British Spying

The Guardian wrote on June 21:

“Britain’s spy agency GCHQ has secretly gained access to the network of cables which carry the world’s phone calls and internet traffic and has started to process vast streams of sensitive personal information which it is sharing with its American partner, the National Security Agency (NSA).

“The sheer scale of the agency’s ambition is reflected in the titles of its two principal components: Mastering the Internet and Global Telecoms Exploitation, aimed at scooping up as much online and telephone traffic as possible. This is all being carried out without any form of public acknowledgement or debate. One key innovation has been GCHQ’s ability to tap into and store huge volumes of data drawn from fibre-optic cables for up to 30 days so that it can be sifted and analysed. That operation, codenamed Tempora, has been running for some 18 months.

“GCHQ and the NSA are consequently able to access and process vast quantities of communications between entirely innocent people, as well as targeted suspects. This includes recordings of phone calls, the content of email messages, entries on Facebook and the history of any internet user’s access to websites.”

The Local wrote on June 22:

“German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger reacted with shock on Saturday to revelations by British newspaper The Guardian that the British spy agency GCHQ had been gathering even more communications data than the Americans. The paper published further material from whistle-blower Edward Snowden on Friday suggesting that GCHQ taps fibre-optic cables on British soil carrying email messages, Facebook posts, internet histories and calls, and shares this data with the US. ‘If the allegations are true, it would be a catastrophe,’ said Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger and demanded the European Union immediately look into the matter of British spying.

“Yet while concern in Germany over recent revelations showing the extent and scope of US and British online snooping capabilities has been widespread, most people do not personally see themselves as targets… Over 70 percent of German participants in the online survey said they believed the NSA had accessed telephone and internet data in Germany, yet just 30 percent believed their own communications data had been seen by employees of the recently-uncovered US secret service Prism program. Only 9 percent thought it very probable that the Americans had been spying on them and 21 percent fairly probable…  Fifty-eight percent said they thought Germany as a nation would feel the consequences of the revelations, which 70 percent believed would be negative.”

All in all, Germans seem to still be pretty naïve, as are many Americans. On June 24, International Business Times reported: “While the [American] public is divided over the NSA PRISM program itself, a majority of those surveyed said that the program probably helped prevent terrorism.”

The relationship between Europe and the USA and Britain is bound to deteriorate over revelations like these spying activities, as the next articles show.

German “Indignation” with Britain

Deutsche Welle reported on June 24:

“First Prism, now Tempora: the British security service GCHQ has been surveying electronic communications of hundreds of millions of people. German politicians are expressing frustration and seeking information. It’s ‘like a nightmare out of Hollywood,’ says German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger with respect to the British Tempora electronic surveillance program…

“It’s not clear how many Germans were affected, but there has been severe criticism from German politicians of all parties… Erich Schmidt-Eenboom, an expert on intelligence agencies, says he’s surprised that German politicians are so indignant. He told MDR that German authorities have long known that British and US services were tapping internet and telephone connections.”

“American and British Totalitarianism Must Come to an End”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 24:

“Overzealous data collectors in the US and Great Britain have no right to investigate German citizens. The German government must protect people from unauthorized access by foreign intelligence agencies, and it must act now. This is a matter of national security…

“At the beginning of last week, we thought after the announcement of the American Prism program, that US President Barack Obama was the sole boss of the largest and most extensive control system in human history. That was an error. Since Friday, we have known that the British intelligence agency GCHQ is ‘worse than the United States’…

“We have Edward Snowden to thank for this insight into the interaction of an uncanny club, the Alliance of Five Eyes. Since World War II, the five Anglo-Saxon countries of Great Britain, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have maintained close intelligence cooperation, which apparently has gotten completely out of control. It may be up to the Americans and the British to decide how they handle questions of freedom and the protection of their citizens from government intrusion. But they have no right to subject the citizens of other countries to their control. The shoulder-shrugging explanation by Washington and London that they have operated within the law is absurd. They are not our laws. We didn’t make them. We shouldn’t be subject to them.

“The totalitarianism of the security mindset protects itself with a sentence: If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. But firstly, that contains a presumption: We have not asked the NSA and GCHQ to ‘protect’ us. And secondly, the sentence is a stupid one: Because we all have something to hide, whether it pertains to our private lives or to our business secrets…

“Thus the data scandal doesn’t pertain just to our legal principles, but to our security as well. We were lucky that Edward Snowden, who revealed the spying to the entire world, is not a criminal, but an idealist. He wanted to warn the world, not blackmail it. But he could have used his information for criminal purposes, as well. His case proves that no agency in the world can guarantee the security of the data it collects — which is why no agency should collect data in such abundance in the first place. That is the well-known paradox of totalitarian security policy. Our security is jeopardized by the very actions that are supposed to protect it.

“So what should happen now? European institutions must take control of the data infrastructure and ensure its protection. The freedom of data traffic is just as important as the European freedom of exchange in goods, services and money. But above all, the practices of the Americans and British must come to an end. Immediately.

“It is the responsibility of the German government to see to it that the programs of the NSA and GCHQ no longer process the data of German citizens and companies without giving them the opportunity for legal defense. A government that cannot make that assurance is failing in one of its fundamental obligations: to protect its own citizens from the grasp of foreign powers.”

German Spying

On June 22, npr.org reported the following:

“Revelations of widespread U.S. spying on foreign Internet communications put a damper on President Obama’s first state visit to Berlin. The German chancellor and other officials there say they want to know more about what the National Security Agency is looking at. Yet the backlash has been more muted than expected. One reason is that the German government is doing similar surveillance.

“… the U.S. is actually doing German authorities a favor — especially when Washington shares what it collects. Just like the American government, German officials quietly justify increased surveillance as necessary to protect their country from terrorist attacks… Germany’s top court also recently upheld the right of security agencies to maintain an anti-terror database containing sensitive personal information about German citizens…”

The hypocrisy involved is dumb-founding.

US Drone Spying

The Washington Post wrote on June 20:

“The FBI has received clearance from federal aviation officials to conduct drone surveillance operations in the United States… The documents provide virtually no detail on where the FBI has operated drones in U.S. airspace, for what purpose or how long the missions lasted. But they shed some additional light on the origins and extent of the FBI’s secretive drone program…

“Drones, or unmanned aircraft, are generally prohibited from flying in U.S. airspace… The Department of Homeland Security flies large surveillance drones along the borders with Canada and Mexico. Congress has directed the FAA to open domestic airspace to drones by 2015…”

Even Obama a Target of NSA

Business Insider wrote on June 22:

“Russ Tice worked as an offensive National Security Agency (NSA) from 2002 and 2005, before becoming a source for this Pulitzer-Prize winning The New York Times article exposing NSA domestic spying…

“‘In the summer of 2004, one of the papers that I held in my hand was to wiretap a bunch of numbers associated with a forty-some-year-old senator from Illinois… That’s who the NSA went after. That’s the President of the United States now.’ Tice added that he also saw orders to spy on Hillary Clinton, Senators John McCain and Diane Feinstein, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, Gen. David Petraeus, and a current Supreme Court Justice. That sounds like a lot of abuse of the rules that govern NSA domestic spying. And that’s exactly what Tice is claiming…”

This shows how the US spying activities are being used—and have been used—against just about any person so desired.

Snowden–Major Embarrassment for Obama

Reuters wrote on June 23:

“Fugitive former U.S. spy agency contractor Edward Snowden was seeking asylum in Ecuador on Sunday after Hong Kong allowed his departure for Russia in a slap to Washington’s efforts to extradite him on espionage charges.

“In a major embarrassment for President Barack Obama, an aircraft thought to have carried Snowden landed in Moscow on Sunday, and the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks said he was ‘bound for the Republic of Ecuador via a safe route for the purposes of asylum.’…

“It was a blow to Obama’s foreign policy goals of resetting ties with Russia and building a partnership with China. The leaders of both countries were willing to snub the American president in a month when each had held talks with Obama.

“The United States continued efforts to prevent Snowden from gaining asylum. It warned Western Hemisphere nations that Snowden ‘should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel, other than is necessary to return him to the United States,’ a State Department official said. U.S. Senator Charles Schumer charged that Russian President Vladimir Putin likely knew and approved of Snowden’s flight to Russia and predicted ‘serious consequences’ for a U.S.-Russian relationship already strained over Syria and human rights…

“Ecuador, which has been sheltering WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange at its London embassy for the past year, once again took center stage in an international diplomatic saga over U.S. data secrecy…

“In their statement announcing Snowden’s departure, the Hong Kong authorities said they were seeking clarification from Washington about reports of U.S. spying on government computers in the territory… A spokesman for the Hong Kong government said it had allowed the departure of Snowden – considered a whistleblower by his supporters and a criminal or even a traitor by his critics – as the U.S. request for his arrest did not comply with the law…

“The issue has been a major problem for Obama, who has found his domestic and international policy agenda sidelined as he has scrambled to deflect accusations that U.S. surveillance practices violate privacy protections and civil rights. The president has maintained that the measures have been necessary to thwart attacks on the United States…

“Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post newspaper earlier quoted Snowden offering new details about U.S. surveillance activities, including accusations of U.S. hacking of Chinese mobile phone firms and targeting of China’s Tsinghua University.”

Reuters reported on June 24:

“U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said during a visit to India that it would be ‘deeply troubling’ if Moscow defied the United States over Snowden… Russian officials said Moscow had no obligation to cooperate with Washington, after it passed legislation to impose visa bans and asset freezes on Russians accused of violating human rights. ‘Why should the United States expect restraint and understanding from Russia?’ said Alexei Pushkov, the head of the foreign affairs committee in the lower house of parliament.”

Reuters added on June 25:

“President Vladimir Putin confirmed on Tuesday a former U.S. spy agency contractor sought by the United States was in the transit area of a Moscow airport but ruled out handing him over to Washington, dismissing U.S. criticisms as ‘ravings and rubbish.’”

Whatever the US tries to do, it fails…

Do China and Russia Know About U.S. Nuclear War Plans?

The National Free Beacon wrote on June 26, 2013:

“Intelligence agencies in China and Russia gained access to highly classified U.S. intelligence and military information contained on electronic media held by renegade former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden, according to U.S. officials… One of the biggest fears about the compromise is whether Snowden… gained access to new U.S. nuclear war plans…

“The nuclear war plans, among the most closely guarded U.S. secrets, were recently modified as a result of President Barack Obama’s shift in U.S. nuclear strategy. The president last week signed new guidance for the Pentagon limiting the use of nuclear weapons in U.S. planning and strategy. The shift is the first step in the president’s plan to cut deployed nuclear weapons by one-third to about 1,000 warheads. That plan was announced in Berlin June 19.”

An Innocent Mistake?

The Washington Post reported on June 22:

“In April 2011, Barack Obama, president of the United States, took the extraordinary step of releasing the long-form version of his birth certificate. As the New York Times wrote at the time, the idea behind the move was ‘to finally end a long-simmering conspiracy theory among some conservatives who have asserted that he was not born in the United States and was not a legitimate president.’ The certificate proved that Obama was born in Hawaii.

“Rachel Rose Hartman, a White House reporter for Yahoo! News, couldn’t possibly have missed the ‘birther’ story. It was unavoidable, after all, for an unhealthy chunk of the president’s first term. Yet: In her story yesterday on Obama’s Africa trip, Hartman managed to say that ‘he won’t be stopping in the country of his birth.’ From the context of the story, it’s clear she was referring to Kenya…

“A birther-oriented mistake of this magnitude cannot possibly be finessed, ignored or Daily Callered. So Yahoo! News went ahead and published a properly placed correction, complete with a clever save:

“‘Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified the president’s birthplace. President Barack Obama makes the first extended trip to Africa of his presidency next week—but he won’t be stopping in his ancestral homeland.’

“The Erik Wemple Blog has a number of questions for Yahoo! Newsers:

“1) How on earth?

“2) Did someone forget that the president of the United States needs to be born in the United States (or fulfill other constitutional requirements)?

“3) Any editing over there?

“A spokesperson for Yahoo! News, however, said that there would be no comment beyond the correction.”

If that was an innocent mistake, then there would be a great deal of utter incompetency involved. But what if it was no mistake? Sadly, neither cowardly Republicans nor self-serving Democrats are willing to touch this hot potato—if Kenya is indeed Mr. Obama’s birthplace, the far-reaching consequences would be far too unpleasant.

Pelosi and Others in Hot Water With Catholic Church

Newsmax reported on June 24:

“A Catholic priest active in the pro-life movement said if Nancy Pelosi continues her refusal to condemn abortion, she should renounce her Catholic faith… Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life, sent the House minority leader a strongly worded letter demanding she explain her position on late-term abortion.

“His letter followed Pelosi’s June 13 news conference at which Pavone contends she sidestepped the issue… Pelosi said during her news briefing, ‘As a practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred ground to me when we talk about this. I don’t think it should have anything to do with politics.’

“Addressing her comments in his letter, Pavone wrote, ‘With this statement, you make a mockery of the Catholic faith and of the tens of millions of Americans who consider themselves ‘practicing and respectful Catholics’ and who find the killing of children — whether inside or outside the womb — reprehensible. Whatever Catholic faith you claim to respect and practice, it is not the faith that the Catholic Church teaches. And I speak for countless Catholics when I say that it’s time for you to stop speaking as if it were… for decades you have gotten away with betraying and misrepresenting the Catholic faith…’”

It is not only Nancy Pelosi who is in hot water with the Catholic Church. Other US Democrats, such as Vice President Joe Biden or Secretary of State John Kerry, likewise approve of abortion, while claiming to be practicing Catholics.

Same-Sex Marriage—How the Tides Turn

The New York Times wrote von June 26:

“The Supreme Court issued a pair of rulings Wednesday expanding gay rights, ruling unconstitutional a 1996 law denying federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples and paving the way for California to legalize same-sex marriage…

“The rulings continue a rapid shift, in which public opinion and laws have become far more accepting of same-sex marriage, only a few years after a clear majority of Americans opposed it and it was legal almost nowhere. Today, same-sex marriage is legal in 12 states, not including California, and polls show that a majority of people support it.

“The decision on federal benefits was 5 to 4, with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy writing the majority opinion, which the four liberal-leaning justices joined… Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. was in the minority… The ruling overturned the Defense of Marriage Act, which passed with bipartisan support and which President Bill Clinton signed. The decision… will also raise a series of major decisions for the Obama administration about how aggressively to overhaul references to marriage throughout the many volumes that lay out the laws of the United States.

“The five-member majority in the California case was different than in the Defense of Marriage case… Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion…

“The decision on the Defense of Marriage Act does not alter any state laws governing whether same-sex couples can marry. It instead determines whether same-sex couples that are legally married in one state receive federal benefits that apply to heterosexual married couples…

“Public opinion on same-sex marriage has shifted sharply in the last decade. In President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election campaign, Republican strategists put ballot initiatives to ban same-sex marriage on several state ballots, believing it would help raise turnout and lift Mr. Bush’s chances. As late as 2010, polls showed that a majority of Americans opposed same-sex marriage.

“In the last three years, public opinion has flipped. Mr. Clinton has said he regretted signing the 1996 law that the court struck down Wednesday. President Obama reversed his position last year, in the midst of the presidential campaign, and said he now favored same-sex marriage.”

Time wrote on June 26:

“Seventeen years after a Democratic president signed a federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, the U.S. Supreme Court struck it down Wednesday, capping one of the fastest civil rights shifts in the nation’s history.”

ABC News reported on June 27:

“Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told ABC News he believes the Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act was appropriate…  The comments from Paul, a likely GOP presidential candidate in 2016, highlight how the [Republican Party’s] field could divide over gay marriage. Many Republicans have been unusually muted in their reactions to the Supreme Court rulings today.”

Newsmax reported on June 26:

“The U.S. Supreme Court decisions June 26 striking down part of the Defense of Marriage Act and refusing to rule on the merits of a challenge to California’s Proposition 8 mark a ‘tragic day for marriage and our nation,’ said Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops…

“‘Today is a tragic day for marriage and our nation… The Court got it wrong. The federal government ought to respect the truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, even where states fail to do so…  Now is the time to strengthen marriage, not redefine it… When Jesus taught about the meaning of marriage – the lifelong, exclusive union of husband and wife – he pointed back to ‘the beginning’ of God’s creation of the human person as male and female (see Matthew 19)… we call upon all of our leaders and the people of this good nation to stand steadfastly together in promoting and defending the unique meaning of marriage: one man, one woman, for life…’”

Civil rights shifts, public opinion and political maneuvering do not define godly standards, nor do they alter biblical teaching. The Bible reveals that GOD created marriage and that He defines “marriage” as a union between a man and a woman, and no human law or definition can change that. It is interesting that polygamists hope now that the Supreme Court rulings will pave the way to decriminalizing polygamy and allow for multi-partner marriage, according to the Washington Times, dated June 27. So what is coming next?

Why the War in Afghanistan Is Lost

The German mass tabloid, Bild Online, stated on June 22 that the 10-year-old war in Afghanistan is lost; that the death of 3,340 NATO soldiers was in vain; and that the adventure in Afghanistan was destined to failure from the start. It also pointed out that there are no rights of women or democracy in the country, and that America’s decision to negotiate with the Taliban is, according to German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere, a “psychological victory” for the Taliban and an admission of defeat.

Bild gave the following five reasons why the Afghan war is lost:

Reason #1: Corrupt Partners, including President Hamid Karzai, who is not well respected by most Afghans who rather deal with the Taliban.

Reason #2: Wrong Strategy. Instead of concentrating on the war against terrorism, the West wanted to bring growth and peace to the country.

Reason #3: Tactical mistakes. President Obama announced the withdrawal of the troops by 2014. Since then, the Taliban is collecting money and weapons and is waiting to return.

Reason #4: Drugs. NATO never dealt with them. 90% of all heroin sold worldwide is originating in Afghanistan.

Reason #5: Proud Afghans. The West tried to win the heads and hearts of the Afghan people and overlooked that Afghans don’t like foreigners in their country. The armies of Alexander the Great, the British Empire and the Russians had to leave Afghanistan in disgrace. The same will happen to NATO.

America has still not learned its lesson. According to the Washington Post, dated June 24, “U.S. Secretary of State John F. Kerry assured India and other concerned partners in this volatile region Monday that the United States plans to continue supporting the Afghan military and to keep American forces in Afghanistan after the scheduled 2014 combat withdrawal, ‘under any circumstances.’”

Never mind the contradictory and inconsistent expressions of intent from the American government…

Egypt in Turmoil–Again

AFP wrote on June 23:

“Egypt’s defence minister warned on Sunday that the army will intervene if violence breaks out in the country where opponents of President Mohamed Morsi are planning rallies against him this month… Morsi’s opponents, who accuse him of hijacking the 2011 uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak’s regime, plan a rally on June 30 to mark the day Morsi was sworn in as Egypt’s first civilian and Islamist president… Tens of thousands of Morsi supporters massed on Friday in a show of strength ahead of the June 30 protest…

“Egypt is deeply polarised. Morsi’s supporters say he is clearing institutions of decades of corruption, but his critics accuse him of concentrating power in the hands of his Muslim Brotherhood movement. Since taking office a year ago, Morsi has squared off against the judiciary, media, police and most recently artists.

“Leading dissident Mohamed ElBaradei, a former chief of UN watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency, urged the president to resign for the sake of national unity… A campaign dubbed Tamarod (rebellion in Arabic) first called the anti-Morsi rally to coincide with the first anniversary of his taking office. Tamarod rapidly picked up steam, and organisers said they have collected 15 million signatures demanding that Morsi step down.”

The West applauded the Arab Spring, because politicians and governmental officials were struck with blindness.

Iran—a More Dangerous Place Than Ever Before

The Economist wrote on June 22:

“When a country has seen as much repression as Iran, outsiders hoping for a better future for the place instinctively want to celebrate along with all those ordinary Iranians who took to the streets. The smiling Mr Rohani’s public pronouncements encourage optimism, for he sounds like a different sort of president from the comedy-villain, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who precedes him. Yet even if his election bodes well for Iranians, it does not necessarily hold equal promise for the rest of the world. Iran’s regional assertiveness and its nuclear capacity mean that it is a more dangerous place than it ever was before…

“Yet the Persian lion has not lost its claws, nor has the theocracy suddenly become a democracy. Mr Rohani was indeed the most reformist of the candidates on offer at the election… The 64-year-old cleric has been a loyal servant of the Islamic Republic from its inception. For years he headed the national security council… He is constrained by a system that deemed just eight people fit to stand in the recent election and rejected 678 others (including a former president). The president’s power is limited by Iran’s other institutions, many of which are in conservative hands.

“While Iran’s politics have probably changed less than Mr Rohani’s election suggests, the balance of power between Iran and the rest of the world has been shifting in Iran’s favour for two reasons. First, thanks to heavy investment in nuclear capacity by the mullahs, and despite attempts by the West and Israel to delay or sabotage the nuclear programme, Iran will soon be able to produce a bomb’s worth of weapons-grade uranium in a matter of weeks… Iran has installed more than 9,000 new centrifuges in less than two years, more than doubling its enrichment capability. It is a short step from the 20% enriched uranium that the country’s facilities are already producing at an increasing rate to conversion into the fissile material needed for an implosion device. Although Western intelligence agencies think Iran is still at least a year away from being able to construct such a weapon, some experts believe that it could do so within a few months if it chose to—and that the time it would take is shrinking…

“But now it looks as though Iran will soon be in a position to build a weapon swiftly and surreptitiously. Should the West decide to use force, Iran could amass a small arsenal by the time support for a military strike was rallied… Despite its economic troubles, the Iranian state is a powerful beast compared with its neighbours, and is keen to assert itself abroad. The Iraqi government is now its ally. It has sway over chunks of Lebanon through Hizbullah… And it has sent Hizbullah into Syria, where its fighters have joined Iranian advisers, money and special forces to help turn the tide of the war in Bashar Assad’s favour. Ostensibly the reason why Barack Obama agreed last week to arm the rebels in Syria… was Mr Assad’s use of chemical weapons; but many believe that the greater reason was his reluctance to see Mr Assad hold on to power as a client of Iran’s…”

The article concludes with these words, perhaps without realizing that they might be prophetic, if applied to Europe—but not the USA or NATO:

“The West… has the economic and military clout to influence events in the region, and an interest in doing so. When Persian power is on the rise, it is not the time to back away from the Middle East.”

The Bible says that Europe will indeed intervene in the Middle East… with terrible consequences for the rest of the world. Please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Syrian Conflict Escalates

The Wall Street Journal wrote on June 14:

“The Kremlin criticized the U.S. decision to arm Syrian opposition fighters and said Washington’s evidence that the Syrian regime is using chemical weapons was unconvincing… President Barack Obama on Thursday authorized the U.S. to arm fighters against the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, reversing a policy of giving only nonlethal support to the country’s opposition in the two-year-old civil war. The White House cited confirmation that Mr. Assad’s regime had killed up to 150 people with chemical weapons as the reason for its about-face.

“U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron… welcomed Washington’s assessment of Syrian weapons use. The U.K. and France were instrumental in ending a European Union arms embargo on Syria, paving the way for increased European assistance to rebel forces… U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Friday that he opposed the U.S. decision to send arms…  The Syrian government on Friday dismissed U.S. charges that it used chemical weapons as ‘full of lies,’ accusing Mr. Obama of resorting to fabrications to justify his decision to arm Syrian rebels, the AP reported…”

Der Spiegel Online added on June 14:

“The United States has shifted its course on Syria following chemical weapons revelations, but international support is limited. Germany refuses to arm the insurgents, and Russia is openly critical of President Obama… Germany says it has no plans to deliver arms to the rebels… Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the German Foreign Ministry said it had no information of its own about the use of deadly poison gas by the regime in Damascus.”

The Local added on June 15:

“Rainer Stinner, the FDP faction speaker, told the Tagesspiegel newspaper on Friday that he was ‘exceptionally skeptical’ that the weapons delivery would help and thinks it would cause more problems than it solves. ‘The situation in Syria is completely unclear. No one knows who is going to end up with the weapons. They could be used against our partners. There is after all the danger that the conflict expands and spills over into other countries.’ The FDP, the junior coalition partner, is also the party of Germany’s foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle.”

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 16:

“The United States wants to provide additional military support to the Syrian rebels. Both sides in the conflict are already getting weapons from abroad. Will the weapons of war increase the chances for peace?… The German government… is against arming the rebels, fearing that this may lead to an escalation in the conflict… with Iran and Russia on its side, the Assad regime has no shortage of supplies…. Tehran is sending small arms and trainers, and there are rumors of Iranian fighters alongside government troops. Russia also remains a staunch supporter of Assad, supplying him with fighter jets, anti-aircraft missiles and helicopters.

“Ultimately, however, the United States, Saudi Arabia and Russia are all using the Syrian civil war to pursue their own ends. Syria has become an arena in which geopolitical power struggles are being played out – and it’s the Syrian people who are paying the price.”

USA Engaged in Arming Most Extreme Sunni Islamists in Middle East

The Independent wrote on June 15:

“Washington’s decision to arm Syria’s Sunni Muslim rebels has plunged America into the great Sunni-Shia conflict of the Islamic Middle East, entering a struggle that now dwarfs the Arab revolutions which overthrew dictatorships across the region. For the first time, all of America’s ‘friends’ in the region are Sunni Muslims and all of its enemies are Shiites. Breaking all President Barack Obama’s rules of disengagement, the US is now fully engaged on the side of armed groups which include the most extreme Sunni Islamist movements in the Middle East.

“The Independent on Sunday has learned that a military decision has been taken in Iran – even before last week’s presidential election – to send a first contingent of 4,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards to Syria to support President Bashar al-Assad’s forces against the largely Sunni rebellion that has cost almost 100,000 lives in just over two years. Iran is now fully committed to preserving Assad’s regime, according to pro-Iranian sources which have been deeply involved in the Islamic Republic’s security, even to the extent of proposing to open up a new ‘Syrian’ front on the Golan Heights against Israel.

“In years to come, historians will ask how America – after its defeat in Iraq and its humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan scheduled for 2014 – could have so blithely aligned itself with one side in a titanic Islamic struggle stretching back to the seventh century death of the Prophet Mohamed. The profound effects of this great schism, between Sunnis who believe that the father of Mohamed’s wife was the new caliph of the Muslim world and Shias who regard his son in law Ali as his rightful successor – a seventh century battle swamped in blood around the present-day Iraqi cities of Najaf and Kerbala – continue across the region to this day…

“[America’s] enemies include the Lebanese Hizballah, the Alawite Shiite regime in Damascus and, of course, Iran. And Iraq, a largely Shiite nation which America ‘liberated’ from Saddam Hussein’s Sunni minority in the hope of balancing the Shiite power of Iran, has – against all US predictions – itself now largely fallen under Tehran’s influence and power. Iraqi Shiites as well as Hizballah members, have both fought alongside Assad’s forces.

“Washington’s excuse for its new Middle East adventure – that it must arm Assad’s enemies because the Damascus regime has used sarin gas against them – convinces no-one in the Middle East. Final proof of the use of gas by either side in Syria remains almost as nebulous as President George W. Bush’s claim that Saddam’s Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction…

“In the Middle East, there is cynical disbelief at the American contention that it can distribute arms – almost certainly including anti-aircraft missiles – only to secular Sunni rebel forces in Syria represented by the so-called Free Syria Army. The more powerful al-Nusrah Front, allied to al-Qaeda, dominates the battlefield on the rebel side and has been blamed for atrocities including the execution of Syrian government prisoners of war and the murder of a 14-year old boy for blasphemy. They will be able to take new American weapons from their Free Syria Army comrades with little effort…”

Iran’s New President

Reuters wrote on June 14:

“Millions of Iranians voted to choose a new president on Friday, urged by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to turn out in force to discredit suggestions by arch foe the United States that the election would be a sham. The 50 million eligible voters had a choice between six candidates to replace incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but none is seen as challenging the Islamic Republic’s 34-year-old system of clerical rule.”

The Washington Post wrote on June 15:

“… early returns indicate a strong showing by the most moderate of the six candidates running for president of Iran [namely] Hassan Rouhani, the only cleric in the race… After some leading reformists were barred from running and other candidates dropped out, Iranians were choosing from among six presidential contenders…

“All six presidential candidates are considered to be loyal to [supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei]… Khamenei… dismissed the importance of the U.S. view on Iranian domestic politics. ‘I heard recently that someone in America’s National Security Council said that we don’t accept Iran’s elections,’ Khamenei said, an apparent reference to a comment by Secretary of State John F. Kerry. Kerry said last month that he did not expect the elections to ‘change the fundamental calculus’ of Iran’s nuclear policies, which he said are controlled by Khamenei, and not the president. ‘To hell with those who don’t accept it,’ said Khamenei.”

BBC News reported on June 15:

“Reformist-backed cleric Hassan Rouhani has won Iran’s presidential election, securing just over 50% of the vote and so avoiding the need for a run-off… Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei congratulated Mr Rouhani on his victory… Ayatollah Khamenei will ratify the vote on 3 August and the new president will then take the oath in parliament. Mr Rouhani… urged the world to ‘acknowledge the rights’ of Iran. He said: ‘The nations who tout democracy and open dialogue should speak to the Iranian people with respect and recognise the rights of the Islamic republic.’…

“The US said it respected the vote, although White House spokesman Jay Carney cited concern at censorship and lack of transparency… No foreign observers monitored this year’s election and there have also been concerns that media coverage in the run-up has been unfair. Many reformist newspapers have been shut down, access to the internet and foreign broadcasters has been restricted, and journalists have been detained.”

The Local wrote on June 16:

“German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle on Saturday welcomed the election of moderate cleric Hassan Rowhani as Iran’s new president as a vote for reforms and ‘a constructive foreign policy’”.

The same naive “hope” was expressed when Morsi was elected as the new President of Egypt, until he turned out to be a tyrannical Islamist of the Moslem Brotherhood. In  any event, notice the following insightful analysis.

Could Rowhani Deliver?

The Times of Israel wrote on June 15:

“In his public speeches, Rowhani — himself a conservative Shiite cleric –promised Iranians change both domestically and abroad. But Israeli experts on Iran said on Saturday that with no control over foreign policy and with the country’s economic situation dependent to a great extent on international decisions, the new president has precious little leeway. ‘An Iranian president largely serves as head of government for the supreme leader,’ Raz Zimmt, a research fellow at the Alliance Center for Iranian Studies at Tel Aviv University told The Times of Israel. ‘He has no real prerogatives in foreign policy and his ability to provide solutions on the central issue, the economy, is limited.’…

“As secretary of the Supreme National Security Council (a position he filled from 1989 to 2005), Rowhani suspended the enrichment of uranium for two years, between 2003 and 2005. He was criticized for this during the election campaign, but repeatedly claimed that the decision was Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei‘s, not his. The United States had just invaded Iraq, and the Iranian leadership was fearful of a similar fate.

“On Friday, Rowhani brazenly declared that he was running ‘to boot out the extremists,’ indicating to Western observers that unlike Ahmadinejad, he seemed to be set on change. But Meir Javedanfar, who teaches modern Iran at Herzliya’s Interdisciplinary Center, said that paradoxically [sic] Rowhani could be put to good use by Iran’s conservative decision-makers. ‘They could have falsified the elections, but chose not to do so,’ Javedanfar said in an interview. ‘Now the regime can use Rowhani to mend bridges with the West, because the cost of sanctions has become too high.’ Zimmt said that by falsifying the elections like it did in 2009, the regime would have risked another round of widespread protests, a price hardly worth paying considering that Rowhani‘s positions are not diametrically opposed to those of Khamenei…

“Rowhani can try to convince the supreme leader to engage in negotiations with the US, but cannot initiate such a move on his own, Zimmt said. Domestically, he will likely act to release political prisoners and stress the importance of freedom of expression…

“One thing was clear on Saturday: The Iranian public wanted change, fearing the continuation of status quo or worse… ‘We won’t let the past eight years be continued,’ Rowhani told a crowd last week. But his ability to deliver on that promise seems rather limited.”

Real change in Iran won’t come… as the next article shows as well.

Syria and Iran

The Times of Israel wrote on June 16:

“Syrian President Bashar Assad on Sunday congratulated Hasan Rowhani on his victory in Friday’s Iranian presidential election, calling on his new counterpart to upgrade ties between the already close countries. Iran has been among Assad’s most steadfast supporters during Syria’s two-year civil war, sending Damascus arms, money and fighters. Assad said first on the agenda for the two leaders would be ‘confronting the plots of hegemony and aggression against the national sovereignty in our region in a way that reflects positively on the peoples of both friendly countries,’ according to a report carried by Syria’s state-run SANA news agency…

“While Rowhani is considered to be relatively moderate compared to his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, [his hands are tied] by the ruling clerical regime in Tehran, which will keep a tight handle on Iran’s foreign affairs. On Sunday, Britain’s Independent newspaper reported that Tehran would be sending 4,000 troops to Syria to bolster Assad’s forces, which are already augmented by fighters from the Lebanon-based terror group Hezbollah, which is backed by Iran.”

Events in Syria (biblical Aram) and Iran (biblical Elam) are of great significance in the light of biblical prophecy. For more information, please read our free booklets, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America,”  “Europe in Prophecy,” and “Middle Eastern and African Nations in Prophecy.” 

Why the Uproar in Turkey?

The Globe and Mail wrote on June 15:

“Some say the nationwide protests that rocked Turkey’s government the past two weeks were only about a grove of sycamore trees in the middle of the country’s biggest city, a trifling issue for a local planning board to work out. But to the country’s unapologetic Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, it was much more significant, and explains why he was willing to fight a large segment of public opinion and put his decade-long rule on the line.

“For more than 200 years, on this site now known as Gezi Park, adjacent to Istanbul’s central Taksim Square, there stood grand Ottoman-era military barracks – a testament to the power of the Ottoman Empire. Then came Kemal Ataturk, the father of the Republic, who wanted to Europeanize Turkey. In 1940, his successors had the barracks razed and the trees planted in their place.

“Mr. Erdogan, the most prominent Turkish leader since Mr. Ataturk, hopes to be in power in some capacity in 2023, the 100th anniversary of the founding of the modern state. And, just as Mr. Ataturk ushered out the Islamic order that had dominated Turkey for 13 centuries, Mr. Erdogan and his Islamic-leaning Justice and Development Party (known as the AKP), have ushered it back in, making Islam once again a significant component of Turkish life… He wants the Ottoman barracks rebuilt to their former glory – even if they only house a shopping mall instead of troops – and a grand mosque built on Taksim Square.

“Like a modern-day Peter the Great, who oversaw the design of Russia’s capital in St. Petersburg, Mr. Erdogan is seeing to every detail of his urban masterpiece, intended to Islamify parts of the city…”

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 16:

“Turkish police have been using tear gas and water cannons to clear protesters from the center of Istanbul ahead of Prime Minister Erdogan’s visit on Sunday. The move has done nothing to quell people’s outrage. In a full-scale operation on Saturday night (15.06.2013), Turkish riot police in Istanbul moved in to clear both Taksim Square and adjacent Gezi Park, where thousands of demonstrators had been camping out for more than two weeks… The leader of the German Green Party, Claudia Roth, was in Gezi Park to show solidarity with the protesters. She too was appalled by the behavior of the police, and said it had given her a sense of what war was like. Desperate protesters turned to Twitter to plead for help from the United Nations. Other eyewitnesses reported arrests and violent attacks by baton-wielding police. But the governor of Istanbul, Huseyin Avni Mutlu, justified the operation. ‘We asked the demonstrators to end their protests. We only went in after we had given the warning,’ he said…

“On Sunday night (16.06.2013) Erdogan was slated to attend a big political rally in Kazlicesme, a mostly conservative-Muslim part of Istanbul, and give a speech to his supporters. All over the city center there are advertisements in which the prime minister urges his constituents to demonstrate. The people of Istanbul are furious… Erdogan’s plan… is likely to backfire. The two main protest areas have been forcibly evacuated. The demonstrators are now preparing to march.”

For more information on Turkey’s future (which is biblical Esau or Edom), please read our free booklet, “Middle Eastern and African Nations in Prophecy.”

Where Is the Proof?

The Guardian wrote on June 13:

“Two prominent Senate critics of the NSA’s dragnet surveillance have challenged the agency’s assertion that the spy efforts helped stop ‘dozens’ of terror attacks. Mark Udall and Ron Wyden, both members of the Senate intelligence committee, said they were not convinced by the testimony of the NSA director, General Keith Alexander, on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, who claimed that evidence gleaned from surveillance helped thwart attacks in the US. ‘We have not yet seen any evidence showing that the NSA’s dragnet collection of Americans’ phone records has produced any uniquely valuable intelligence,’ they said in a statement released on Thursday…

“Alexander also testified that the databases of Americans’ phones records [contain] safeguards governing its searchability to prevent the NSA from abusing it. But there is ambiguity about whether a court or any outside body must grant the NSA permission to search it.”

These assertions by the NSA director have also been echoed by Attorney General Eric Holder and an increasing number of vocal Republicans, including former Vice President Dick Cheney. However, these “defenses” are highly suspect.

Newsmax added on June 18:

“Former state court Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Tuesday that officials from the National Security Agency ‘answered questions professionally’ in their testimony before Congress — ‘but I still think it’s bogus’… He was referring to comments from Army Gen. Keith Alexander, the NSA’s director, on the agency’s two surveillance programs: one that gathers U.S. phone records and another that is designed to track the use of U.S.-based Internet servers by foreigners with possible links to terrorism… Alexander testified to the House Intelligence Committee that the programs have foiled 50 terrorist plots worldwide, including one directed at the New York Stock Exchange. ‘They can pick and choose which classified episodes they’re going to reveal,’ said Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court judge and Fox analyst. ‘Of course, they’re going to pick and choose the ones that make them look good.’

“In attacking Alexander’s broader testimony, Napolitano specifically cited the general’s response to a question posed by Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, the GOP chairman of the Intelligence Committee. Rogers asked whether the NSA had the “’ability to listen to Americans’ phone calls or read their emails under these two programs?’ Alexander responded, ‘No, we do not have that authority.’ Napolitano observed: ‘Of course, he doesn’t have the legal authority to [listen to] the phone calls. That’s not what the question asked. The question asked, “Does he have the practical ability to do so?” and he couldn’t answer that because the answer is “yes.” And the president and General Alexander are both saying, “trust us.” The same administration said “trust us” on Benghazi till we changed the story four times,’ Napolitano added. ‘The same administration said “trust us” on the James Rosen, Fox News search-warrant affair. The same administration said “trust us” on the IRS targeting conservatives. Why should we trust them?’ he asked Cavuto. ‘Why should we trust these people?’”

Yahoo Forced to Join PRISM Program

The Huffington Post wrote on June 14:

“Yahoo fought PRISM, and PRISM won. Court records obtained by The New York Times show that Yahoo had fought back against the National Security Agency’s broad requests for user data in 2008. The company, which provides email service to hundreds of millions of people, argued that the order violated Yahoo account holders’ constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures. The secret court didn’t buy Yahoo’s argument, and compelled the company to give the NSA digitally stored email and photos at its beck and call.

“Since the bombshell revelation of NSA’s so-called PRISM program last week, the public has learned more about how the nine participating Internet companies let the government collect broad swaths of personal information from Internet users for national security purposes. The secret 2008 decision seemed to put a dark cloud over Silicon Valley: cooperate with the government to fight terrorism abroad, or you’ll find yourself in court.

“One firm that more successfully resisted the NSA’s advances was Twitter. That’s partially because the young microblogging service has less data on users compared to Google or Facebook, according to The Verge, so it’s less desirable to government snoops. But that hasn’t stopped the company and its top lawyer, Alex Macgillivray, from fighting the government in court when it has asked for people’s private information.

“Though this case was previously known through a heavily redacted court order, it wasn’t until now that we knew Yahoo was the company behind the unsuccessful NSA challenge that would leave many companies less willing to battle the NSA on other surveillance requests. In the decision, the court had told Yahoo that their worries were ‘overblown.’

“Yahoo, like Google and Facebook, have denied involvement in PRISM. ‘Yahoo! has not joined any program in which we volunteer to share user data with the U.S. government,’ Yahoo General Counsel Ron Bell wrote in a Tumblr post Saturday. ‘We do not voluntarily disclose user information. The only disclosures that occur are in response to specific demands.’

“Moving past outright denial of participation, companies such as Twitter, Microsoft, Facebook and Google are now pressing the government for permission to publish more information about the number of secret requests it receives for customers’ data.”

All of this is also shocking in light of the fact that these new revelations are contrary to what was asserted earlier, as the subsequent articles show as well.

TechCrunch reported on June 17:

“Yahoo! has disclosed the number of government requests for data it has received over the past 18 months, becoming the latest tech company to do so after the fallout from the NSA spying scandal… the company said that Yahoo! received 12,000 to 13,000 requests from FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) and U.S. law enforcement agencies during the period between December 1, 2012 and May 31, 2013… Facebook said on June 15 that for the six months ending December 31, 2012, it had received between 9,000 to 10,000 requests for data from U.S. law enforcement agencies. During that same period Microsoft received between 6,000 and 7,000 requests.”

How We Are Being Lied To

The Verge wrote on June 16:

“Since the story broke last week of the NSA’s secret compilation of Americans’ phone call metadata, the overwhelming response from government has been ‘nobody is listening to your telephone calls’ — that the data being collected is limited to things like phone numbers and call durations. Well, perhaps unsurprisingly, it now looks like the feds are listening. Or at the very least, they don’t require a court order just to do so.

“CNET has posted text from a Thursday House Judiciary Committee hearing at which FBI director Robert Mueller… testified that the government would need a ‘special, particularized order’ from the secret FISA court in order to target a particular individual’s phone for a wiretap. After checking to make sure the details weren’t classified, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) challenged Mueller’s statement, saying, ‘we heard precisely the opposite at the briefing the other day. We heard precisely that you could get the specific information from that telephone simply based on an analyst deciding that… In other words, what you just said is incorrect. So there’s a conflict.’”

On June 16, cnet.com added the following:

“The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed this week that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed ‘simply based on an analyst deciding that.’ If the NSA wants ‘to listen to the phone,’ an analyst’s decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. ‘I was rather startled,’ said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.

“Not only does this disclosure shed more light on how the NSA’s formidable eavesdropping apparatus works domestically, it also suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to eavesdrop on phone calls. Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, Nadler’s disclosure indicates the NSA analysts could also access the contents of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking approval.”

As was pointed out recently in the press, the spying activities of NSA, resulting in a huge collection of data, could be used or misused in case of a totalitarian government in the future. What was not mentioned is that this totalitarian government could be an occupying foreign power, as revealed in Scripture. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord”; “Is That in the Bible? The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation”; and “Biblical Prophecy—From Now Until Forever.”

“Obama Tries to Ease German Spying Angst”

The Local wrote on June 15:

“The White House on Friday sought to cool German fears over a secret US Internet surveillance program, which threatens to detract from President Barack Obama’s visit to Berlin next week. Obama will speak directly to German Chancellor Angela Merkel about the PRISM program that was revealed in newspaper articles last week, and point out it is purely aimed at thwarting terror attacks, a senior aide said. ‘We understand the significant German interest in privacy and civil liberties,’ said Ben Rhodes, a US deputy national security advisor, adding that Obama would point out legal and political safeguards around the program. ‘I think our point is that this is focused very specifically on one goal, which is, you know, how do we disrupt terrorist activity, how do we mitigate security threats, both to us and to Germany,’ he said. Rhodes also noted that Germany had served as a ‘staging’ area for some of the hijackers who plotted the September 11 attacks in 2001.

“The German government said earlier in the week it was sending a list of questions to the Obama administration about the program. Under the scheme, the US National Security Agency can issue directives to internet firms like Google or Facebook to gain access to emails, online chats, pictures, files and videos uploaded by foreign users. The European Union has also expressed disquiet over the program and warned of ‘grave adverse consequences’ to the rights of European citizens. Germany had earlier Friday signaled disappointment that a meeting with US Internet companies Microsoft and Google over the PRISM program had not yielded sufficient answers.”

Obama Faces More Skeptical Germany

The Local wrote on June 16:

“Barack Obama will encounter a very different Germany – one that is more powerful and sceptical – than his famous predecessor John F. Kennedy did when he delivered his famous ‘ich bin ein Berliner’ speech some 50 years ago… Candidate Obama dazzled a crowd of 200,000 people in an open air speech in 2008 some months before his historical election. He will face a more modest reception this time around as talks center on trade and secret surveillance practices, observers say.

“President Obama appears ready to try to harness some of the alliance’s bygone sparkle by timing his visit one week ahead of the 50th anniversary of Kennedy’s speech… Leading news magazine Der Spiegel last week featured a cover picture of Obama in Kennedy’s shadow, the tagline ‘The Lost Friend’, and an angst-ridden report about fraying ties…

“Obama nevertheless enjoys a level of support here that even Merkel, Germany’s most popular post-war leader, could envy as she seeks a third term in September elections. Last November nearly 90 percent wanted Obama re-elected. But now revelations of a global Internet snooping operation run by the National Security Agency have shocked a country where memories of systematic spying on citizens by communist East Germany’s despised Stasi are still raw.”

President Obama in Germany

The Atlantic Wire wrote on June 19:

“Barack Obama returned to Berlin today, almost five years to the day from when he delivered his famous ‘Victory Column’ speech that cemented his reputation as an international rockstar. Unfortunately, his reception this time was a lot different. An estimated 200,000 people turned out in July 2008 to see then Candidate Obama deliver an address in front of one of Germany’s most notable landmarks…

“Fast forward to 2013, and many are now saying that Obama’s reputation is ‘tarnished,’ by his recent snooping scandals, his extensions of the war on terror, and the hard luck realities of failing to deliver on all your promises… He’s ‘demystified’ and ‘no longer a superstar’ in German eyes. Now he’s just another world leader on a state visit, and whatever problems people have with U.S. policy are on his shoulders. And instead of opening up the speech to the whole city, Obama spoke in front only about 5,000-6,000 spectators, all of them invited guests…”

The New York Times reported that only 4,500 invited spectators were in attendance.

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 19:

“German leaders have seemed eager to ensure that their concerns about the digital spying operation be taken seriously. Several have blasted both Obama and the National Security Agency, perhaps none as vociferously as Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger. Wednesday, despite the day-long Barack-fest in the German capital, was no different. Philip Rösler, Angela Merkel’s vice chancellor and head of her junior coalition partners, the Free Democrats, said on public television that he was ‘extremely unsettled’ by the spying program. Former German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier of the opposition Social Democrats added that, while he understood US security concerns, ‘that can’t be synonymous with mass surveillance.’

“Merkel too voiced careful criticism of the program during the pair’s joint press conference at the Chancellery. She made sure to emphasize that Germany had received important intelligence from the US which played a role in thwarting planned terrorist activity here. But, she added: ‘I made clear that, despite the necessity, the issue of balance is an important one.’

“Obama was ready for questions about the Prism program, which has been likened in both the US and German press to George Orwell’s ‘Big Brother,’ made famous in his novel ‘1984.’ Rather than trying to dodge reporters’ queries, he took time to defend the program and explain its importance for US security. At the press conference, Obama also fielded difficult questions about some additional elements of US foreign and domestic policy that many in Germany find problematic, including Washington’s policy of using drones to hunt down suspected terrorist leaders in Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan, and the ongoing existence of the Guantanamo detention camp…

“Still, issuing an elaborate justification for a vast state surveillance program at exactly the same time as his wife and daughters were placing flowers at the remnants of the Berlin Wall is nothing if not ironic. East Berlin, after all, was the mother of all spy-states. Visitors to the Wall memorial learn that the state, known counter-intuitively as the German Democratic Republic, maintained a network of well over 100,000 citizen spies to keep close watch on their neighbors in addition to thousands of professional moles. Presumed enemies of the state were locked up… But it remains to be seen whether the president’s impassioned words in front of Berlin’s pre-eminent Cold War symbol will be enough to assuage deep German disappointment over the fact that Obama has failed to live up to expectations. Prior to the speech, Peter Thompson of the Guardian aptly summed up the feeling, tweeting: ‘Given PRISM will his speech become known as the “Ich bin ein East Berliner” speech?’”

The New York Times wrote von June 19:

“Yet the anticipation of the speech at the historic site was offset by attention to the dispute over the revelations of the breadth of American surveillance programs, which include both Prism, an effort to monitor foreign communications at American Internet companies like Google, as well as a vast database of domestic phone logs. The programs monitor the communications without individualized court orders. ‘We know of at least 50 threats that have been averted because of this information, not just in the United States but in some cases here in Germany,’ Mr. Obama said during the news conference. ‘So lives have been saved.’  He did not provide any details…

“That news has been controversial in Germany, where both the Nazi era and the postwar surveillance in Communist East Germany have fostered deep concerns about privacy and civil liberties, and the issue was expected to loom large in the meeting of the two leaders. Ms. Merkel said at the news conference that she and Mr. Obama had talked at length about the American programs, even indicating that the topic took precedence over their discussion of subjects like the global economy and the conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan. She made clear that she had expressed her own concerns, despite her stated understanding of the need for such intelligence efforts…

“Mr. Obama, repeating defenses he has made to Americans, described how he had made sure when he took office that the intelligence programs ‘were examined and scrubbed.’… Ms. Merkel looked at him he spoke beside her, expressionless but seeming to listen intently. ‘It’s necessary for us to debate these issues,’ she replied. ‘People have concerns.’”

Of course, Angela Merkel would try to carefully “defend” the US spy program (having her own election in mind in 2014), in light of revelations of German hypocrisy, as the next article shows.

German Hypocrisy

The Local wrote on June 16:

“Despite the scandal over the US Prism spy programme, the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) is planning to invest €100 million to improve its internet surveillance, Spiegel Online reported on Sunday. The money is to be spent on new technology and on hiring as many as 100 new employees, the service wrote. The €100 million is to be spent over a five year period, but the federal government has already released €5 million for the first phase.

“The BND is moving forward with its plans despite criticism over the US spying programme. The agency, like the US National Security Agency, wants to be sure that it can survey cross-border data traffic. The story said that German law allows for spy agencies to monitor as much as 20 percent of communication between Germany and other countries, but due to technical limitations only five percent of such traffic is being monitored. These include emails, telephone calls, Facebook postings and Skype conversations.

“In contrast to the US, which can make a record of suspicious communications, German spies have tighter restrictions. Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich is calling for a loosening of those regulations. Friedrich also defended the US from German criticism of the recently revealed spying program, saying ‘That’s not how you treat friends who are our most important partner in the fight against terrorism.’ He made his comments to the Welt am Sonntag newspaper.

“Friedrich said Germany is dependent on information delivered from the US and Der Spiegel noted that there has been a considerable exchange of information between Germany and the US and that many attacks in Germany have been prevented, in part, by US information. Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger sharply criticized the US actions and has called for a full explanation from Washington.”

Of course, since Germany wants to follow the lead of the USA in how to spy on their citizens, and since they are ALREADY COOPERATING with the NSA, then they WOULD try to “justify” and support these horrendous atrocities. At the same time, Britain is not doing any better.

The Independent reported on June 17:

“Britain was plunged into a diplomatic row tonight following claims that foreign politicians and diplomats were repeatedly spied upon when they attended two G20 summit meetings in London. The allegations provoked anger in Turkey, Russia and South Africa, whose dignitaries were reportedly targeted by the covert surveillance operations in 2009 while Gordon Brown was Prime Minister. The intelligence services were even said to have set up internet cafes at the summit venues which they used to read emails sent by visiting officials.”

German Reactions

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 20:

“He… managed to remind Germans why they are such big fans of this president. Even if Tuesday and Wednesday marked the first time Obama had visited Berlin as president — after fully five years in office — he was able to make it seem as though Germany and the Germans were near and dear to him… The audience ate it up. Sure there is concern in the country about Obama’s drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan. There is widespread disgust with the mind-boggling extent of online surveillance undertaken by the National Security Agency. There is also a good bit of disillusionment stemming from Obama’s inability to close down the Guantanamo detention camp… But Germans like nothing better than to be taken seriously — and they are open to being charmed. Obama made a convincing show of doing both…

“But coming from a president that most in Germany continue to revere despite the shortcomings that have by now become obvious to all, Berliners were more apt to see the logic of proposing cuts to the nuclear arsenal in a city so marked by the Cold War. That, of course, was Obama’s intention. And he left the city having achieved the primary goal of his visit — that of putting a feel-good coat of paint on a trans-Atlantic relationship that had recently begun to show its age.

“German commentators on Thursday, however, seemed largely immune to the charm offensive.

“The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘(The speech) was a disappointment for those who hope for … for what actually? Clearly these phrases for the history books, which in themselves imply the claim of the US to lead the western World, don’t exist anymore… Obama used the Brandenburg Gate, he used Berlin, and he used Angela Merkel and her East German heritage to send a clear signal to Russia [regarding reduction of nuclear weapons] … The fact that this appeal to Russia was broadcast from Germany to the world shows what a central role Berlin still plays from America’s point of view in its relations with Russia.’

“Conservative daily Die Welt writes: ‘Barack Obama’s visit… didn’t touch the Germans, neither warmly or coolly… The indifference with which Obama was received is not an indication that Germans don’t like Obama anymore… America has become more foreign to us… But Europeans have also become more foreign to Americans. How should Americans know and understand that which we ourselves don’t know or understand? There is still a great lack of clarity about where the partially unified, partially divided continent of Europe is headed politically…’

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘… Europeans, especially the Germans, have their problems with both presidents. They despise Bush as a supposedly dim-witted cowboy. But in the meantime, they have become leery of the coldly analytical Obama, who kills suspected terrorists with drones and lets his government monitor the Internet.’

“Business daily Handelsblatt writes: ‘Germany, once again, provided the TV-ready backdrop for a US president, but is the country really a partner to America?… The US government itself knows the importance of Berlin and would like to see Germany take on a greater global role…’

“Left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes: ‘Obama… spoke about a lot, without saying much… he had no plan… Possibly the most important politician in the world has nothing planned. That is terrible news.’”

According to The Local, dated June 20, “The Südwest Presse… questioned the German public’s faith in Obama… ‘do the Germans trust the Nobel Peace Prize winner to lead the way to a beautiful new world?’ it asked. ‘Unfortunately the lasting impression is that he is a man of big promises and little progress,’ the paper concluded.”

Deutsche Welle (on June 19) summed it up in this way: “US President Barack Obama came, saw – but did he conquer?… US-German ties have developed, changed and matured over the years. What they most definitely are not is ‘normal.’… Germany and the United States have grown apart since 1990… Unified Germany emancipated itself rather quickly from its former protecting power, pursued its own interests, worked to push European integration, distanced itself from President George W. Bush and his war against Iraq, stands dumbfounded when it comes to Guantanamo… The United States also went its own ways after the collapse of the Berlin Wall. They withdrew troops and funds from Germany… All the while, the generation of World War II that had breathed life into the special relationship between Germany and the United States was dying out…

“In the run-up to President Obama’s visit to Berlin there was a lot of talk about a rather diffuse but growing disappointment with the man and his presidency. He was no messiah, no shining light anymore… the hopes and expectations projected onto Barack Obama – and that he had willingly projected onto himself – were as unrealistic as can be. That is why the current disillusionment with President Obama follows a specific dynamic that largely grows from disappointed love. Somehow the United States has never managed to live up to the great hopes and expectations that Germans linked to it…”

Obama Offends Catholics in Ireland

Newsmax reported on June 19:

“President Barack Obama angered some proponents of Catholic education during his visit to Ireland this week when he told a Belfast audience that towns will remain divided ‘if Catholics have their schools and buildings, and Protestants have theirs.’ An article, which subsequently appeared in the Scottish Catholic Observer carried the headline, ‘U.S. President Undermines Catholic Schools after Vatican Prefect Praised Them.’ The article said that Obama ‘made an alarming call for an end to Catholic education in Northern Ireland,’ and quoted from recent remarks of the Vatican’s Archbishop Gerhard Müller, who had said that Catholic education was ‘a critical component of the Church.’”

“Vatican to Announce John Paul II ‘Miracle’”

The Telegraph wrote on June 20:

“The Vatican has secretly attributed a mystery miracle to the late John Paul II, clearing the way for him to be declared a saint. The Holy See has yet to reveal what the miracle was or where and when it took place but Vatican sources said it would ‘amaze the world’. It concerns the ‘extraordinary healing’ of a Costa Rican woman who was cured of a severe brain injury after her family began praying to the memory of the late Polish pope, according to reports in the Italian media… John Paul II was beatified — the first step towards sainthood — in a lavish outdoor ceremony in St Peter’s Square in May 2011.

“The second miracle — which is required in order for him to be given full sainthood — reportedly occurred on the very day of his beatification… John Paul’s first attributed miracle was the apparent healing of a French nun, Sister Marie Simon-Pierre. Her recovery from Parkinson’s disease after praying for the late pope’s ‘intercession’ had no medical explanation, the Catholic Church maintains… ‘The canonisation of Karol Wojtyla will be the crowning glory of the recent history of Catholicism, linking the last three pontificates,’ Saverio Gaeta, who wrote a biography of John Paul II, told La Stampa newspaper.”

In case you missed it, the second “miracle” allegedly happened through the late pope AFTER his death—so supposedly, he worked this “miracle” from heaven. But the Bible condemns such beliefs which are rooted in paganism.

INS “Interprets” Rules for Conscientious Objector Status

The Huffington Post wrote on June 20:

“Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected. Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty’s behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she’d need to document that she was ‘a member in good standing’ of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note ‘on official church stationary [sic]’ would suffice, they said.

“Here’s how Doughty explained her refusal to sign the pledge: ‘I am sure the law would never require a 64 year-old woman like myself to bear arms, but if I am required to answer this question, I cannot lie. I must be honest. The truth is that I would not be willing to bear arms. Since my youth I have had a firm, fixed and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or in the bearing of arms. I deeply and sincerely believe that it is not moral or ethical to take another person’s life, and my lifelong spiritual/religious beliefs impose on me a duty of conscience not to contribute to warfare by taking up arms … my beliefs are as strong and deeply held as those who possess traditional religious beliefs and who believe in God … I want to make clear, however, that I am willing to perform work of national importance under civilian direction or to perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States if and when required by the law to do so.’…

“The Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to Citizenship and Immigration Services, calling the government request ‘illegal and unconstitutional.’ ‘It is shocking that USCIS officers would not be aware that a nonreligious yet deeply held belief would be sufficient to attain this exemption,’ Andrew L. Seidel, a staff attorney at Freedom From Religion Foundation, wrote after laying out a list of Supreme Court tests that suggest a rejection would be unusual and improper. ‘This is a longstanding part of our law and every USCIS officer should receive training on this exemption … Either the officers in Houston are inept, or they are deliberately discriminating against nonreligious applicants for naturalization.’”

The IRS Scandal–FBI Knows Nothing

CNS News reported on June 13:

“While testifying before the House Judiciary Committee today, FBI Director Robert Mueller could not name the lead investigator in the IRS case involving the targeting of conservative groups. It is now one month into the investigation. Rep Jim Jordan (R-OH): ‘Can you tell me who the lead investigator is?’ Mueller: ‘Off the top of my head, no.’ Jordan: ‘It’s the most important issue in front of the country in the last six weeks, and you don’t know who’s heading up the case? Who the lead investigator is?’ Mueller: ‘At this juncture, no, I do not know.’ Mueller also claimed ignorance when Rep. Jordan asked him if anyone had contacted the victims of the IRS scandal.”

IRS Has Been Targeting Religious Organizations for Many Years

Breitbart wrote on June 14:

“An article on the Fox News website delineates the intimidation tactics the IRS has used to bludgeon religious organizations and religious leaders for decades. The authors point out that the IRS targets the organizations or individuals in one of two ways: either by responding to a complaint by an anti-religious group and asking the religious group or individual to justify their non-profit status, or for the IRS to carry out the wishes of upper echelon federal government officials who find the religious perspective offensive.

“The article site various targets over the years:

“ 1. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in the 1950’s who was targeted with an audit for speaking out about civil rights;

“2. An Episcopal minister from Southern California who received a multi-year audit after excoriating President Bush for invading Iraq;

“3. The legendary evangelist Billy Graham, who was hit with an audit last fall after he supported a ballot measure in his home state of North Carolina that clashed with the White House.

“The authors close with a stinging condemnation of the IRS’s warning to religious people ‘Not to do it again.’ They write:

“‘But not do what again? Not preach about moral matters that have a political connection? That would mean that religious issues stop being religious once a politician starts talking about them. More importantly, where does the IRS get the authority to override the First Amendment? If freedom of speech and freedom of religion are to mean anything, government bureaucrats can’t be allowed to decide what rabbis, priests, imams, and pastors  can preach. Religious people can and do disagree over whether pastors, priests, or rabbis should preach about the political issues of the day. That is their right. But surely all Americans can agree — especially after the abuses that have come to light in the past week–that the time for the tax man to censor sermons must come to an end.’”

The Curse of Obamacare

The Los Angeles Times reported on June 18:

“Aetna Inc. said it would stop selling individual health insurance policies in California next month, and nearly 50,000 existing policyholders will have to find new coverage by January. The company’s announcement Monday comes a month after it opted not to participate in California’s new state-run insurance market for consumers, a key component of the new federal healthcare law… Starting in January, most Americans will be required to [have] health insurance coverage or pay a penalty.”

A reader wrote us: “[We] were going to try to get health insurance through AARP, since I am 55 now, but they said they no longer carried health insurance for the state of West Virginia as of June 1st! AARP contracted out with Aetna as well!!  Thank you Obamacare! The downfall of America is right before our eyes!”

How Much Worse Can it Get?

On June 16, today.com reported the following:

“When twin sisters Zea and Luna Weiss-Wynne, both 9, wrote a letter to President Barack Obama last year, they asked for his attention on a few things. Obama invited the sisters to join him at a reception at the White House to outline their requests in public. The girls, who asked for his support of marriage equality, spoke at the LGBT Pride Month reception Friday, which is part of the annual celebration dedicated to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights. The president made sure to give the third graders a turn in front of the microphone…

“Among the requests the girls outlined in their speech and their letter was… a commitment to gay marriage… The girls care about marriage equality because ‘we have two moms and they are just as good as other parents. They love us a lot.’… President Obama nodded his head and smiled as the sisters spoke to the crowd and outlined their requests… In his remarks at the event, Obama discussed various legislation he has passed that relates to the LGBT community, including a hate crimes bill, a national HIV/AIDS strategy and a policy that bans companies from denying medical care to LGBT Americans. ‘But part of the reason we’re here is because we know we’re not done yet,’ Obama said.”

This development is not restricted to the US, though. See the next article:

Europe’s Largest Gay Festival Held in Berlin

The Local wrote on June 16:

“Nearly half a million people in Berlin celebrated on Saturday the 21st annual gay-lesbian city festival – the largest gathering of its kind in Europe. Berlin’s mayor Klaus Wowereit, who is gay, took part in the festivities. He said the festival embodies the city’s openness to the world and its progressiveness, the Berliner Zeitung reported. The two-day festival, which wraps up Sunday evening, is expected to draw more than 400,000 spectators to the Schöneberg area of the city. Head organiser Dieter Schneider said that by Saturday afternoon the steady stream of visitors was larger than last year.”

For more information on a healthy and godly family life, please read our free booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families.”

Colorado Fire Worst in State’s History

NBC News wrote on June 15:

“Firefighters made some progress battling a massive, deadly wildfire near Colorado Springs late Friday when cooler temperatures, rain and calmer winds swept in, allowing them to increase containment to 30 percent. Mandatory evacuation orders for thousands of Colorado Springs residents were lifted… More than 38,000 people were evacuated at the peak of the blaze.

“The fire, the worst in the state’s history, has killed two people and made ashes of 419 homes… The fire raged mostly uncontrolled for days, with a burn zone covering nearly 25 square miles. One of three major fires raging in Colorado, the Black Forest fire is now the most destructive on record in the state.”

“The Birds”

Breitbart wrote on June 14:

“The mighty endangered California condor has decided to take revenge on the people of California. The birds, which have up to a nine-foot wingspan, have descended Hitchcock-style on the town of Bear Valley Springs, ripping off roof shingles, clawing at air conditioners, and, of course, coating the town in condor feces. At one rental property, condors pried open a can of white paint, coating a deck with it; bit the wiring of the air conditioning; and tore apart the screens of two sliding doors…

“But residents can’t do anything about the delinquent condors, due to federal and state regulations. In fact, the California State Fish and Game Commission recently prohibited use of lead ammunition in areas in which condors nest. Actually, about the only thing you can do to the condor in California is kill it using a wind turbine.”

Armed Drones and Government Surveillance Are Linked

On June 8, the left-wing Huffington Post published an article by Peter Scheer. The author is “a lawyer and writer [and] executive director of the First Amendment Coalition. FAC has filed suit against the Justice Department for access to classified legal memos analyzing drone strikes”:

“First came news accounts of the government’s use of armed drones in the targeted killing of suspected terrorists abroad. Then came the revelations about government surveillance programs, breathtaking in their scale, tapping into data on phone calls, emails, Internet searches and more. These activities are, in fact, linked…

“The logic of warfare and intelligence have flipped, each becoming the mirror image of the other. Warfare has shifted from the scaling of military operations to the selective targeting of individual enemies. Intelligence gathering has shifted from the selective targeting of known threats to wholesale data mining for the purpose of finding hidden threats.

“The resulting paradigms, in turn, go a long way to account for our collective discomfort with the government’s activities in these areas. Americans are understandably distressed over the targeted killing of suspected terrorists because the very individualized nature of the drone attacks converts acts of war into de facto executions — and that in turn gives rise to demands for high standards of proof and adjudicative due process.

“Similarly, intelligence activities that gather data widely, without fact-based suspicions about specific individuals to whom the data pertain, are seen as intrusive and subject to abuse. The needle-in-a-haystack approach to intelligence gathering is fundamentally at odds with Americans’ understanding of the Constitution’s promise to safeguard them against ‘unreasonable’ government searches. There is nothing reasonable about giving government secret access, in real time, to phone calls and emails of tens of millions of Americans.

“Our fear of these changes is reinforced by the absence of transparency surrounding drone strikes-specifically, the protocols for selecting targets-and intelligence operations that cast a broad net in which U.S. citizens are caught…”

Another left-wing journalist and commentator, New York Times’ Paul Krugmann, said this (according to ABC News, dated June 9):

“… there are different kinds of surveillance states. You can have a democratic surveillance state which collects as little data as possible and tells you as much as possible about what it’s doing. Or you can have an authoritarian surveillance state which collects as much as possible and tells the public as little as possible. And we are kind of on the authoritarian side.”

“Obama’s Fundamental Flaw”

The Huffington Post published a follow-up article on June 11:

“If, as the U.S. president now argues ex post facto, it was okay on balance to have the NSA (National Security Agency) monitoring process put in place, why not have that discussion with the American people in broad daylight right after he took office?… His Harvard Law School-driven government is counting on the docility of the American people… Never mind that he had advertised himself in the 2008 presidential campaign as a professor of constitutional law. We all know by now that this is just one among the many qualification boxes he ticked off in order to secure his eventual rise.

“And forget about his principled utterances as a presidential candidate about having reservations about clandestine monitoring programs being conducted on U.S. citizens. People are used to politicians fidgeting with the truth to seek higher office. What is far more disconcerting is the utter political tone deafness of Obama, the (presumed) politician. Now, he has grandiosely okayed a fundamental invasion of privacy… his fundamental flaw as a politician has been firmly established. As has happened so many times before on other issues, he excels by doing his very own opposition’s bidding. Talk about disarming yourself.”

When even the left-leaning press publishes articles like these, then we know that the Obama Administration is in big trouble. According to Newsmax, dated June 12, “actor and liberal activist John Cusack” blasted Obama and the NSA, and even extremely “Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore delivered his unsurprisingly damning verdict, tweeting, ‘the administration has now lost all credibility.’ He implied hypocrisy on the part of the president by highlighting a 2007 Obama quote: ‘that means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens. No more (spying) on citizens…No more tracking citizens…’”

For more information and analysis, please read our Editorial in this issue, and view our recent StandingWatch program, “How Your Government Is Spying on You” and “Prism Spying and Its Consequences.”  

Reaction of Obama Administration and Further Response by Rand Paul

Please note the reaction of the Obama Administration to the revelation of their secret spying and apparently unconstitutional activities on innocent American citizens, as reported by Fox News, dated June 9:

“The Obama administration has taken a first step toward opening a criminal investigation into the purported leaking of classified documents related to the federal government tracking Americans’ phone calls and emails, a source familiar with the high-level discussions told Fox News on Saturday. The source said James Clapper, the director of U.S. national intelligence, had filed a ‘criminal report’ with the Justice Department and the FBI, which begins the process…

“The FBI and Justice Department would likely be involved in such a probe, which is expected to focus on British and U.S. newspapers including The Guardian. The British newspaper reported late Wednesday that the U.S. government had collected the phone records of millions of Verizon customers.”

Others are not easily intimidated.

As Fox News reported on June 9, “Sen. Rand Paul said Sunday he wants to mount a Supreme Court challenge to the federal government logging Americans’ phone calls and Internet activities. Paul, R-Ky., a leading voice in the Libertarian movement, told ‘Fox News Sunday’ he wants to get enough signatures to file a class-action lawsuit before the high court and will appeal to younger Americans, who appear to be advancing the cause of less government and civil liberties… ‘If we get 10 million Americans saying we don’t want our phone records looked at, then maybe someone will wake up and something will change in Washington.’…

“Paul, a first-term senator and potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, said he disagrees with President Obama’s argument that the National Security Agency collecting 3 billion calls daily and other information [is] a modest invasion of privacy…

“Washington officials have acknowledged all branches of the federal government – Congress, the White House and federal courts – knew about the collection of data under the Patriot Act. Paul also said the government should be using a specific warrant, not a general warrant, to get the data, arguing the Fourth Amendment prevents unreasonable search and seizure. ‘The Founding Fathers didn’t want that,’ he said….”

Rand Paul, a Republican, made headlines before when he became the lonely voice in refusing to cast his vote for one particular governmental appointee, speaking non-stop for hours in the Senate, until the government broke their usual silence and showed a touch of transparency by providing a few answers to his questions.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with his view points, at least here is someone who is willing to stand up for what he believes to be right, while most politicians don’t dare, are too cowardly or just too complacent to do so… behaving as proverbial “politicians” are expected to act. But since Rand Paul is willing to stand up for his convictions, there is virtually no chance that he will become the next President of the United States in 2016. Chances are, he would not even get the necessary support from intimidated or unconcerned colleagues in his own party.

Traitor or Not?

While many Republicans and Democrats declared whistleblower Edward Snowden, who revealed the clandestine worldwide spying activities of the NSA,  to be a traitor of the country, Newsmax reported on June 12:

“Former GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul insisted on Tuesday that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden is not a traitor, but he fears the U.S. government may send drones or a cruise missile to kill the 29-year-old, who has fled the United States. ‘Everybody’s worried about him and what they’re going to do, and how they’re going to convict him of treason, and how they’re going to kill him, but what about the people who destroy our Constitution?’ the former Texas Republican congressman asserted. ‘What kind of penalty for those individuals who just take the Fourth Amendment and destroy it? What do we think about people who assassinate American citizens without trials and assume that that’s the law of the land? That’s where our problem is.’

“Paul said that ‘our problem isn’t with people who are trying to tell us the truth about what’s happening’ as in the case of Snowden, and he fears that the U.S. government may try to kill the former contractor. ‘I’m worried about somebody in our government might kill him with a Cruise missile or a drone missile,’ Paul said. ‘I mean we live in a bad time where American citizens don’t even have rights and that they can be killed, but the gentleman is trying to tell the truth about what’s going on.’… He pointed to the case of a CIA agent who was imprisoned for acknowledging that torture takes place at Guantanamo.”

Another lonely voice, Republican Governor Rand Paul, also stated that he is reserving judgment as to whether or not Snowden is a traitor, but as reported above, he vehemently charged the Obama Administration and the NSA with breaking the law by acting illegally and unconstitutionally. According to Reuters, dated June 12, its poll revealed that “Some 23 percent of those surveyed said… Snowden is a traitor while 31 percent said he is a patriot. Another 46 percent said they did not know.”

German and European Reactions

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 10:

“29-year-old ex-CIA employee Edward Snowden has admitted to making one of the biggest intelligence leaks in history. He now faces severe consequences — but President Obama also has a lot to answer for.

“… the US’s virtual surveillance network is nearly all-encompassing — and that citizens are powerless against it… Obama now faces a huge public relations problem. Wasn’t it he who said that he welcomed the debate on government spying? And yet now he has decided to pursue the very man who triggered this debate…”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 11:

“The world has been scandalized to learn about Prism, the broad data surveillance program used by the US at home and abroad. German commentators say that both Berlin and Brussels must defend Europe from this invasion of privacy…

“Germany, which has particularly strict data privacy laws, is reportedly one of the most heavily monitored countries in the surveillance program… European politicians are also worried about the surveillance…The scandal has revealed state surveillance of a previously unimaginable scope by the US both at home and abroad…

“Center-left daily Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘It may be that US citizens can defend themselves under the US Constitution. But that doesn’t apply to foreigners. Facebook users in Germany have as little protection from the US Constitution as those in Afghanistan. Germany is the country in Europe whose telephone and Internet communications are being spied on the most intensely by the US… The only good thing about the NSA spying is that it exposes the principle tenet of domestic security that has been used to justify the rebuilding of the security system since Sept. 11, 2001: That those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear. This is simply a stupid idea.’…

“Left-leaning Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘Basic civil rights around the world, which are taken for granted far too naively in Western democracies, are being placed under attack by state “security architecture” such as the US spying program Prism…’

“Conservative daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: ‘Whether it’s with Facebook, Google, Yahoo or Microsoft — user confidence has been shaken… all users should be asking whether they themselves, and especially their personal data, are in good hands with these companies.’”

On June 11, der Spiegel Online published a Commentary by German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger:

“With its Prism spy program, the US has crossed the line… On the weekend, President Obama reacted by saying that it is impossible to have 100 percent security and 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience. I don’t share this view. The more a society monitors, controls and observes its citizens, the less free it is. In a democratic constitutional state, security is not an end in itself, but serves to secure freedom…

“We should remember that the strength of the liberal constitutional state lies in the trust of its citizens. Constitutional guarantees protect this trust and pursue two objectives: to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent or those who are unjustly suspected of a crime against wrongful actions by the government. These are precisely the tenets Germany adopted in 1949 from the tradition of the American Constitution of 1776 — namely that in a free and open democratic process, it is important to avoid the impression that the protection of basic rights is not being taken seriously enough…

“The suspicion of excessive surveillance of communication is so alarming that it cannot be ignored. For that reason, openness and clarification by the US administration itself should be paramount at this point. All facts must be put on the table…”

AFP wrote on June 12:

“The EU has warned President Barack Obama’s administration of ‘grave adverse consequences’ to the rights of European citizens from a huge US Internet surveillance programme, officials said Wednesday.

“Viviane Reding, the EU’s Justice Commissioner, wrote a letter on Monday to US Attorney General Eric Holder demanding ‘swift and concrete’ answers about the spy scheme when they meet in Dublin on Friday… Her questions to Holder include whether EU citizens were targeted by the US programmes, whether Europeans would be able find out whether their data has been accessed, and whether they would be treated similarly to US nationals in such cases. The EU official also warned that the European Parliament ‘is likely to assess the overall transatlantic relationship also in the light of your responses’”.

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 12:

“The US government is using ‘American-style Stasi methods,’ Markus Ferber, a member of the European parliament, told Reuters, referring to the former communist East German secret police. ‘I thought this era had ended when the [German Democratic Republic] fell.’”

The EUObserver wrote on June 12:

“The German government is demanding explanations from the US after it emerged that its secret spying programme Prism collected more information from Germany than any other EU country… Data privacy is a very sensitive topic in Germany and the cluelessness of Merkel’s government about the affair may become an issue in September’s elections… The ministry of interior is working on a questionnaire for the US government to find out the extent and the legal basis for the collection of data from Germany…  Similar information requests will be sent to Internet firms such as Google, Facebook, Yahoo and Apple, which were targeted by Prism, but which deny that US security staff got unlimited access to their servers…

“German data protection chief Peter Schaar said on the WDR public broadcaster that Prism amounts to ‘almost total surveillance.’… The German opposition is also outraged by the news…  ‘This looks to me like it could become one of the biggest data privacy scandals ever,’ Greens leader Renate Kuenast told Reuters.”

These are strong words and reactions. America is really doing everything imaginable to make themselves unpopular in the eyes of the world.

Secrecy also in the UK

Mail On Line wrote on June 7:

“David Cameron is to attend a meeting of the secretive Bilderberg Group tonight – but will not say who he meets. The Prime Minister will take part in a debate on the global economy with an unknown group of ministers, business leaders and academics from around the world.

“But his attendance at the heavily-guarded event is certain to spark controversy after Mr Cameron once promised to lead the ‘most open and transparent government in the world’.”

Prime Minister Cameron sounds and behaves just like President Obama. As Deutsche Welle reported on June 6, “On his first day in office President Obama vowed to create the most open government in history. But after five years his administration has brought more espionage cases against leakers than all other presidents combined…”

A New Monarchy for Germany?

The Local wrote on June 6:

“Germans might not know it, but they desperately need the moral guidance of a re-instated royal family, the great-great grandson of the last Kaiser, Prince Philip Kiril of Prussia [said]… ‘Subconsciously, I think young Germans wants something they can orientate towards,’ said Prince Philip. The 45-year-old father of six may work as a Protestant vicar, but he has become one of the loudest voices out of those who want to see Germany revive its monarchy. Second in line to the throne Kaiser Wilhelm II abdicated in 1918, Prince Philip believes that a royal family with divine right conferred by God could offer Germany what it is missing. ‘When a leader answers to himself, and not God, an atheist-led country ends in disaster. Look at Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin,’ he told The Local. Religion, ‘tames the selfishness naturally present in all of us.’

“For the prince, a country guided by politicians and a ceremonial president means not only is there no strong family to look up to, nor is there anyone to rally up enthusiasm for family life. ‘A presidential head of state is not enough…what Germany needs is moral guidance and a friendlier face,’ which, he added, ‘people do not get, and shouldn’t expect, from politicians.’ Indeed, this appears to be what [an] increasing amount of young Germans want, after a survey for news agency DPA revealed last month that as many as one in three 18-24-year-olds would like the Kaiser back on the throne…  ‘Looking up to a king or queen would be much better for Germany’s young people than to pop stars or football players,’ Prince Philip said. He lamented that people were putting too much value on consumerism and material goods…

“He cited the increasingly popular face of European royalty as being partially responsible for boosting interest among younger Germans…  For the prince, a presidential head of state simply does not cut it. Being voted in ‘doesn’t deign them the same respect’ as a king, who is chosen by God. This is why he thinks his career as a protestant vicar would mix well with being royal. ‘All people are born equal but some are born to lead, and others to follow. This is not a human made concept, but a God-made one.’ …

“Eventually, the country will need more than its finances and infrastructure being taken care of. It needs spirituality and religion and… God, Prince Philip added…”

This renewed interest in European monarchies, especially among Germans and Austrians, is worthwhile noticing. Revelation 17:9-10 speaks of the last ten leaders of the final revival of the Roman Empire as “ten kings.” Whether this is just a reference to ten “rulers,” who will give their power and authority to the beast, or ten literal “kings” or “emperors,” will remain to be seen.

Equal Rights for Gay Unions in Germany

The Associated Press reported on June 6:

“Gay rights campaigners won a victory over the German government Thursday as the country’s top court ruled that homosexual couples in civil unions should receive the same tax benefits as heterosexual married couples. The Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe ruled that treating the two forms of partnership differently for tax purposes violates the country’s guarantee of equal rights.

“Chancellor Angela Merkel’s center-right government had long resisted granting the same tax benefits to gay couples in civil unions. Those unions – officially certified by a notary and carrying similar rights and duties to wedlock – are widely accepted by Germany’s gay community as equivalent to marriage…

“Married couples in Germany are able to jointly declare their taxable incomes, which can significantly lower their overall tax burden especially when one partner has higher pay… The court ordered the government to retroactively amend the relevant laws dating back to 2001, when civil union status was first introduced by a previous center-left government… The government vowed it will seek to get the necessary legislation passed by this fall to implement the court decision…

“Granting more rights to homosexual couples is relatively uncontroversial among the wider public in Germany…”

This development might look, at first glance, as being in total contradiction with the previous article. But this only seems to be the case. As we suggested, it is very likely, based on a Scripture in Daniel 11:37, that the prophesied “beast” in the book of Revelation—the last leader of the final revival of the ancient Roman Empire–may be homosexual. We read in Daniel 11:37 that he “does not regard the desire of women.” The Elberfelder Bible translates that he does not care for the love of or towards women (“Frauenliebe”). This could be a reference to other than normal sexual preferences. The commentary of Henry speaks of “unnatural lust” in the context (compare Romans 1:24-28).

But longing for the return of a godly-appointed monarch who would allegedly give moral guidance and be a good example of strong family life, and supporting homosexuality is not viewed by most Germans as a contradiction. They know that other “respected” European and Roman emperors were homosexuals, while they were “married” and had children. In addition, many Germans had no problem with electing a homosexual foreign minister and a homosexual mayor of Berlin.

Gay Lobby in the Vatican

Newsmax wrote on June 11:

“Pope Francis has acknowledged the existence of a ‘gay lobby” in the Vatican and says he is consulting advisers on what to do about it.

“Speaking informally to a confederation of religious groups from Latin America and the Caribbean, he said…:  ‘The “gay lobby” is mentioned, and it is true, it is there… We need to see what we can do.’… Rumors over the existence of such a group in the Vatican have circulated for years and the extent of the problem is thought to have partly influenced Benedict to resign. But until now, successive popes never have publicly acknowledged it.

“Some Catholics believe such a lobby pervades much of the Church in the West, weakening its proclamation of the Gospel and compromising the Church’s integrity and authority.  They also blame bishops for not speaking out more forcefully against such groups… Informed Vatican sources tell Newsmax that Francis has been holding a series of brainstorming sessions with Vatican-based cardinals and other senior Vatican officials on how to reform the Curia.”

The homosexual lobby in the Vatican will not like any such reforms, and it will have to be seen what they will do to prevent the pope from going through with his intentions.

Aachen—the New Rome

The Local wrote on June 11:

“In 786 AD Charlemagne dreamed of creating a ‘new Rome’ when he ordered the construction of the Church of St. Mary and its Palatinate chapel in his main residence of Aachen. He thus laid the foundations for one of the most important buildings in Europe, making the city the focal point of his Roman empire in 800 AD.

“The cathedral is of universal importance in terms of art and cultural history. 30 German kings were crowned there over a period of 600 years (936-1531), and the cathedral treasury is one of the finest in Europe… Since the Middle Ages, Aachen Cathedral has been one of the leading pilgrimage sites in the Christian world because of its famous reliquaries – the four holy shrines.

“Charlemagne was buried in the palatinate chapel following his death in 814. His ancient sarcophagus can be found in the central drum of the Gothic chancel.”

Our recent series in our Q&As on the ten revivals of the Roman Empire sheds more light on Charlemagne and the city of Aachen.

Obama’s Newest “Change”: Now Morning-After Pills for Girls of Any Age

Newsmax wrote on June 10:

“The federal government on Monday told a judge it will reverse course and take steps to comply with his order to allow girls of any age to buy emergency contraception without prescriptions. But the decision isn’t likely to end President Barack Obama’s troubles with the issue, as anti-abortion advocates are certain to be unhappy with the reversal.

“The Department of Justice, in the latest development in a complex back-and-forth over access to the morning-after pill, notified U.S. District Judge Edward Korman it will submit a plan for compliance. If he approves it, the department will drop its appeal of his April ruling. Last week, the appeals court dealt the government a setback by saying it would immediately permit unrestricted sales of the two-pill version of the emergency contraception until the appeal was decided… The government had appealed the judge’s underlying April 5 ruling, which ordered emergency contraceptives… be made available without a prescription, over the counter and without point-of-sale or age restrictions.

“It asked the judge to suspend the effect of that ruling until the appeals court could decide the case. But the judge declined, saying the government’s decision to restrict sales of the morning-after pill was ‘politically motivated, scientifically unjustified and contrary to agency precedent.’ He also said there was no basis to deny the request to make the drugs widely available…

“It appears the Justice Department has decided it might lose with the appeals court and then would have to decide whether to appeal to the Supreme Court, The New York Times noted… Obama can expect to see a renewed political debate on the issues at a time when his administration already is beset with multiple scandals and controversies, the Times noted. The president, who has two young daughters, said last year he felt uncomfortable with the idea of them being able to obtain the drug without a prescription.

“The morning-after pill contains a higher dose of the female hormone progestin than is in regular birth control pills. Taking it within 72 hours of rape, condom failure or just forgetting regular contraception can cut the chances of pregnancy by up to 89 percent, but it works best within the first 24 hours. If a girl or woman already is pregnant, the pill, which prevents ovulation or fertilization of an egg, has no effect.”

Rather than teaching young girls (of any age) not to have sexual relationships outside (future) marriage, this now makes it easier for unmarried girls of any age to sin, thinking they can get away with it. Surely, this world has it upside down and backwards.

Obamacare and IRS Absurdities

The Washington Post wrote on June 12:

“It is reassuring that amid so much government dysfunction, the Internal Revenue Service has resolved the question of when and whether to tax tanning beds under the Affordable Care Act… Obamacare… calls for a 10 percent sales tax every time some pale face exposes himself to potentially harmful, cancer-causing rays, thus affecting everyone’s health-insurance premiums… But, wait, there’s an exception:  If such beds are offered as part of a gym or fitness center at no extra charge, no tax will be imposed…

“Despite the IRS’s impressive resolution of the tanning bed conundrum, one is struck by the unfortunate timing of its several displays of (a) incompetence and/or (b) ideologically driven harassment — just when the agency is charged with implementing and overseeing large swaths of Obamacare… [it]  includes at least 47 new tax provisions. Also, recall that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the ACA’s individual mandate (you must buy insurance or else) by categorizing the mandate as a tax.

“Which is to say, the IRS has some big work ahead… In addition to deciding which organizations qualify for tax-exempt status, as in the case of tea party and patriot organizations recently targeted for prolonged, special scrutiny,  our nation’s revenuers will also be redefining ‘religious.’ Determining whether a religious or charitable institution qualifies for tax-exempt status has always been part of the IRS’s dubious bailiwick, but Obamacare has upped the ante by requiring some religious affiliates to provide health care — such as contraception — that violates their conscience.

“Whatever one’s personal positions on reproductive matters, the historically higher standard of individual conscience has been scuttled by the Obama administration in deference to a universal health-care plan that leaves the definition of religious organization and, therefore, conscience to a bureaucracy of accountants… Those deemed not truly religious will be denied conscience protections, as has already occurred… freedom of conscience is fundamental to other freedoms we similarly take for granted. Obamacare largely dismisses such considerations…

“Come next January, as insurance rates climb and many businesses opt to pay government fines, sending their workers into government exchanges, all those people who believed, as promised, that they could keep the insurance they like will learn otherwise… At the center of these disappointments and revelations will be the nation’s new, expanded army of tax enforcers — this time examining not just your beliefs but also your medical records.”

Of course, there are still some… if not many… (uninformed) Americans who do not (want) to see the horrendously absurd problems with Obamacare.

Turkey in Deep Trouble

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 12:

“Tuesday’s crackdown has drawn criticism from the international community. ‘With its reaction to the protests so far, the Turkish government is sending the wrong signal — both within the country and to Europe,’ German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said in Berlin on Wednesday…

“The developments come at an awkward time for the European Union, which is considering steps later this month to move forward accession talks with Turkey…  Editorialists at leading German newspapers and across the political spectrum are roundly critical of Erdogan’s heavy-handed response to the protests, with a number ridiculing the Turkish leader as an ‘autocrat.’

“Center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“‘Ever since he became prime minister, an air of distrust has surrounded Ergodan. How democratic is this man? Initially, it was Erdogan’s religious roots that fueled this distrust, especially the religious character of his moderate Islamist AKP. Fears of an Islamization of Turkey dominated the first phase of a reign that has already lasted a decade. During this time, he used brutal means to subjugate the military stronghold of the generals to the primacy of politicians… Today, it is clear that Islam isn’t really Erdogan’s greatest temptation. It is power itself — a pure lust for power that has gone to his head. Erdogan has continuously expanded his power base. His party men now hold positions in the judiciary and in the business sector, and the media seem to try to outdo each other to glorify him. There doesn’t appear to be any opposition left within the apparatus. … Erdogan is playing a dangerous game. … At the most important moment of his time governing, he has decided to become a total autocrat.’ 

“Financial daily Handelsblatt addresses Erdogan’s claim that speculators are among those inciting the violence: ‘Whatever Erdogan’s motives may be, his wild attacks against investors, bankers and investors are a risky gamble… Erdogan is playing with fire on his path of confrontation. The prime minister threatens not only the political stability of his country, but also its economic future.’

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘Taksim Square will go down in history not as an environmental project, but as the scene of a clash of cultures that divides the Western-oriented secular Turkey from the Islamic-conservative Turkey. Here, tensions are being discharged that run right through Turkish history — before and especially after the founding of the Turkish state by Kemal Pasha Atatürk, a revolutionary act that shattered the country’s traditional forms and remains traumatic to this day.’”

Turkey will still play a major role in prophetic events. Their actions against the state of Israel will greatly anger the God of the Bible.

Israel’s Isolation

The Times of Israel wrote on June 11:

“In Jordan, perceived Israeli violations of the status quo of Jerusalem’s holy sites, over which Jordan maintains a custodianship, have angered Amman, and the parliament there recently voted to expel Israeli ambassador Daniel Nevo — a symbolic but resonant step… Israel’s relations with Jordan are now at a low point, [an unidentified] diplomat said, though not the lowest they’ve ever been. He was likely referring to the crisis that followed Israel’s botched assassination attempt of Hamas political leader Khaled Mashaal in Amman in September 1997, when King Hussein came close to severing ties… ‘Israel and Jordan are on a strategic collision course,’ said Assaf David, who teaches Jordanian politics at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University…

“The situation in Egypt is even gloomier. Israeli officials tacitly indicate that Israel has grudgingly agreed to forgo the pleasures of normalization with Egypt… Yitzhak Levanon, who was serving as Israel’s ambassador to Cairo when the mob stormed his embassy, told The Times of Israel last September that the gradual deterioration in relations began as early as Mubarak’s rise to power in 1981, but has accelerated since the election of President Mohammed Morsi last June.”

The Invasion of the “Crazy Ant”

On June 10, 2013, Mail On Line reported the following:

“A new and annoying species of ant is terrorizing the U.S. and chemicals that kill off other types of the insect are proving ineffective against it. The ‘crazy’ ant, named for the erratic trail it leaves as it makes its way across the country, originated in Argentina and Brazil.

“But since it was first spotted in Houston in 2002, it has spread to some 21 counties in Texas, 20 counties in Florida and a few locations in Mississippi and Louisiana…. University of Texas researcher and co-author of a study on the creatures Ed LeBrun said the omnivorous ants attack and kill other species as well as monopolizing food sources to the detriment of the entire ecosystem. He said everything from cattle to songbirds are at risk of the tiny ants, despite them being at the bottom of the food chain…

“The insects, bizarrely, are attracted to electrical wiring and components and in one year alone caused $146.5 million in damages in Texas… The devastation occurs when one ant discovers the transformer then gets electrocuted when it touches it, and ‘waves its abdomen in the air’ omitting a certain scent. The scent lures for ants to the scene and they too are electrocuted, again sending the scent into the air to attract their friends. Eventually, there are so many dead ants that the electric switches get stuck or the insulation fries and the system shuts down.”