Greeks
Posted 2015-03-24
The Armenian National Assembly recognized the Assyrian and Greek genocide perpetrated by Turks in World War One.
Yerevan (AINA) -- The Armenian National Assembly voted today to recognize the genocide of Assyrians and Greeks that was committed by Ottoman Turks during World War One, between 1915 and 1923. The genocide claimed the lives of 750,000 Assyrians (75%), 500,000 Greeks and 1.5 million Armenians.
The genocide recognition bill, sponsored by the Republican Party, received 117 yay votes and 14 abstentions. There were no nay votes. The formal title of the bill is "On the Genocide of the Greeks and Assyrians Perpetrated by Ottoman Turkey between 1915 and 1923." The bill was authored by Eduard Sharmazanov, Armen Rustamyan, Hovhannes Sahakyan, Edmon Marukyan, Arpine Hovhannisyan, Tevan Poghosyan, Gurgen Arsenyan, Heghine Bisharyan, Alexander Arzumanyan, Vahram Baghdasaryan, Hermine Naghdalyan, Margarit Yesayan, Lyudmila Sargsyan.
Eduard Sharmazanov, the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, said:
We have chosen to adopt a declaration because the National Assembly of Armenia adopts declarations in very important cases. In this case, we proposed, discussed and came to the conclusion that the adoption of a declaration would be more appropriate because it's not every day that the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia adopts a declaration. In this sense, by submitting the draft as a declaration on condemnation, we want to show society and our Greek and Assyrian brothers and sisters and the international community that the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia and all the political forces attach importance to condemnation of the genocide perpetrated against the Greeks and Assyrians.
In 2007 the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) recognized the Assyrian and Greek genocides (AINA 2007-12-15). In 2010 Sweden recognized the Assyrian, Greek and Armenian Genocide (AINA 2010-03-12).
Sabri Atman, director of the Assyrian Genocide Research Center, said:
The systematic genocide the Ottoman State and its Kurdish allies committed against Assyrians, Armenians and Greeks during World War 1 is no longer a gain for Turkey and we will never allow it to be as such. We salute the Republic of Armenia for its decision to recognize the Assyrian and Greek Genocide. This encourages us and gives us strength to be recognized internationally.
Turkey cannot take its place among the civilized nations of the world if it does not take full responsibility for the horrific crime of the Armenian, Assyrian and Greek Genocide.
Turkey should stop its denial mentality and should stop its support to criminal and barbaric organization, such as ISIS, that are now continuing to commit genocide against our people in Iraq and Syria.
Turkey should know that the descendants of the survivors of the "forgotten Genocide" will never stop demanding recognition.
While the Armenian genocide is widely known and recognized, the Assyrian and Greek genocides are lesser known. But these genocides cannot be separated from the Armenian genocide, as they were perpetrated at the same time and by the same policy. The genocide of the Assyrians, Greeks and Armenians is one and the same. It was a genocide against Christians.
Assyrians have worked with Greeks and Armenians to pressure Turkey to recognize the genocide of World War One.
To date, Assyrians have erected genocide monuments in 9 cities around the world (story).

Obama Declares War on Israel
Bassam Tawil/Gatestone Institute
March 24, 2015
https://bay174.mail.live.com/?tid=cm9Pe7kA_S5BG9fxBgS7LiGg2&fid=flinbox
Instead of congratulating the Israeli people for being one of the few countries in the Middle East to hold real free and democratic elections, Obama has decided to inflict collective punishment not on Netanyahu, but on all Israelis, even its Arabs and Christians, for having an election that came out not the way he wanted it to.
The terrorists have also been following with great enthusiasm reports that the Obama Administration is considering reassessing its policy -- that the U.S. no longer considers Israel a strategic ally in the Middle East.
In short, Obama's anti-Israel stance is the best gift the Americans could have given to Muslim terrorists and radical Arabs.
Obama also seems not to want to face the fact that because of his withdrawals and neglect, the situation in the Middle East today, with the rise of Islamic State and other terror groups, is not the same as it was even five years ago.
Thanks to Obama's policies, the Iranians and their friends are now in control of Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon, and much of Bahrain, and have surrounded the oilfields of the Persian Gulf. Meanwhile the U.S. has been forced to close down its embassies in three Arab countries -- Syria, Libya and Yemen.
Even Palestinians and Arabs are aware of the fact that under the current circumstances a Palestinian state would sooner or later be controlled by jihadists and Islamic terrorists, whose dream is the destruction of Israel, Europe and the U.S.
The last thing the Americans and Europeans need is another Islamic extremist country that exports terrorism -- with nuclear weapons -- to all parts of the earth.
The real enemy is not Netanyahu. The real enemy is Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad and Islamic State.
Bassam Tawil writes that President Obama's anti-Israel stance is the best gift the Americans could have given to Islamist terrorists. Above, Israeli PM Netanyahu meets President Obama at the White House, May 20, 2011. (Image source: Israel PM office)
Many Arabs and Muslims are rubbing their hands in joy as they watch U.S. President Barack Obama declare war on Israel after the victory of Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party in last week's general election.
They do not see the rising tensions between Obama and Netanyahu as the result of a personal dispute between two leaders. Instead, the dispute is seen by many Arabs and Muslims as part of the Obama Administration's strategy to undermine Israel and force it to make territorial concessions that would pose an existential threat to Israel.
At the beginning of his first term in office, he raised high hopes in the Arab and Islamic countries when he rushed to deliver an apologetic speech at the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Al-Azhar University in Cairo. His speech left many Arabs and Muslims with the impression that here, finally, is an American president who is prepared to sacrifice Israel for the sake of appeasing its enemies.
Instead of congratulating the Israeli people for being one of the few countries in the Middle East to hold real free and democratic elections, Obama has decided to inflict collective punishment not on Netanyahu, but on all Israelis, even its Muslim and Christian citizens, for having an election that came out not the way he wanted it to.
The terrorists have also been following with great enthusiasm reports that the Obama Administration is considering reassessing its policy -- that the U.S. no longer considers Israel a strategic ally in the Middle East.
In short, Obama's anti-Israel stance is the best gift the Americans could have given to Muslim terrorists and radical Arabs.
Obama also seems not to want to face the fact that because of his withdrawals and neglect, the situation in the Middle East today, with the rise of Islamic State and other terror groups, is not the same as it was even five years ago.
Thanks to Obama's policies, the Iranians and their friends are now in control of Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon, and much of Bahrain, and have surrounded the oilfields of the Persian Gulf. Meanwhile the U.S. has been forced to close down its embassies in three Arab countries -- Syria, Libya and Yemen.
Even Palestinians and Arabs are aware of the fact that under the current circumstances a Palestinian state would sooner or later be controlled by jihadists and Islamic terrorists, whose dream is the destruction of Israel, Europe and the U.S.
The last thing the Americans and Europeans need is another Islamic extremist country that exports terrorism -- with nuclear weapons -- to all parts of the earth.
The real enemy is not Netanyahu. The real enemy is Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad and Islamic State.
Many Arabs and Muslims are rubbing their hands in joy as they watch U.S. President Barack Obama declare war on Israel after the victory of Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party in last week's general election.
They do not see the rising tensions between Obama and Netanyahu as the result of a personal dispute between two leaders. Instead, the dispute is seen by many Arabs and Muslims as part of the Obama Administration's strategy to undermine Israel and force it to make territorial concessions that would pose an existential threat to Israel.
At the beginning of his first term in office, he raised high hopes in the Arab and Islamic countries when he rushed to deliver an apologetic speech at the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Al-Azhar University in Cairo. His speech left many Arabs and Muslims with the impression that here, finally, is an American president who is prepared to sacrifice Israel for the sake of appeasing its enemies.
Muslims have long considered Obama to be on their side in the conflict with Israel. They were expecting him to become the first U.S. president to abandon Israel in favor of Arabs and Muslims. But since the 2009 speech in Cairo, there has been great disappointment with Obama in the Arab and Islamic countries for failing to "do something" about Israel.
Now, at long last, the Obama Administration's increased hostility toward Israel is being welcomed in many Arab and Islamic capitals. They are overjoyed to see that after failing the Arabs and Muslims for the past six years, Obama seems finally to be moving in the "right" direction.
Terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hizbullah, Al-Qaeda and Islamic Jihad are also expressing satisfaction with what they see as Obama's "declaration of war" against Israel. Palestinian Authority officials in the West Bank are also celebrating over the fact that Israel has become the number one enemy of the Obama Administration.
This week, a Palestinian Authority official was quoted as saying that the Palestinians would not be surprised if President Obama himself joined their campaign to file war crimes charges against Israel before the International Criminal Court. The official was reported to have told a Ramallah-based Western diplomat that Obama hates Israel and this was good news for the Palestinians.
Israel's enemies have been sitting on its borders and waiting for an opportunity to attack. One of the reasons they have been reluctant until now to wage an all-out war to destroy Israel was their fear that the U.S. would come to Israel's rescue. But now, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Islamic State and other terror groups are hopeful that Obama has finally decided to abandon Israel.
The terrorists also have been following with great enthusiasm reports that the Obama Administration is considering reassessing its policy in the Middle East in the wake of Netanyahu's electoral victory. This is exactly the kind of news they have been waiting to hear for so many years -- that the U.S. no longer considers Israel its main strategic ally in the Middle East.
Bassam Tawil writes that President Obama's anti-Israel stance is the best gift the Americans could have given to Islamist terrorists. Above, Israeli PM Netanyahu meets President Obama at the White House, May 20, 2011. (Image source: Israel PM office)
Reports that the Obama Administration will no longer support Israel in international forums and agencies, especially in the UN General Assembly and Security Council, are seen by a growing number of Arabs and Muslims as the beginning of the end of the partnership between the U.S. and Israel. This partnership has worried Israel's enemies for decades because it stands in the way of achieving their goal of wiping Israel off the face of the earth.
In short, Obama's anti-Israel stance is the best gift the Americans could have given to Islamist terrorists and radical Arabs. For the first time ever, the Obama Administration has created hope among Israel's enemies that the U.S. will at last give them his wholehearted support, just as he has been doing with Iran.
The sharp crisis between the Obama Administration and Israel has been taking place at a time when the U.S. is losing most of its Arab and Muslim friends, especially in Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, as well as other countries. It is also taking place at a time when Iran is capturing one Arab country after the other, and has now surrounded all the oilfields in the Persian Gulf, as well as having quietly for years infiltrated South America.
Thanks to Obama's policies, the Iranians and their friends are now in control of Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon, and much of Bahrain, and have surrounded the oilfields of the Persian Gulf. Meanwhile, the U.S. has been forced to close down its embassies in three Arab countries -- Syria, Libya and Yemen.
Instead of facing the dangers of the Iranian drive to export the Islamic revolution to as many Arab and Islamic countries as possible -- with the help of an accelerating operation to acquire nuclear weapons -- Obama has turned Israel in general, and Netanyahu in particular, into the main threat to world peace and stability.
And instead of congratulating the Israeli people for being one of the few countries in the Middle East to hold real free and democratic elections, Obama has decided to inflict collective punishment not on Netanyahu, but on all Israelis, even its Muslim and Christian citizens, for having an election that came out not the way he wanted it to.
What Obama does seem to want is to force Israel to accept a Palestinian state that would pose an existential threat to it and become the source of instability and tensions in the region. Obama also seems not to want to face the fact that because of his withdrawals and neglect, the situation in the Middle East today, with the rise of Islamic State and other terror groups, is not the same as it was even five years ago.
Even Palestinians and Arabs are aware of the fact that under the current circumstances a Palestinian state would sooner or later be controlled by jihadists and Islamic terrorists, whose dream is the destruction of Israel, Europe and the U.S.
If Obama is interested in reconsidering his Middle East policy, he should start by examining the repercussions of the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on regional and international security. The last thing Americans and Europeans need is another Islamic extremist country that exports terrorism -- most probably with nuclear weapons -- to all parts of the earth.
Obama needs to wake up. The real enemy is not Netanyahu. The real enemy is Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Islamic State. Unfortunately, Obama -- as he continues undermining moderate Muslims and Arabs in the free world -- has decided to side with the wrong side.

Question: "Why is the truth of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ so important?"
GotQuestions.org
Answer: The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the most important event in history, providing irrefutable evidence that Jesus is who He claimed to be � the Son of God. The resurrection was not only the supreme validation of His deity; it also validated the Scriptures, which foretold His coming and resurrection. Moreover, it authenticated Christ�s claims that He would be raised on the third day (John 2:19-21; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34). If Christ�s body was not resurrected, we have no hope that ours will be (1 Corinthians 15:13, 16). In fact, apart from Christ�s bodily resurrection, we have no Savior, no salvation, and no hope of eternal life. As the apostle Paul said, our faith would be �useless� and the life-giving power of the gospel would be altogether eliminated.
Because our eternal destinies ride on the truth of this historical event, the resurrection has been the target of Satan�s greatest attacks against the church. Accordingly, the historicity of Christ�s bodily resurrection has been examined and investigated from every angle and studied endlessly by countless scholars, theologians, professors, and others over the centuries. And even though a number of theories have been postulated that attempt to disprove this momentous event, no credible historical evidence exists which would validate anything other than His literal bodily resurrection. On the other hand, the clear and convincing evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is overwhelming.
Nonetheless, from the Christians in ancient Corinth to many today, misunderstandings persist relative to certain aspects of our Savior�s resurrection. Why, some ask, is it important that Christ�s body was resurrected? Couldn�t His resurrection have just been spiritual? Why and how does the resurrection of Jesus Christ guarantee the bodily resurrection of believers? Will our resurrected bodies be the same as our earthly bodies? If not, what will they be like? The answers to these questions are found in the fifteenth chapter of Paul�s first letter to the church in Corinth, a church that he established several years earlier during his second missionary journey.
In addition to growing factions in the young Corinthian church, there was rampant misunderstanding of some key Christian doctrines, including the resurrection. Although many of the Corinthians accepted that Christ has been resurrected (1 Corinthians 15:1, 11), they had difficulty believing others could or would be resurrected. The continuing influence of Gnostic philosophy, which held that everything spiritual was good whereas everything physical, such as our bodies, was intrinsically evil, was essentially responsible for their confusion regarding their own resurrection. The idea of a detestable corpse being eternally resurrected was, therefore, strongly opposed by some and certainly by the Greek philosophers of the day (Acts 17:32).
Yet, most of the Corinthians understood that Christ�s resurrection was bodily and not spiritual. After all, resurrection means �a rising from the dead�; something comes back to life. They understood that all souls were immortal and at death immediately went to be with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8). Thus, a �spiritual� resurrection would make no sense, as the spirit doesn�t die and therefore cannot be resurrected. Additionally, they were aware that the Scriptures, as well as Christ Himself, stated that His body would rise again on the third day. Scripture also made it clear that Christ�s body would see no decay (Psalm 16:10; Acts 2:27), a charge that would make no sense if His body was not resurrected. Lastly, Christ emphatically told His disciples it was His body that was resurrected: �A spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have� (Luke 24:39).
Again, however, the Corinthians� concern was regarding their personal resurrection. Accordingly, Paul tried to convince the Corinthians that because Christ rose from the dead, they also would rise from the dead some day, and that the two resurrections � Christ�s and ours � must stand or fall together, for �if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised� (v.13).
�But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive� (vv. 20-22).
When Jesus Christ was resurrected, He became the �first fruits� of all who would be raised (see also Colossians 1:18). The Israelites could not fully harvest their crops until they brought a representative sampling (first fruits) to the priests as an offering to the Lord (Leviticus 23:10). This is what Paul is saying in verses 20-22; Christ�s own resurrection was the �first fruits� of the resurrection �harvest� of the believing dead. The �first fruits� language Paul uses indicates something to follow, and that something would be His followers � the rest of the �crop.� This is how Christ�s resurrection guarantees ours. Indeed, His resurrection requires our resurrection.
And to allay their concerns regarding connecting the spirit to what was deemed an undesirable body, Paul explained to them the nature of our resurrected bodies and how they would differ from our earthly bodies. Paul likened our deceased earthly bodies to a �seed,� and God would ultimately provide another body (vv. 37-38) that would be like Christ�s glorious resurrected body (1 Corinthians 15:49; Philippians 4:21). Indeed, just as with our Lord, our bodies which are now perishable, dishonored, weak, and natural will one day be raised into bodies that are imperishable, glorious, powerful, and spiritual (1 Corinthians 15:42-44). Our spiritual bodies will be perfectly equipped for heavenly, supernatural living.
Recommended Resources: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Logos Bible Software

New US �allegation�: Israel spied on closed-door nuclear talks, passed secrets to Congress
DEBKAfile Special Report March 24, 2015
Yet another Obama administration thrust in its campaign to stigmatize Binyamin Netanyahu and the newly elected Israeli government came Tuesday, March 24, in the form of a pejorative leak to The Wall Street Journal.
"Israeli intelligence was eavesdropping on closed-door nuclear negotiations between Iran and the US and other world powers, then passing the classified information along to the US Congress to try and preemptively scuttle the deal, The WSJ reported, adding from its unnamed sources: "It�s one thing for the US and Israel to spy on each other. It is another thing for Israel to steal US secrets and play them back to US legislators to undermine US diplomacy.�
Citing the spy-versus-spy rivalry often operating behind the scenes of US-Israel relations, the paper reports that, in fact, the White House discovered Israel had an inside track on the talks by snooping on communications among Israeli officials. "They carried details the US believed could have come only from access to the confidential talks."
"These allegations are utterly false," a senior official in the Israeli Prime Minister's office said. "The state of Israel does not directly conduct espionage against the United States or its other allies."
debkafile�s sources say that the WSJ �allegation� was timed for the trip to Paris by Israel�s Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz�s and national security adviser Yossie Cohen with a warning to France and later other European leaders that the nuclear deal shaping up between the US and Iran enables Iran to preserve its capabilities and remain a threshold nuclear state.
Monday, they met the senior French negotiator, National SecurityAdviser Jacques Audibert. They were able to hand him information at variance with the data the US had given out including how far the bilateral talks with Iran had progressed.
The Israeli delegation is due in London on the same mission Tuesday.
The WSJ story raises three points.
1. The Obama administration repeatedly promised to keep Israel informed on the content of the Six Power negotiations with Iran led by the United States and make them �transparent.� The WSJ story demonstrates that Washington violated this commitment, by revealing that Israel needed to activate its spies to get at the facts. It is also possible alternatively that the data from the closed door sessions was leaked to Israel by other participants such as Russia, France, Germany or the UK, who too were aghast at the extent of American concessions to Iran for a deal.
2. Did the Obama administration seriously expect Israel to sit back and wait calmly for its diplomats to make concession after concession to the Iranians, knowing that Iran was being allowed to come closer step by step to a nuclear threshold state to the peril of Israel, its Gulf neighbors and Middle East security at large?
3. Why did Israel need to snoop on the talks when Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, all of which strongly oppose the deal taking shape, believed they should have been partners to talks that determined their fate, alongside the six external world powers? If Iran objected, the Middle East nations most concerned might have been given a role on the sidelines, instead of being left out of decision-making in the way that the old Colonial powers determined the boundaries of the region among themselves.
In this regard, debkafile notes that the Obama administration continues its vendetta against Binyamin Netanyahu day be day, as though he was not elected in far and honest elections which permitted every Israeli citizen to make his or her will known through the ballot box. This campaign is strongly echoed by the left-wing camp which lost the election and refuses to accept its outcome, as though nothing has changed.

Prepare for the Yemeni Storm
Mshari Al-Zaydi/Asharq Al Awsat
Wednesday, 25 Mar, 2015
What is currently happening in Yemen is not the first problem Saudi Arabia has faced with respect to its neighbor to the south. But the current problems don�t just concern Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom is of course the most affected out of the countries of the Arabian Peninsula, but it is by no means alone in being impacted. Other Gulf countries, as well as those along the Red Sea, and those countries whose ships pass through the Bab El-Mandeb strait and the Cape of Good Hope, will also be affected by the crisis.
In fact, what is happening in Yemen poses a problem for the whole world, politically, strategically, and in terms of global security. This is especially true when bearing in mind how Yemen is currently being transformed into a regional base for the Persian�Khomeinist camp and a rebel stronghold for Osama Bin Laden�s Al-Qaeda.
Saudi Arabia is the country most affected by the current Yemeni crisis, due to its geographic proximity to Yemen and the nature of the terrain on the borders between the two countries, from mountains and valleys to plains and steppes�not to mention the close links that exist between the peoples of these two countries.
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members have been attempting to lay out a political road map for Yemen according to specific criteria, which are based on the outcomes of the Gulf Initiative, the legitimacy of President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, the unity of the country and its security.
The Iran-backed Shi�ite Houthi movement, which has staged a coup in Yemen, refuses all of this, however. Working alongside the Houthis is the country�s ousted former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, and his General People�s Congress (GPC) party, both pulling the strings from behind the scenes.
Meanwhile, Khomeinist Iran continues its meddling in the northwestern corner of the Peninsula, using its proven and poisonous abilities in subterfuge and divisiveness, spreading sedition and fomenting revolution in the happy land of Yemen and ruining the lives of its good, kind-hearted people.
But Iran was angry after the calls for holding a conference on Yemen in the Saudi capital Riyadh. These calls came from President Hadi himself�who fled a Houthi-imposed house arrest last month, later moving his cabinet to the southern port city of Aden. He was soon followed by his Defense Minister Mahmoud Al-Subaihi, who also fled his own Houthi-imposed house arrest in the Yemeni capital.
After Hadi and Subaihi�s escape acts, Houthi leader Abdul Malik Al-Houthi was livid with rage, refusing to attend the Riyadh conference and using the threat of force to push his agenda. Here he is today launching attacks on Taiz and Aden, the heartland of anti-Houthi sentiment in Yemen, opposed to the movement�s deviant ideology, one far removed from traditional Zaydism in Yemen, which the movement claims to follow, though it is in fact closer to Iranian Khomeinism.
Abdul Malik Al-Houthi also announced a �mass mobilization� of forces against the Taiz, Aden and Lahj provinces and any other regions of the country opposed to his coup and his dependence on Tehran.
The Houthi leader launched an attack on the presidential palace in Aden as well as the city�s airport. He also provoked the people of Taiz. And now the country has reached boiling point.
It was for this reason that Yemen�s new Foreign Minister Riyadh Yassin told the Al-Arabiya news channel that the current crisis in Yemen threatens a host of different countries. He said that Yemeni President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi called on the UN and the GCC�s Peninsula Shield Force to intervene in order to counter Houthi efforts, adding that the GCC countries were already considering the move.
UN Special Adviser on Yemen Jamal Benomar has recently said that the current events are now pushing the country �to the edge of a civil war,� and to eventual partition, unless some kind of miracle occurs. I believe this miracle resides in the Yamama Palace in Riyadh, where Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman Bin Abdulaziz recently met with other Gulf leaders to discuss the crisis.
And during his meeting on Monday with his British counterpart Philip Hammond, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal warned that unless the Houthi coup ends peacefully, Saudi Arabia and the GCC would be forced take the necessary measures to protect the rest of the region.
A storm is brewing in the southern Arabian Peninsula, heading northwards and outwards. Stopping it spreading is no longer a choice.