U.S. Elections–Super Tuesday
Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 6:
“The race for the Democratic nomination remains open after Super Tuesday as Hillary Clinton won the California primary and most states on the wealthy East Coast, but Barack Obama won more states overall. John McCain clinched delegate-rich primaries to strengthen his lead in the Republican race…
“Obama won 12 states and Clinton took eight. Clinton’s wins included the key prizes of California and New York on the biggest day of presidential voting in the United States ahead of November’s election…
“Republican contender John McCain won nine states, including key victories in California and big Northeastern states to take a strong lead in the Republican race. But Republican rivals Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee kept their hopes alive and vowed to fight on. Romney won six states and Huckabee won five…”
However, The Associated Press reported on February 7: “Mitt Romney will suspend his presidential campaign for the Republican nomination…, effectively ceding the nomination to John McCain.”
In a related article, The Associated Press reported on February 7: “Democrat Barack Obama raised $7.2 million in less than 48 hours post Super Tuesday and rival Hillary Rodham Clinton collected $4 million, giving him a financial edge that’s caused consternation within a Clinton campaign… Clinton acknowledged Wednesday that she loaned her campaign $5 million late last month as Obama was outraising and outspending her heading into Feb. 5 Super Tuesday contests.”
German Analysis of the U.S. Democratic Election
Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 6 about the Democratic election:
“Barack Obama has powerful allies… But Barack Obama also has a powerful opponent he has so far been unable to beat: the middle ground of American society. The majority of that middle ground is still refusing to follow his message of change and hope. Converted into power, the most important currency of politics, that means that the senator from Illinois is strong — but not strong enough — to topple Hillary Clinton. She’s ahead in the fight for the Democratic nomination, but her lead is narrowing…
“Try as he might, Obama is failing so far to win over ordinary people. It’s hard to whip up enthusiasm among the down-to-earth voters of the center ground, people who are too preoccupied with the everyday problems of life to get swept up by Obama’s grand pledge to turn over a new leaf in the history book. His message doesn’t have much impact among them… These people aren’t excited, they’re worried. They’re not content, but they have no desire for revolution either. You don’t come across such people in the pages of American newspapers, but the real world is full of them. THEY’RE SKEPTICAL ABOUT POLITICS…
“Obama is inspiring millions of Americans, but there are also millions who find him too young, too smart, too smooth, too unscarred. He’s hardly lived his life and already wants to take home the big prize. The modern part of the country may celebrate him as a pop star, but the majority is still listening to country music.
“Harvard professors might support him, but in Massachusetts, the state surrounding the Harvard campus, Clinton won on Super Tuesday… The rich and famous climbed on stage for Obama in California… But [Clinton] managed to win over the ordinary people… This is no campaign of left against right. This is a HISTORIC ELECTION in which the center of society is trying to stand its ground. The center is shrinking, in Europe as well as in America.”
German Analysis of the U.S. Republican Election
Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 6 about the Republican election:
“It’s been an unbelievable comeback. A year ago, you could have pretty much written the obituary for John McCain’s 2008 campaign. And now, one day after Super Tuesday, he’s firmly at the helm of the Republican ship. His battle, though, hasn’t just been with Democrats. Some of his most vicious enemies are part of his own party…
“John McCain’s victory was surprisingly clear. His opponent Mitt Romney won a handful of the smaller states, including Massachusetts, where he used to be the governor. Mike Huckabee, the politically gifted Baptist preacher from Arkansas, performed surprisingly well and won in four Southern states, which makes Romney’s successes look even feebler…
“Right-wing commentators and hosts of the big radio talk shows have joined forces to create a veritable anti-McCain brigade. For weeks now, right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh has agitated against McCain on his program. The closer the Vietnam hero gets to the nomination, the meaner the attacks become. McCain ‘has stabbed his party in the back so many times,’ Limbaugh rages. ‘I can’t even say how often.’ The radio host says that he would prefer to have his party lose the election over having it be led by McCain. ‘If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit … rather than a Republican causing the debacle.’
“James Dobson, the head of an arch-conservative Christian group that espouses family values, warned recently on another radio talk show that: ‘I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative and, in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are.’ These right-wing radio programs are very popular. Each week, Limbaugh alone reaches over 13.5 million listeners.
“But it’s clear that the voters have not listened to the drums beating loudly against McCain. And, instead of transforming Mitt Romney into a kingmaker, it now appears that the influence of the right-wing opinion-makers is smaller than had previously been believed… As Barack Obama’s success also shows, Americans are LOOKING FOR A LEADER and not for someone who, like Romney, adapts his beliefs to whichever way the wind blows…
“More than anything else… this vote was one about CHARACTER. The voters’ beliefs are often at odds with John McCain’s, but they put a high value on his character… This explains what is actually a rather paradoxical situation. America’s tanking economy has become one of the most important election issues, but it is not one of McCain’s strong suits. Nevertheless, he is still winning because his character outshines everything… else. The same holds true when it comes to the war in Iraq. McCain is one of the war’s unshakeable advocates, and he only has differences with President George W. Bush when it comes to the question of which strategies are the correct ones. Nevertheless, the former Marine pilot is also currently [attracting] the votes of Republicans opposed to the war.”
How the World Views the U.S. Presidential Race
The Associated Press reported on February 1:
“America’s extraordinary presidential campaign has captivated politicians and ordinary people around the globe. With SO MUCH AT STAKE in the race for the White House, the world is watching with an intensity that hasn’t been seen since the Clinton era began in 1992…
“‘[Non-Americans] feel there’s a real chance to work with the U.S.,’ said Julianne Smith, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. ‘America’s image in the world is really on the line.’ Non-Americans, she said, are looking for someone who can ‘restore faith in the United States.’
“Obama, perhaps not surprisingly, is generating most of the buzz abroad. ‘Der schwarze Kennedy,’ some German admirers are calling him: ‘The black JFK.’ ‘He is young, charming and sexy!’ the mass-circulation newspaper Bild gushed. ‘Obama is now the ideal projection screen for hopes and expectations in Europe’ and the U.S. alike, said Christian Hacke, a professor at the University of Bonn.
“… in Europe, where some see Obama as untested, support for Clinton is widespread, and nostalgia for her husband’s charisma runs deep. When scandals rocked the Clinton White House, most Europeans responded with a Gallic shrug. ‘Nobody in Europe ever took Bill Clinton’s problems in office seriously,’ said Patrick Dunleavy, a political scientist at the London School of Economics. ‘Nobody could ever understand why Americans were so upset. Bill Clinton was always a fantastic presence in Europe.’
“The Republican presidential hopefuls, by contrast, are not highly regarded in Europe: Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are seen as too religious, and the 71-year-old McCain as too old. To Britons, history’s most popular postwar presidents were Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton because of their perceived levelheadedness and intelligence, said Dunleavy. The most despised? President Bush and Ronald Reagan ‘because they were seen as erratic and unpredictable,’ he said.
“Yet Democrats don’t rule the entire world of public opinion. Saad al-Hadithi, a political analyst in Baghdad, contends the Republican candidates are more committed to Iraq and have a better approach. ‘They show more support to the political progress and to combating terrorist groups in Iraq,’ he said. ‘The Democrats, especially Hillary Clinton, are calling for the withdrawal of U.S. forces, but they are not offering an alternative. Such a withdrawal while the Iraqi security forces are still weak will lead to disastrous results.’
“Russia’s leaders also consider Republicans more pragmatic, said Nkolai Petrov, an analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center. But the Kremlin, Petrov said, would likely have ‘serious concerns’ if McCain wins the Republican nomination because of the Arizona senator’s harsh and persistent criticism of Vladimir Putin’s autocratic government…
“Africans naturally gravitate toward Obama, whose father was from Kenya. Israelis, though, seem to prefer Hillary Clinton… because of her experience and the backing Bill Clinton gave to the Jewish state during his two terms as president.
“Amid the raging debate over immigration, Mexicans arguably have more at stake in the U.S. election than any other nation. But President Felipe Calderon doesn’t think very highly of any of the candidates. ‘The only theme,’ he declared in December, ‘is to compete to see who can be the most swaggering, macho and anti-Mexican… People all around the world are pretty worried,’ he said. ‘They want a president who will restore a kind of U.S. legitimacy in the world.'”
Federal Interest Rate Cuts–A Double-Edged Sword?
Der Spiegel Online reported on January 31:
“In a drastic step, the Fed has lowered its key interest rate to 3.0 percent, the second large cut in two weeks…. Interest rate cuts are a double-edged sword. On the one hand, cheap money is a boon for the economy and stock market: If banks have access to cheap money, then theoretically companies should also be able to take out loans at better conditions…
“But on the other hand, interest rate cuts — especially extraordinary rate cuts announced between scheduled meetings, like last week’s — also raise fears. When the US Federal Reserve takes drastic measures, the inevitable suspicion arises that they know more than the rest of the world: Do they have data which shows that the economy is cooling faster than is feared?…
“More significant than this diffuse anxiety are allegations by many analysts that the Fed’s attempted CURE IS WORSE THAN THE DISEASE. With his policy of holding interest rates low, ex-Fed chief Alan Greenspan is accused by some of being partly responsible for laying the foundations for the subprime real estate crisis…
“Greenspan lowered interest rates 11 times in 2001 — from 6.5 percent to finally just 1.75 percent. The following year, rates even fell to 1 percent… By making these cuts, Greenspan saved the US economy… from disaster. At the same time, he made money so cheap that Americans who would never have got credit before were suddenly being given loans — and to an extent which exceeded any reasonable limits…”
America’s Terrible Financial Situation
The Associated Press reported on February 4:
“The record $3.1 trillion budget proposed by President Bush on Monday would produce… a huge jump in the deficit to $410 billion this year and $407 billion in 2009, the White House says, just shy of the record $413 billion set four years ago.
“But even those figures are optimistic since they depend on rosy economic forecasts and leave out the full costs of the war in Iraq. The White House predicts the economy will grow at a 2.7 percent clip this year, far higher than congressional and private economists expect, and the administration’s $70 billion figure for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is simply a placeholder until the next president takes office.
“Bush’s lame-duck budget plan is likely to be ignored by Congress, which is controlled by Democrats and already looking ahead to November elections. His long-term projections are mostly academic since he’s leaving office next January… Bush is leaving his successor an ENORMOUS FISCAL DILEMMA…
“‘There was an assumption that in the short term… the budget would start to correct and that we could balance in the short term,’ said Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, top Republican on the Budget Committee. ‘But with the stimulus package and with the continuing war costs, that’s not going to happen. In fact it’s going to get very serious when you’re hitting $400 billion deficits.’… Some of Bush’s proposals are hopelessly unrealistic…
“Seven years ago, Bush took over a government predicted to generate $5.6 trillion in surpluses over 10 years. Those estimates were flawed, but there’s no question he’s leaving his successor a budget in far weaker fiscal shape than he inherited. For instance, when he took office the total federal debt held by the public was $3.3 trillion… Now, debt held by the public – including foreign governments – is expected to reach $5.4 trillion this year and $5.9 trillion in 2009… Some $2.3 trillion is foreign held.”
America’s terrible financial state of affairs should not be surprising to Bible scholars. For more information, read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”
Euros in New York
Reuters reported on February 6:
“In the latest example that the U.S. dollar just ain’t what it used to be, some shops in New York City have begun accepting euros and other foreign currency as payment for merchandise… The increasingly weak U.S. dollar, once considered the king among currencies, has brought waves of European tourists to New York with money to burn and looking to take advantage of hugely favorable exchange rates.”
Al Qaeda Preparing New Strike Against America
The Washington Times wrote on February 6:
“Senior al Qaeda leaders have diverted operatives from Iraq across the globe and are increasing preparations to strike the United States, senior intelligence officials told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence yesterday… The officials added that al Qaeda is recruiting Westerners to terror camps in Pakistan… [and that] al Qaeda had plans to specifically target the White House…
“The most active al Qaeda affiliate in northwestern Africa is the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, which intelligence officials said poses a ‘significant threat to U.S. and European interests in the region.’ Further, al Qaeda ‘has been able to retain a safe haven in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) that provides the organization many of the advantages it once derived from its base across the border in Afghanistan’ making it a training hub for terrorists seeking to attack the United States and its allies… the Pakistani military has not been able to disrupt al Qaeda operations in the tribal border region… the U.S. military is prohibited by Pakistan from pursuing al Qaeda fighters or Taliban that flee Afghanistan across the border after conducting attacks.”
Tennessee Governor on Tornadoes: “The Wrath of God…”
The New York Times wrote on February 7:
“Residents in five Southern states rose Wednesday to widespread clusters of destruction caused by an unusually ferocious winter tornado system. At least 54 people were killed and scores more were injured… Arkansas and Tennessee were the hardest hit, with Arkansas reporting 13 dead and Tennessee 30…
“‘The wrath of God is the only way I can describe it,’ Gov. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee said after surveying the damage by helicopter. ‘I’m used to seeing roofs off houses; houses blown over. These houses were down to their foundations, stripped clean.’ The governor said 1,000 houses in Tennessee were destroyed.”
Afghanistan–New Crisis Between USA and Germany
Der Spiegel Online reported on February 1:
“On Friday morning, Germany Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung rejected a call by United States Secretary of Defense Robert Gates for Berlin to send combat troops to southern Afghanistan, where a Taliban-led insurgency has destabilized efforts to establish a democracy in the country.
“This week, German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung received a letter from his American counterpart Robert Gates making it clear that the US expects more from the Germans…
“The letter’s negative tone put German politicians on the defensive on Friday… a spokesman for Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government, Ulrich Wilhelm, said there were currently ‘no thoughts’ about making a change to the existing mandate for the Bundeswehr’s deployment in Afghanistan — a move that would require parliamentary approval in the Bundestag — and that the chancellor had rejected Gates’ demand. In all of her talks, Wilhelm said, the chancellor has repeatedly made clear that the scope of the current mandate is ‘not up for discussion’ — and that remains the government’s ‘firm position.’
“Earlier Friday, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who also serves as vice chancellor representing the center-left Social Democrats in Merkel’s government, rejected Gates’ call for the deployment of Bundeswehr soldiers in hard-fought southern Afghanistan.”
Der Stern commented on February 1:
“The American demand to send German troops to southern Afghanistan has hit Berlin like a bomb. Now there is a dark cloud between Berlin and Washington… The experiment Afghanistan is about to fail… Gates wants to change the U.S. strategy… Most Afghans condemn the brutal military actions of the West which have cost the lives of many civilians… But the Germans are not in a position to give advice… Those who want to talk must participate in the action…”
The Telegraph reported on February 4:
“Nato has faced one of its greatest tests since the Cold War after America accused Germany of failing to fight the Taliban… Behind this disagreement between the two allies, disclosed in a ‘stern’ exchange of letters between their defence ministers, lies a crucial dispute over ‘burden sharing’ which threatens the credibility of the alliance… All of Nato’s 26 member states agreed to mount the mission in Afghanistan and 42,000 troops have been deployed in the country.
“However, only four Nato members – Britain, America, Canada and Holland – have sent large numbers of soldiers to southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban insurgency is strongest. These countries, notably Britain with 7,800 troops, are conducting the lion’s share of the campaign against the Taliban. Germany has 3,200 troops in Afghanistan – but they are deployed in the relative safety of the north…
“Stephen Harper, the Canadian prime minister, has told Gordon Brown that his country will withdraw the 2,500 troops it has in the southern province of Kandahar unless other Nato countries contribute 1,000 troops. If this happens, the Dutch government would come under pressure to do the same, leaving America and Britain to fight the Taliban with little help.”
Der Spiegel Online reported on February 6:
“The German government on Wednesday rejected accusations from NATO allies that it wasn’t bearing its fair share of the burden in Afghanistan and reiterated its refusal of a US request for German troops to be deployed from the relatively peaceful north to help fight a Taliban insurgency in the south. German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung said Germany was already the third-biggest troop provider in Afghanistan and that redeploying troops away from the north would be a ‘decisive mistake.’ He did however repeat Germany’s vague pledge to provide its NATO allies with military assistance when required, and announced that Germany will be sending a unit of combat troops to northern Afghanistan to replace the 250-strong Norwegian Quick Reaction Force being withdrawn.”
New President of Europe… With Real Powers?
The Guardian wrote on February 2:
“Tony Blair has been holding discussions with some of his oldest allies on how he could mount a campaign later this year to become full-time president of the EU council, the prestigious new job characterised as ‘president of Europe’. Blair, currently the Middle East envoy for the US, Russia, EU and the UN, has told friends he has made no final decision, but is increasingly willing to put himself forward for the job if it comes WITH REAL POWERS TO INTERVENE IN DEFENCE AND TRADE AFFAIRS… Apart from Blair, two other candidates most often mentioned are the former Austrian chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel, promoted by Germany, and the current Luxembourg prime minister, Jean-Claude Juncker.”
Tony Blair–To Be or Not to Be…?
Reuters reported on February 5:
“Tony Blair is unlikely to be the first president of the European Union, EU diplomats and politicians say… Insiders say Blair has little chance because Britain is too disconnected from the EU mainstream, and he remains too divisive a figure because of his enthusiastic support for the U.S.-led war in Iraq which split Europe in 2003… Britain has not joined the single currency or the Schengen zone of passport-free travel, and… Blair had negotiated elaborate opt-outs from the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and police and judicial cooperation… Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the former French president, joined the ‘Stop Blair’ chorus, underlining Britain’s absence from the central European economic project of the last decade — the euro.
“Some EU officials question what Blair has achieved in seven months in the Middle East… Blair might garner support from north European states such as the Netherlands, Sweden and Poland that favour a free-market, looser form of European integration, but opposition in countries such as Germany, France, Italy and Spain would outweigh that.
“[Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude] Juncker, [chairman of finance ministers of the 15-nation euro zone,] whose Eurogroup term expires conveniently at the end of this year, made clear his own interest in the role in a French newspaper interview on Monday PROVIDED IT HAD REAL POWER. ‘It will all depend on the precise job description. I have no intention of just cutting ribbons like a president of the French Fourth Republic,’ he told business daily Les Echos…”
Many European politicians begin to express more forcefully that the new President of Europe must have REAL powers. Ultimately, he will–but this won’t be good news for the world. Please read our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”
Adoption of the EU Lisbon Treaty
The EUObserver reported on February 4 about developments in France:
“French MPs have voted in favour of amending their country’s constitution to allow adoption of the EU Lisbon Treaty… Following the constitutional amendment, the National Assembly and Senate will hold separate votes on the adoption of the treaty on Thursday. Although the Socialists would have preferred a referendum on the treaty, they intend to vote Yes to the treaty itself…
“The Lisbon Treaty replaces the Constitutional Treaty voted down in referendums in France and the Netherlands in 2005… Last week, a poll by French left-wing newspaper Liberation said that 59% of French voters favoured a referendum on the treaty and 33% approved of its adoption by parliament.”
The EUObserver added on February 5 about events in the UK:
“Four UK Labour MPs are facing disciplinary action for taking part in a campaign for a referendum on the EU’s Lisbon treaty against the Labour-led government’s wishes… The move comes ahead of unofficial referendums on the EU’s new document… The mock popular votes are aimed at putting pressure on the country’s prime minister, Gordon Brown, who has opted for parliamentary ratification of the EU treaty.
“The Labour party had previously promised to organise a referendum on the original European Constitution in its pre-election manifesto, but it now argues that the current Lisbon treaty – which contains most of the constitution’s innovations – is a different document.”
The article continued:
“Meanwhile, Romania became the fourth country to ratify the EU treaty… The green light from Bucharest means a continuation of the new EU member states’ lead in the ratification marathon, with Hungary, Slovenia and Malta preceding the Black Sea country with the move. ‘This is another important step towards our objective of a new treaty in force by 1 January 2009,’ European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso said in a statement. ‘I hope that other member states will quickly follow the lead given by the four countries that have now approved the Treaty,’ he added.”
The march towards European unification is unstoppable. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”
European Peacekeeping Force in Chad–What’s REALLY Behind It?
Der Spiegel Online wrote on January 29:
“After months of delay, the European Union finally agreed Monday to deploy a 3,700-strong peacekeeping force to Chad and the Central Africa Republic to help humanitarian aid workers and refugees seeking to escape the chaos in the neighboring Darfur region of Sudan… French soldiers will make up more than half of the force. Thirteen other countries — though not Germany — have also pledged to contribute troops.
“The rebellion raging in Darfur since 2003 has led to an estimated 200,000 deaths and 2.5 million refugees, many of whom have fled into neighboring countries in the hope of finding safety. But Chad itself is currently facing its own turmoil…
“German commentators seem skeptical… believing that France’s historical ties to its former colony and its interests in the region make its INTENTIONS MORE THAN JUST HUMANITARIAN.
“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘The European Union has needed three more months than promised to get soldiers on the march in order to help the refugees from Darfur and Chad. The Europeans have had to listen to a lot of criticism on account of this delay. Some have complained that it is scandalous that the EU is incapable of quickly mustering a few thousand men and a handful of helicopters. Others accuse it of really lacking the political will to provide assistance in a lost corner of Africa… Many countries, among them Germany, have held back — but not out of callousness. They do not see the deployment as being useful toward solving the Darfur crisis…’
“The left-leaning Berliner Zeitung also expressed skepticism about the stated aims of the mission: ‘The Chad mission is not what it seems. What, then, is it? France, the former colonial power in Chad, is contributing the largest contingent. France protects the rebel, dictator and Gadhafi-sidekick [Chad’s President] Idriss Deby, both of whom launched a coordinated invasion of Darfur at the end of the ’80s. France keeps its military staging point for Africa in Chad along with the continent’s longest airstrip. Now [French] President Sarkozy has used massive pressure to ‘Europeanize’ the deployment to Chad, though the more precise word is ‘camouflage.’ So, why the big charade? Strategically speaking, Chad is ONE OF THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT COUNTRIES IN AFRICA, next to Djibouti and Eritrea, both of which are NEAR THE SEA PASSAGE to the Gulf. Chad’s neighbor Niger has vast amounts of uranium, and there are vast amounts of oil in three other neighbors — Nigeria, Libya and Sudan…'”
Europe Ueber Alles?
Recently, there have been several stories surrounding the Serbia/Kosovo quagmire, but interestingly, the perceived solution seems to evolve around membership for Serbia in the EU. Piece by piece, Europe is rising as a formidable force to extinguish historical differences that have created the patchwork of nations on this continent.
Reuters reported on February 5:
“Serbia’s prime minister on Tuesday denounced plans to sign an accord with the European Union as a trick to lure it into rubber-stamping an independent Kosovo, piling pressure on a creaking ruling coalition. The statement by Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica exposed a deep rift with pro-Western President Boris Tadic over Serbia’s EU accession drive and could threaten plans to sign a deal that would put Serbia on the road to membership.
“Tadic won re-election on Sunday on a pledge of pursuing EU membership no matter what happens with Serbia’s breakaway province where the 90-percent Albanian majority is poised to declare independence this month, with the West’s backing…
“‘After the referendum confirmation of our country’s European orientation, not a single party or politician can prevent what our citizens want and that is that we sign this agreement and join the EU as soon as possible,’ said deputy PM Bozidar Djelic.”
Europe Concerned About Berlusconi’s Possible Comeback
Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 6:
“Attempts to form an interim government in Italy have failed and President Giorgio Napolitano has been forced to dissolve parliament and call fresh elections for April… Observers outside Italy may be looking on in disbelief but it appears that media magnate [and former two-time Prime Minister] Silvio Berlusconi is about to be given another crack at power in Rome… [Prime Minister Romano] Prodi’s government fell victim to the inherent weakness of the system, after a tiny Catholic party withdrew its support, provoking the collapse of the coalition on Jan. 24. His administration had been consistently undermined by bickering between the nine ruling parties, particularly the Catholic and Communist groups.
“There is a widespread assumption that Berlusconi will win the forthcoming snap elections… media commentators are already predicting more instability ahead… The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung is pessimistic about the role Berlusconi is likely to play in Europe. ‘With him it will be almost impossible to reliably agree on a European position, for example if the Iran crisis were to escalate. Then Berlusconi will decide as he always does: on the basis of short-term opportunistic considerations. He won’t strengthen Italy in this way — but he is sure to weaken Europe.'”
Terror Is Back in Israel
Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 5:
“Terrorists struck again in Israel on Monday in the first suicide bombing the country has seen in a year. It was an attack that politicians and military officers say they have seen coming for days. The bloody deed, which claimed the lives of one Israeli woman and the two suicide bombers, came as no surprise for many Israelis. Now that the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt is open, it has become easier for terrorists to reach Israel from Gaza. Security experts have been warning that terrorists in Gaza would see this as a new opportunity — and would take advantage of it. This week, they were proven right…
“The nonchalance with which Israel has accepted the gaps in its border fence is astonishing. At the international airport in Tel Aviv, Israeli border agents question arriving passengers in painstaking detail before issuing entry visas, and the West Bank is being sealed off with a security fence. But at its border with Egypt, Israel tolerates ‘that anyone can get in who wants to get in,’ says Israeli Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit. Israel’s roughly 300-kilometer (186-mile) desert border with Egypt is not secured and in many places not even marked by a fence. Israeli intelligence is aware of at least 30 locations where it is possible to cross the border between the two countries without having to pass through a border control. Many of Israel’s military observation posts are either permanently or often unmanned. This lack of security is attributable to successive administrations’ unwillingness to pay the necessary costs of a fence that would run upwards of €500 million ($734 million), as Sheetrit estimates…
“The situation is more explosive than ever… In recent days, Palestinians have taken advantage of the open border to bring weapons and ammunition into the Gaza Strip, including armor-piercing grenades, rockets and anti-aircraft missiles… dozens of Palestinian activists trained in Iranian camps have also returned to Gaza in recent days… Israeli hardliners are calling for a large-scale military campaign against the Gaza Strip so that Israel can put a stop to the terrorists once and for all. But… there is no evidence that military force is even capable of solving the problem.”
Israel to Build Egypt Border Fence
On February 6, 2008, The Jerusalem Post reported the following:
“Israel will soon begin construction of a security fence along certain parts of the Israeli-Egyptian border, it was decided Wednesday in a meeting between the prime minister, defense minister, foreign minister and security officials. The fence will be built in northern Nitzana and southern Eilat, regions considered to be particularly vulnerable to infiltration. Monitoring of other areas will be reinforced by additional ground forces and aerial observation measures.
“The need for a fence along the open border with Egypt was highlighted recently by the breaching of the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, which allowed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to move freely between the two territories, as well as – Israel believes – enabling many terrorists to sneak into Sinai. The construction of the fence is expected to LAST SEVERAL YEARS and may force across-the-board budget cuts of an estimated NIS 1 billion.”
Human Embryo With Three “Parents”
On February 5, 2008, BBC News reported the following shocking and outrageous example of so-called “artificial creation” and subsequent destruction or murder of human life, under the guise of “scientific research and advancement”:
“Scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in IVF treatment by creating a human embryo with three separate parents. The Newcastle University team believe the technique could help to eradicate a whole class of hereditary diseases, including some forms of epilepsy. The embryos have been created using DNA from a man and two women in lab tests… Within hours of their creation, the nucleus, containing DNA from the mother and father, was removed from the embryo, and implanted into a donor egg whose DNA had been largely removed… The embryos then began to develop normally, but were DESTROYED [within] six days…
“… the Newcastle work has attracted opposition. Josephine Quintavalle, of the pro-life group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said it was ‘risky, dangerous’ and a step towards ‘designer babies.’ ‘It is human beings they are experimenting with,’ she said. ‘We should not be messing around with the building blocks of life.’ Mrs Quintavalle said embryo research in the US using DNA from one man and two women was discontinued because of the ‘huge abnormalities’ in some cases.”
