For Israel’s hawkish premier, the issue is not halting illegal settlement expansion, but increasing it less conspicuously, writes Khalid Amayreh in Ramallah.
While claiming to have a genuine desire for the resumption of “peace talks” with the Palestinian Authority (PA), Israel has been murdering Palestinian civilians in the streets of the West Bank in a clear overreaction to recent Palestinian protests against Israeli transgressions against Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem.
Eyewitnesses reported that trigger-happy Israeli troops shot had killed two young Palestinians who were trying to access their land near the northern West Bank town of Nablus. Initially, the Israeli army claimed the two tried to attack heavily armed soldiers with pitchforks, a claim rejected by the Ramallah- based Palestinian government that described the killings as “cold-blooded murder”. An Israeli army spokesman later said the circumstances surrounding the two deaths were vague and that an investigation into “the incident” would be carried out.
Ghassan Al-Khatib, head of the Palestinian Government Press Office, accused the Israeli occupation army of murdering Palestinians in order to provoke a new uprising — or Intifada — that would divert the world’s attention from the belligerent discourse adopted by the Netanyahu government. “We look at this as part of the Israeli escalation. It could have been treated in a completely different way. But the Israelis have been escalating, and this is something the prime minister [Netanyahu] has been warning.”
More ominous remarks came from Mahmoud Al-Alul, a senior Fatah leader based in Nablus. He told some 2,000 mourners that, “nobody can imagine that we can stand with our hands tied vis-à-vis what is happening.” A day earlier, two more Palestinians were killed and others injured when Israeli troops opened fired on Palestinian youths protesting against Israeli provocations at Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of Islam’s holiest shrines. The Israeli army claimed it used rubber bullets, though they can also prove fatal.
The latest killings in the West Bank coincided with visits to the region by EU Foreign Policy Director Catherine Ashton and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki- Moon. Both visited Israel and the occupied territories, including the blockaded Gaza Strip, voicing their solidarity and sympathy with tormented Gazans, many of whom are homeless having had their houses destroyed during Israel’s brutal onslaught against the coastal enclave last year.
Hoping that the two important visitors would not submit a “negative” report when they return to their respective bases in Brussels and New York, the Israeli government decided to allow them to travel to Gaza via the Beit Hanoun border terminal, also known as the Erez Crossing. Israel previously blocked repeatedly foreign officials from travelling to Gaza via Erez.
In the West Bank, Ban, escorted by Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, saw firsthand how the proliferation of Jewish colonies is seriously inhibiting prospects for the creation of a viable Palestinian state. He called for a total freeze on Jewish settlement expansion, a call ignored by the Israeli government notorious for its disregard of and contempt for the UN.
In Gaza, Ban inspected destruction caused by massive Israeli bombing. He called on Israel to allow building materials to get through to Gaza, acknowledging the fallacy of the Israeli argument that Hamas could use building materials for illegitimate purposes. Ban had earlier met with the family of an Israeli prisoner, captured by Palestinian fighters near Gaza. The UN secretary-general made no mention of the thousands of Palestinians languishing in Israeli prisons and detention camps.
Both Ban and Ashton left Israel-Palestine with a negative impression about the extent to which the Netanyahu government is willing to engage in a genuine peace process that would end the military occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Prior to his departure for the US in order to address a major conference of the Jewish lobby and to attempt to mend fences with the Obama administration, Netanyahu told his cabinet and party caucus that settlement expansion would continue unabated. He added that Israel would have to carry out its settlement schemes “quietly, stealthily, and without making a big noise”.
As to recently declared plans to build 1,600 additional settler units in Arab East Jerusalem, Netanyahu vowed to keep building, regardless of what Washington says or does. “Our policy on Jerusalem is the same policy followed by all Israeli governments for the past 42 years. Building in Jerusalem is the same as building in Tel Aviv.”
Netanyahu’s remarks on Jerusalem were rejected by European foreign ministers meeting in Brussels this week. Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn was quoted as saying that the EU was very disappointed by the position of the Israeli government. “I think I can say very clearly that Jerusalem is not Tel Aviv,” he said.
Faced with an uncharacteristically determined American stance on the issue of settlement building, and dismayed by a growing negative impression in Europe — including with close allies such as Germany — about his government’s true intentions, Netanyahu is expected to undertake a number of “goodwill gestures” towards the PA in order to enhance his government’s image in Washington and Europe.
According to Israeli media, Netanyahu might agree to “discuss” all outstanding issues with the Palestinians, release a few hundred Fatah-affiliated prisoners, and allow the entry into Gaza of a limited shipment of building materials as demanded by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Nonetheless, the Israeli premier has refused to revoke plans to build 1,600 settler units in the Ramat Sholomo colony in East Jerusalem. To avoid the kind of embarrassment accompanying the recent visit to Israel by US Vice- President Joe Biden, when Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yeshai announced the new settlement expansion in the occupied Palestinian town, Netanyahu promised a better “oversight system” for the future.
Netanyahu’s tactics suggest he is convinced that the recent tension with Washington is over the timing, not the content, of the settlement expansion announcement. In addition, Netanyahu is trying to achieve two tactical goals. First, return the proverbial ball to the Palestinian court; second, replacing the “Iranian subject” on the top of US agenda while relegating the “Palestinian subject” to a secondary status. Netanyahu may even be harbouring further ambitions, including the acquisition of laser-guided bunker-busters from the US, which Israel could use in an attack on Iranian nuclear installations.
As Netanyahu headed for Washington, US Envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell — who returned to the region this week — urged “both sides to show restraint”. Mitchell was evasive and noncommittal about the issue of settlements, stressing that the important thing was to resume peace talks, even without clear guidelines. Recently, General David Petraeus, head of US Central Command in the Middle East, was quoted as criticising Mitchell’s mission in the region, suggesting that the American diplomat was “too old, two slow and too late”.
The Ruling Class and World Governance Are Our Nations´ Treason against Us Summary:
This is Andrew G. Marshall´s review of how the world elite have grasped still more power over the last 20 years. The development is controlled by the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford Foundations, etc., which have powerful tools in their clubs, Universities, international political organizations like the G20, G8, G5, and the European Union. Now Gordon Brown is calling for a World Bank and world governance. Council on Foreign Relations believes that nation states will be dissolved in the “world governance”: individual state elements: courts, regulatory agencies, corporate executives and even legislatures are in a network with their colleagues around the world, creating a dense network of relations that constitutes a new transgovernmental policy.
It is the most widely used and effective way for transnational governance. Under the world governance, transnational classes of society are being restructured: the international elite, 6000 in the super class, is stateless, working across the borders. Through debt bondage it is actively eliminating the middle class, which is being converted into a trans-national working class, which will be more or less starved to death. The transnational elite have formed a network of trans-national states that have offered parts of their sovereignty to supranational governance bodies. National State has played its role, and in this century it will disappear – there will be a global government– ruling the whole world, says the Council on Foreign Relations.
Thus, “World Governance” is more insidious, more sneaking betrayal than the UNs visible world government. We have seen that the New World Order Club of Rome has described the New World Order as a world communist dictatorial one world state. How are they organizing this silent Marxist revolution? This is an excerpt of Andrew Marshall´s monograph on the New World order – here about the ruling class.
First the author reviews the regional building blocks: The EU/Union for the Mediterranean), the NAFTA/emerging North American Union, the ASEAN, Africa and South America of which the world state is to be built. Conquest of Central Asia is ongoing – endangering world peace in a planned war with Russia (Die Welt 10 May 2009). For, as Obama´s mentor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, said:
“We cannot leap into world government through one quick step…. The precondition for eventual and genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.” “This is a form of Socialism known as fascism, and it will be the type of world government the power elite plans ultimately to bring about and control.
In this government, the power elite will control politicians who will become government leaders who will promulgate laws, rules and regulations favorable to certain transnational corporations.”
How the transgovernmentalist class managed to take power of the world Andrew Gavin Marshall, Global Research 13 Aug. 2009: The economic foundations of the current crisis were laid in the “Clinton globalist project.” As Bello explained, “The administration embraced globalization as its ‘Grand Strategy’—that is, its fundamental foreign policy posture towards the world.” Further, “The dominant position of the USA allowed the liberal faction of the US capitalist class to act as a leading edge of a transnational ruling elite in the process of formation—a transnational elite alliance that could act to promote the comprehensive interest of the international capitalist class.”[75]
Out of the ashes of the financial crisis, a new world order will emerge in constructing a global government.
In October of 2008, Gordon Brown said that we “must have a new Bretton Woods – building a new international financial architecture for the years ahead.” An article in the Telegraph reported that Gordon Brown would want “to see the IMF reformed to become a ‘global central bank’ closely monitoring the international economy and financial system.”[88] In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Gordon Brown wrote that the “new Bretton Woods” should build upon the concept of “global governance.”[89]
He also calls for a “global economic policeman,” perhaps in the form of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).[90]
In November of 2008, it was reported that Baron David de Rothschild “shares most people’s view that there is a new world order.
In his opinion, banks will deleverage and there will be a new form of global governance.”[91] In a 1997 article of Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, Anne-Marie Slaughter discussed the theoretical foundations of the New World Order and explained the emergence of what she called a “new medievalism” as opposed to liberal internationalism.
“Where liberal internationalists see a need for international rules and institutions to solve states’ problems, the new medievalists proclaim the end of the nation-state,” where “The result is not world government, but global governance. If government denotes the formal exercise of power by established institutions, governance denotes cooperative problem- solving by a changing and often uncertain cast.”[27]
Slaughter states that, “The state is not disappearing; it is disaggregating into its separate, functionally distinct parts. These parts—courts, regulatory agencies, executives, and even legislatures—are networking with their counterparts abroad, creating a dense web of relations that constitutes a new, transgovernmental order,” and that, “transgovernmentalism is rapidly becoming the most widespread and effective mode of international governance.”[28]
Slaughter was Dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University from 2002-2009, is currently Director of Policy Planning for the United States Department of State, and has previously served on the board of the Council on Foreign Relations. Classes of Society being restructured under world government In the past few decades, a concurrent class restructuring has been taking place, in which the middle classes of the world descend into debt bondage while the upper classes have begun a process of transnationalizing.
What we have witnessed and are witnessing with recent events, is the transnationalization of class structures, and with that, labour forces. What connects the ruling elite?The transnational ruling elite are stateless. The international system exists only as an intersubjective awareness among people; in that sense the system is constituted by ideas, not by material forces. It is a set of ideas, a body of thought, a system of norms, which has been arranged by certain people at a particular time and place.
A Transnational Capitalist Class (TCC) has emerged, and is a global ruling class. It is a ruling class because it controls the levers of an emergent transnational state apparatus and of global decision making.”[32]
This class has no borders, and is composed of the technocratic, media, corporate, banking, social and political elite of the world. “States could decide “to reduce their sovereignty or even to give up their sovereignty. If that happened there would no longer be an international anarchy as we know it. Instead, there would be a brave new, non-anarchical world – perhaps one in which states was subordinate to a world government.”[33]
There is also a rise in the apparatus of a Transnational State (TNS), which is “an emerging network that comprises transformed and externally integrated national states, together with the supranational economic and political forums; it has not yet acquired any centralized institutional form.”[34]
Among the economic apparatus of the TNS we see the IMF, World Bank, WTO and regional banks. On the political side we see the Group of 7, Group of 22, United Nations, OECD, and the European Union. This was further accelerated with the Trilateral Commission, “which brought together transnationalized fractions of the business, political, and intellectual elite in North America, Europe, and Japan.” Further, the World Economic Forum has made up an important part of this class, and, I might add, the Bilderberg Group. The TNS apparatus has been a vital principle of organization and socialization for the transnational class, “as have world class universities, transnational oriented think tanks, the leading bourgeois foundations, such as Harvard’s School of International Business, the Ford [and Rockefeller] and the Carnegie Foundations, [and] policy planning groups such as the Council on Foreign Relations.”
These “elite planning groups are important forums for integrating class groups, developing new initiatives, collective strategies, policies and projects of class rule, and forging consensus and a political culture around these projects.”[36]
Robinson and Harris identify the World Economic Forum as “the most comprehensive transnational planning body of the TCC and the quintessential example of a truly global network binding together the TCC in a transnational civil society.”[37] I would take issue with this, and instead propose the Bilderberg Group. Bilderberg is simply the most influential planning body, sitting atop a grand hierarchy of various planning bodies and institutions, and is itself a key part of the apparatus of the formation of a Transnational State, but is not a “world government.”
It is a global think tank. The economic crisis is perhaps the greatest “opportunity” ever given to the TCC in re-shaping the world order according to their designs, ideals and goals. To achieve these ends, however, all classes must be transnationalized, not simply the ruling class. Now that there is an established “Superclass” of a transnational composition, the other classes must follow suit. The middle class is targeted for elimination in this sense, because most of the world has no middle class, and to fully integrate and internationalize a middle class, this would require industrialization and development in places such as Africa, and would represent a massive threat to the Superclass, as it would be a valve through which much of their wealth and power would escape them.
Their goal is not to lose their wealth and power to a transnational middle class, but rather to extinguish the notion of a middle class, and transnationalize a lower, uneducated, labour oriented class, through which they will secure ultimate wealth and power. The economic crisis serves these ends, the lower classes of the world, poverty-stricken even prior to the crisis, will suffer the greatest, most probably leading to a massive reduction in population levels, particularly in the “Third World” states. The TCC or Superclass (Rothkopf estimates the number at 6,000 individuals within the ruling class), ….is not immune to such drastic and rapid changes itself.
Constructing the Political Structure of a Global GovernmentStrobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State in the Clinton administration from 1994 to 2001, is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission and is currently President of the Brookings Institution: “Within the next 100 years, “nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. There has always been an overall trend toward larger units claiming sovereignty. Each world war inspired the creation of an international organization, the League of Nations in the 1920s and the United Nations in the ’40s.
The European Community pioneer the kind of regional cohesion that may pave the way for globalism. The best mechanism for democracy, whether at the level of the multinational state or that of the planet as a whole, is a federation, a union of separate states that allocate certain powers to a central government while retaining many others for themselves.”[56]
In a 2001 issue of Foreign Affairs, Richard Falk and Andrew Strauss wrote an article titled, “Toward Global Parliament”: The nation-state is an old-fashioned concept that has no role to play in a modern globalised world.” (61).
Marshall brings many more similar statements. Comment The aim of destroying the middle class and its replacement by the proletariat makes the massive Muslim immigration and the increasing unemployment which the Wall Street Superclass have created in the middle class comprehensible. However, I do not think the New World Order can do entirely without some, reduced, well-educated middle class. The most prominent of the New World Order clubs is no doubt the Council on Foreign Relations, which rules the USA and the world by means of David Rockefeller´s Studies Programme. As seen above the CFR scorns the nation state and favours world governance/world government by an undemocratic corporative clique of transnational corporations, politicians, media people and their masters behind the whole treacherous crime against us:
The architects of the New World Order, the illuminists, for whom the EU states to work (explanatory statement). The globalists are dangling a brave new non-anarchist world before us in their world state – although the process of globalization up to now has begotten increasing chaos, violence and – anarchy because of immigration and parallel societies. The CFR makes a futile attempt to discern between global government and global governance in order to pull the wool over our eyes:“ If government denotes the formal exercise of power by established institutions, governance denotes cooperative problem- solving by a changing and often uncertain cast.” But who decides the “consensus” in a hurry?
Those with the Money: the illuminists and their bought political henchmen: This class has no borders, is stateless. We are being told that the components of our states (courts, executives, legislature governments etc.) lose their independence by networking globally (i.e. receiving orders from the gurus of globalization: The illuminists, whose heads are the Rothschild and Rockefeller dynasties and their tools: the CFR, Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission, the Club of Rome.
Thus, it comes true: Money governs the world – and it comes from Lucifer´s obedient followers, who have stolen it from us. We are being told that the illuminists want to eliminate the world´s middle class to have just 2 classes: The “Superclass”, the Transhuman gods of the “Age of Transition” in their own imagination, and the underlings to be made robots, the slaves, whose number is to be reduced – the useless eaters. The whole bunch is to be transnationalized, stateless, without character, a herd – not thinking individuals. How far they have already come down that path!!
Only God can stop this madness, for we have been totally hypnotized by these New World Order criminals.
There must really be some form of power play going on within the EU as to who is ultimately going to run the whole show and is finally going to emerge as being the Beast of Revelation.
I can think of three to four presidents they have right now. The EU president, the president of the EU Commission, the president of the EU parliament, and the president of the six month rotating EU presidency, there are probably more than that? There are presidents for presidents and that doesn’t even into account the EU Secretary Generals.
Talk about confusion, I still question if Henry Kissinger is as confused as what most Europeans must be right now about who is really running the EU and if he is still wondering who to call when he calls Europe?
A new name has emerged, or more correctly an old name has reemerged, revamped, the former French Prime Minister Jean Pierre Raffarin. Actually there was one stage when I pondered the prospect of Raffarin being the Antichrist, but then he seemed to fade into obscurity as most of my suspects eventually do, but now he’s back and back and in full steam.
Allegedly his title is also EU Secretary General and he is assisting the current French president Nicholas Sarkozy in international matters. To view a video of him meeting with the EU president Herman Van Rompuy go to http://vloghvr.consilium.europa.eu/?p=366 Underneath the video he is called the French president’s personal representative to the “Organisation internationale de la Francophonie”
“The Organization international de la Francophone encompasses 56 states and governments and 14 observers from all five continents, who are united by French as a common language. Spoken by 200 million people around the world, French is an official language in 32 states and governments of La Francophone”.
There are so many in fact it would not really come as a surprise that Sarkozy would appoint the former Prime Minister Jean Pierre Raffarin to act on his behalf relative to be the moderator between so many countries. There is simply too much else that Sarkozy has on his plate at the moment as he brings the global nations together into a World Government for him to be everywhere at once.
I am getting Google updates on Raffarin so if there is anything else I can report I would be happy to do so. One may also ponder the question, in the appointment of Raffarin are we seeing the coming together of some form of alliance between the Antichrist and his False Prophet. Remember in these last days we are told in the scriptures that we will see the emergence of Satan, (the boss) his Beast and the helpmate of the Beast, the False Prophet – these three are known commonly the Unholy Trinity.
It’s a little too soon to speculate but we may be looking at a coup de France right here, right now. Remember on this blog I wrote extensively with regards to Pierre de-Boissieu; he was the Frenchmen who were promoted from Deputy EU Secretary General to EU Secretary General as a result of the Lisbon Treaty and his job was to run the machinery of the EU from behind the scenes.
So now we may have the unholy trinity of de-Boissieu, Sarkozy and now Raffarin, all very much French. Our trials and tribulations may have only just begun?
The doctrine relating to the Rapture of the Church is nothing but pure witchcraft, sorcery or another form of occultism and those that believe in it and preach it are nothing more than False Prophets and liars doing the works of Satan and will go to where they belong.
There never has been nor will there ever be a taking away of the church so through that garbage out and concentrate on what the Bible really teaches, the resurrection of the church, but do not mix the two up together as the hypocrites and the harlot churches do.
So my message to anybody that reads this that your simply wasting your time and energy by even thinking of a pre, mid or post tribulation let alone bothering to waste time and energy arguing amongst each other about something that the scriptures does not even teach at all.
For Israel’s hawkish premier, the issue is not halting illegal settlement expansion, but increasing it less conspicuously, writes Khalid Amayreh in Ramallah. 
