Q&A: Palestinian bid for full membership at the UN

From BBC News

24 September 2011 Last updated at 02:40 ET

A recent rally against Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory on the anniversary of the 1967 war

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has formally submitted a request to join the United Nations as a full member state. He said the request entailed international recognition on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as a capital.

The idea is strongly opposed by Israel and its close ally, the United States.
Here is a guide to what is likely to happen and its significance.

Q. What are the Palestinians asking for?

The Palestinians, as represented by the Palestinian Authority, have long sought to establish an independent, sovereign state in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza - occupied by Israel since the 1967 Six Day War. However, two decades of on-and-off peace talks have failed to produce a deal. The latest round of negotiations broke down a year ago.

Late last year, Palestinian officials began pursuing a new diplomatic strategy: asking individual countries to recognise an independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. Now they want the UN to admit them as a full member state. Currently the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) only has observer entity status. This would have political implications and allow Palestinians to join UN agencies and become party to international treaties, such as the International Criminal Court, where they could take legal action to challenge the occupation of territory by Israel.

Q. What is the general process?

There are clear procedures at the UN which began its annual General Assembly General Debate in New York on 21 September.

In order for the Palestinians to be admitted as a member state, they would need the approval of the 15-member UN Security Council. Any Council recommendation for membership would then need a two-thirds majority vote in the 193-member General Assembly for final approval.

Palestinians believe over two-thirds of the General Assembly would recognise their statehood

 

At the start of the process, Mr Abbas submitted a request to the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on 23 September. Mr Ban has handed the application on to the Security Council.

The Council would need nine votes out of 15 and no veto from any of its permanent members to pass a decision. However, the US has made clear it will wield its veto power. The UK and France would almost certainly abstain because they cannot endorse UN membership of a state they have not recognised bilaterally.
If, as expected, the US vetoes the bid, the Palestinians have a second option, though this would not result in full membership. They can submit a resolution to the General Assembly and a vote could be held within 48 hours of submission, though it would probably be delayed until after the General Debate, ie late September or early October. This would give more time to negotiate a text that would have maximum support, from European countries in particular. Approval would require a simple majority of those present. There is no veto.

Q. What might the resolution say?

A resolution could ask for support for the Palestinians to be admitted to the UN as a "non-member observer state", an upgrade from the PLO's current status as observer. This status is held by the Vatican and has been held in the past by countries such as Switzerland.

Continue reading the main story

Palestinian UN membership bid

• Palestinians currently have permanent observer entity status at the UN
• They are represented by the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO)
• Officials now want an upgrade so a state of Palestine has full member status at the UN
• They seek recognition on 1967 borders - in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza
• Enhanced observer member status could be an interim option

This would improve the Palestinians' chances of joining UN agencies and the International Criminal Court, although the process would be neither automatic nor guaranteed. Among Palestinians, there are also questions over whether an observer state of Palestine could represent the diaspora community of refugees in the same way as the PLO does. 

Diplomats say that elements of a General Assembly resolution could also include acknowledgement of the number of countries that have recognised Palestinian statehood (currently 126 according to the Palestinian ambassador at the UN), and an appeal to the Security Council to accept the Palestinians as a full member. The resolution could also include parameters for future negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
The Palestinians can follow either the Security Council or General Assembly paths, or do both.

Q. What is the US position?

President Obama has told Mr Abbas that the US would use its UN Security Council veto to block a Palestinian bid. Mr Obama is facing a difficult battle for re-election next year and will be conscious of Israel's many friends in the US. The front runner for the Republican presidential nomination, Gov Rick Perry, has accused him of appeasing the Palestinians and betraying Israel. Mr Obama is also deeply aware how much of a blow to his prestige in the Middle East a veto would be. Palestinians and others contrast his support for Arab uprisings this year with his stance on the statehood bid.

Q. Is this symbolic or would it change facts on the ground?

Continue reading the main story

Who currently recognises Palestine?

	Yes	No
Source: UN, Foreign ministries
Permanent Security Council members (with veto)	China Russia	France UK US
Non-permanent Security Council members	Bosnia- Hercegovina Brazil Gabon India Nigeria Lebanon S. Africa	Colombia Germany Portugal
All General Assembly members	122	71

Getting UN recognition of Palestinian statehood on 1967 borders would have largely symbolic value, building on previous UN decisions. Already Security Council resolution 242, which followed the Six Day War, demanded the "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict". Although Israel disputes the precise meaning of this, there is wide international acceptance that the pre-1967 frontiers should form the basis of a peace settlement. 

The problem for the Palestinians is that Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejects these borders as a basis for negotiations. In May, when President Barack Obama called for border talks based broadly on 1967 lines, Mr Netanyahu described the idea as "unrealistic" and "indefensible". He says that new facts on the ground have been created since 1967: almost half a million Israelis live in more than 200 settlements and outposts in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Mutually agreed land swaps have been discussed in previous talks as a way to overcome this problem.

The Palestinians argue that admission of Palestine as a full member state at the UN would strengthen their hands in peace talks with Israel especially on the final status issues that divide them: the status of Jerusalem, the fate of the Jewish settlements, the precise location of the border, the right of return of Palestinian refugees, water and security. Israel says that any upgrade of the Palestinian status at the UN is a unilateral act that would pre-empt the final status talks.

Q. Why is this happening now?

The main reason is the impasse in peace talks. However, the Palestinians also argue that their UN plan fits with an agreed deadline. The Middle East Peace Quartet - the European Union, United States, Russia and UN - committed itself to the target of achieving a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict by September 2011. Last year, US President Barack Obama also expressed a hope that this deadline would be met. The Palestinian Authority Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad, says that Palestinians have succeeded in building up state institutions and are ready for statehood. The World Bank and IMF have said the same.
Recent Arab uprisings also appear to have energised Palestinian public opinion. Officials have urged civil society groups to hold peaceful demonstrations to show their backing for the UN bids.

Q. How is this different from previous declarations?

In 1988, the late Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, unilaterally declared a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. This won recognition from about 100 countries, mainly Arab, Communist and non-aligned states - several of them in Latin America. UN membership of Palestine as a sovereign state would have much greater impact as the UN is the overarching world body and a source of authority on international law.

Q. Who supports and opposes the UN option?

Recent polls suggest this course of action is supported by most ordinary Palestinians in the occupied territories. Mr Abbas's main Fatah faction backs it, although there is less enthusiasm from its political rival, Hamas, the Islamic group which governs Gaza.

After the recent Palestinian reconciliation deal, Hamas leaders accepted there was a broad consensus on the establishment of a Palestinian state within 1967 borders, though they formally still refuse to recognise Israel. They have described the appeal to the UN as carrying "great risks".
Within the wider region, the 22-member Arab League has given this approach its full backing.

The latest US push to bring the Israelis and Palestinians back to negotiations quickly stalled.

 

The main opposition comes from Israel. "Peace can only be achieved around the negotiating table. The Palestinian attempt to impose a settlement will not bring peace," Mr Netanyahu told a joint session of the US Congress in May. Israeli officials have warned that any UN bid could terminate the peace process. They also worry that possible Palestinian accession to the ICC could lead to the pursuit of war crimes charges at the Hague and say there is potential for rising tensions to trigger violence in the West Bank. Settlers there have received Israeli military training in preparation for this scenario.

The US has joined Israel in vociferously urging the Palestinians to drop their UN bid and return to negotiations, which were previously derailed by the settlement issue. In his recent major speech on the Middle East, President Obama dismissed the Palestinian push as "symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations". The White House sent two envoys to the region to try to persuade the Palestinians to change their minds. However, Palestinian officials say the Americans presented no alternative to going to the UN.
Only nine out of 27 European Union countries have formally recognised a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. Others are looking increasingly favourably on the idea. This is mainly because of their frustration with Mr Netanyahu's government in Israel-Palestinian peace talks and what they see as its recalcitrance over settlements. Britain, France and Germany are likely to support a General Assembly resolution only if it includes a clear roadmap back to the negotiating table.

In the coming days, both Palestinian and Israeli delegations will be on a diplomatic drive to win countries around to their point of view.

Biblical Implications of a Palestinian State

All eyes will be on the United Nations this week as the Palestinian Authority plans to pursue statehood recognition.

Stan Goodenough is a Christian journalist living in the Holy Land. He's creator and editor of the online news site, Jerusalem Newswire.

Goodenough spoke with CBN News about the biblical implications of a U.N. vote for a Palestinian state.

He says for decades there has been "ongoing and relentless pressure" on Israel to give up the land of Jerusalem.

Click play for all of Goodenough's comments to CBN News Mideast Bureau Chief Chris Mitchell.

A Response to End-Time Ecumenism

By DR. JOHN C. WHITCOMB

President, Whitcomb Ministries, Inc.

It is evident that leading neo-evangelicals believe that our main goal is to eliminate doctrinal distinctives and to emphasize unity among those claiming to be believers.

One of the basic ideas of today's philosophy of ecumenical evangelism is that love is more important than doctrine. Ecumenical evangelists say that doctrine divides, whereas love unifies.

What does the Bible say? Is it true that in the New Testament love is more important than doctrine, or truth?

In the so-called "love chapter," we are told: "Now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love [agape]" (1 Cor. 13:13). Some say – "That settles it: love is supreme!"

But when we examine this chapter more carefully, we discover that truth is also mentioned. In v.6 we are told that love "rejoices in the truth." In other words, faith, hope and love are virtues, but truth has an altogether different status. It is the frame of reference, the foundation, the atmosphere without which virtues such as love cannot exist at all.

Love "rejoices in the truth." Why? Because without truth to define, interpret, protect, guide and channel it, love can become a total disaster. We dare not place truth on the same level as virtues.

Virtues would shrivel up and die if it were not for truth. Here is an example from the natural world. We cannot imagine life on this planet without water. Water is absolutely essential for life – as long as it stays within proper channels, such as canals, aqueduct and pipes. But when water gets out of control, it is the second greatest catastrophe that can happen to this planet – second only to fire. On the one hand, it is an absolute blessing, but on the other hand it can be a total disaster. So it is with love.

God's Definition of Love

Love without divine definition (God's revealed channels within which it must flow) becomes the most horrible thing on earth. It can destroy human beings by the millions and can be reduced to satanic sentimentalism.

Love, as defined by God, is doing for a person that which is best for him in the light of eternity, no matter what the cost may be. Somehow, however, when it comes to world evangelism, many people have forgotten God's definitions and have fallen into sentimentalism.

Consider some key Scriptures which illustrate the distinction between love and truth: "Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, 'If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free'" (John 8:31, 32).

Ultimate freedom may only be achieved by total submission – unconditional surrender to truth. There is nothing here about love.

Love Obeys the Truth

There are many who speak glowingly of their love for Jesus Christ and for lost men. But in John 14, He stresses that obedience to truth is the best form of love: "If you love Me, keep My commandments. He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words" (John 14:15, 21, 23, 24).

This is what we call the acid test of love: Does a man obey the commandments of the Lord Jesus Christ? It makes no difference how much we talk about our love if we do not obey Christ. It is obedience that counts, not words. Obedience without love is theoretically possible, but love without obedience is, in practice, impossible. It is a satanic substitute for God's plan.

Love Teaches the Truth

John 21 gives an example of one who said much about his love for Jesus. But when it came to obedience, it was not there. When the pressure came, his resolution collapsed and he denied his Lord. After the resurrection of Jesus, our Lord confronted Peter lovingly, but in truth: "'Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?' He said to Him, 'Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.' He said to him, 'Feed My lambs… Tend My sheep… Feed My sheep'" (John 21:15-17).

How do we express love to the Lord Jesus according to the lesson of this confrontation? By feeding His sheep – teaching His people and training them in "the whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:27) – as He also commanded in the Great Commission: "Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:20).

Love Leaves Nothing Out

This leads to a consideration of Acts 20, where we find a good example of an apostle who obeyed the Great Commission. He said nothing about love in this final appeal to the Ephesians. But he exhibited supreme love toward them.

What did he do for them? Did he say, "I love you, I love you, I love you"? Acts 20:26, 27 gives the answer: "Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God."

The result was "that all who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks" (Acts 19:10). Paul based his evangelism on sound doctrinal instruction. That is God's key for world evangelism.

Here is another example. The words of Paul in Gal. 1:6 ("I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel") were blunt but necessary, as he says in Gal. 4:16, in order to "tell [them] the truth."

Our Lord tells us how we can achieve the perfect balance. Note the gifts God gave the true church, the body of Christ, for service and ministry in this age: "And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4:11).

Every one of these gifts in the form of a person involves a doctrinal person. They are all totally involved in truth. All were engaged in preaching, teaching and discipling in the light of revealed truth. There is no teaching whatsoever in the New Testament suggesting that love is more important than doctrine or truth.

Love is referred to in Eph. 4:15, where we read of "speaking the truth in love." Love is the motivation, manner and method of speaking truth. Love is the servant of truth. It makes it easier to receive, absorb and digest. But it must never be allowed to eclipse or set aside truth. God's truth can never change, but God's truth in the hands of human messengers is a very delicate and fragile thing.

Love Resists Poisons

There is no living system known to science that can survive without an intricate, elaborate and constantly-used system to purify itself from poisons. This is also true of God's church. It is impossible for any spiritual organization to survive unless it has a system to purify itself from poisonous influences.

We need to remember that we are in a highly-poisoned environment. We are immersed in satan's world. He has constant access to every servant of God through his fallen nature. Thus, how can the relative success of a Christian's ministry be evaluated apart from God's infallible, inerrant Word? Apart from it, who is to determine what success means?

Love Protects the Flock

Did the Lord Jesus encourage His disciples to listen sympathetically to other religious leaders of that time? His answer is given in Matt. 7:15: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves." Yet we are told today by neoevangelicals that we should both teach and study in liberal universities and colleges of theology.

But there is one thing worse than division, and that is peace with compromise. Truth is infinitely more important than the false unity of the world.

Love Corrects Error

We see this in that, for the sake of truth, even families will be divided by our Lord so that at least someone within that unit can perpetuate God's truth (cf. Luke 12:51-53). In Rom. 16:17 Paul states: "Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them." If we honor and love the Lord Jesus we will watch for anything or anyone that may destroy His truth. We will avoid such people.

When there is a rotten apple in a barrel, the bad one never gets better, but the good ones go rotten. It is the same with a good life or good doctrine, which can always be contaminated by a bad environment. A mere association of the good with the bad will never make the bad thing better. The good gets worse; the bad does not improve (cf. 1 Cor. 15:33).

Is it right for doctrinal purity to be blatantly submerged for the sake of worldly ecclesiastical unity? Surely this is a total denial of the Holy Spirit's Word through the Scriptures.

May God give us wisdom as we apply His truth in our fallen world – with love.

Copyright © 2011 by Whitcomb Ministries, Inc.

Scripture taken from the New King James Version®.

Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. Distributed by www.worldviewweekend.com

Biblical Christianity says: I didn't get anybody's permission, I just copied and pasted...agreeing wholeheartedly with it all.  I wish I had written it! 

Biblical Christianity re: The Thief on the Cross & Baptism

OLD TESTAMENT

Ex.33: 19.  And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.

Prov.16: 6.  By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the Lord men depart from evil.

Prov.28: 13.  He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.

NEW TESTAMENT

Matt.26: 27.  And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

 28.  For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

 29.  But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.  (Interesting side note: Jesus, whom people accused of being a “wine-bibber” because he drank wine, will drink wine again when he returns.  Apparently there isn’t wine in heaven.  Still wanna preach abstinence?)

Rom.3: 23.  For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

 24.  Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

 25.  Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Luke 23: 39.  And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

 40.  But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?

 41.  And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

 42.  And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.

* 43.  And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

 44.  And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

 45.  And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

 46.  And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

*This was spoken by the creator God of the Old Testament, while still in the Old Testament.  The New Testament doesn’t start until after Jesus dies.  As sovereign Jehovah in the flesh, Jesus forgave and offered mercy on whoever He wanted to.

The Book called the Bible, is a collection of 66 individual books.  The “Old Testament” set of collected books ends with Zechariah, and the “New  Testament “ set of collected writings begins with Matthew.  Because of the arrangement of the books, many think the NT salvation began with the birth of Jesus,  but we are saved by the gospel of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor.15:1-4)   The actual beginning of the biblical New Testament began on the day of Jesus’ resurrection.  The church was born according to the “New Testament” on the day of Pentecost.

The argument that baptism isn’t necessary because the thief on the cross was never baptized is invalid because he died during the time of the Old Testament. and was saved according to Old Testament mercy.

Heb.9: 15.  And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

 16.  For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

 17.  For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

 18.  Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

 19.  For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

 20.  Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

 21.  Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.

 22.  And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

 23.  It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

 24.  For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

 25.  Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

 26.  For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

 27.  And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

 28.  So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Since this is true, it needs to be understood that when Jesus talked with the Pharisees about their need to pay tithes…they were under the law, law keepers.  When Paul talked about men here collecting tithes…he was referring to the priesthood that existed until 70 AD, when Titus destroyed the temple.

Matt.23: 23.  Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Luke 18: 11.  The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

 12.  I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

 13.  And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
 14.  I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Heb.7: 5.  And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

 8.  And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

 9.  And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.  Read the next post.

Biblical Christianity regarding TITHING

Why the Tithe?

Deut. 18:

1.  The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel: they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and his inheritance.

 2.  Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren: the Lord is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them.

 3.  And this shall be the priest's due from the people, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep; and they shall give unto the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw.

 4.  The firstfruit also of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep, shalt thou give him.

 5.  For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy tribes, to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for ever.

Numbers 18:

5.  And ye shall keep the charge of the sanctuary, and the charge of the altar: that there be no wrath any more upon the children of Israel.

 6.  And I, behold, I have taken your brethren the Levites from among the children of Israel: to you they are given as a gift for the Lord, to do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation.

 7.  Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest's office for every thing of the altar, and within the vail; and ye shall serve: I have given your priest's office unto you as a service of gift: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

 8.  And the Lord spake unto Aaron, Behold, I also have given thee the charge of mine heave offerings of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel; unto thee have I given them by reason of the anointing, and to thy sons, by an ordinance for ever.

 9.  This shall be thine of the most holy things, reserved from the fire: every oblation of theirs, every meat offering of theirs, and every sin offering of theirs, and every trespass offering of theirs which they shall render unto me, shall be most holy for thee and for thy sons.

 10.  In the most holy place shalt thou eat it; every male shall eat it: it shall be holy unto thee.

 11.  And this is thine; the heave offering of their gift, with all the wave offerings of the children of Israel: I have given them unto thee, and to thy sons and to thy daughters with thee, by a statute for ever: every one that is clean in thy house shall eat of it.

 12.  All the best of the oil, and all the best of the wine, and of the wheat, the firstfruits of them which they shall offer unto the Lord, them have I given thee.

 13.  And whatsoever is first ripe in the land, which they shall bring unto the Lord, shall be thine; every one that is clean in thine house shall eat of it.

 14.  Every thing devoted in Israel shall be thine.

17.  But the firstling of a cow, or the firstling of a sheep, or the firstling of a goat, thou shalt not redeem; they are holy: thou shalt sprinkle their blood upon the altar, and shalt burn their fat for an offering made by fire, for a sweet savour unto the Lord.

 18.  And the flesh of them shall be thine, as the wave breast and as the right shoulder are thine.

 19.  All the heave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the Lord, have I given thee, and thy sons and thy daughters with thee, by a statute for ever: it is a covenant of salt for ever before the Lord unto thee and to thy seed with thee.

20.  And the Lord spake unto Aaron, Thou shalt have no inheritance in their land, neither shalt thou have any part among them: I am thy part and thine inheritance among the children of Israel.

 21.  And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle of the congregation.

31.  And ye shall eat it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation.

Was the tithe only for the priesthood?

Deut.26:

12.  When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year, which is the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat within thy gates, and be filled;

 13.  Then thou shalt say before the Lord thy God, I have brought away the hallowed things out of mine house, and also have given them unto the Levite, and unto the stranger, to the fatherless, and to the widow, according to all thy commandments which thou hast commanded me: I have not transgressed thy commandments, neither have I forgotten them.

After receiving the tithes from the Israelites, the priests in turn were required to also give ten percent of what was given to them.[*9] [Nu18:21-28] Every third year the tithe was to be reserved as a festival tithe and everything brought for the Levites was shared so strangers, orphans, widows and the poor could come and eat and be content [*10][De 14:27-29; 15:1-7; 26:12-13, etc] In fact, the one festival and related tithes was provided for the people to go and spend the tithe on purchasing anything they lusted after or desired, by commandment of God.[*11] [Deut 14:22-27] http://www.seekgod.ca/tithing.htm)

Rev.1: 6.  And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.  (Not clergy only)

How Did the OT Law of the Tithe get into the NT Church?

(all of the information for this section  is from: http://www.seekgod.ca/tithing.htm)

The Catholic church in fact, viewed the replacement of the Levite priests with sacred ministers. The New Advent article on Tithes, stated that:

"...In the Christian Church, as those who serve the altar should live by the altar (1 Cor., ix, 13), provision of some kind had necessarily to be made for the sacred ministers. In the beginning this was supplied by the spontaneous offerings of the faithful. In the course of time, however, as the Church expanded and various institutions arose, it became necessary to make laws which would insure the proper and permanent support of the clergy. The payment of tithes was adopted from the Old Law, and early writers speak of it as a divine ordinance and an obligation of conscience. The earliest positive legislation on the subject seems to be contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the cannons of the Council of Macon in 585. In course of time, we find the payment of tithes made obligatory by ecclesiastical enactments in all the countries of christendom. The Church looked on this payment as "of divine law, since tithes were instituted not by man but by the Lord Himself ...In English statute law proper, however, the first mention of tithes is to be found in the Statute of Westminister of 1285. ...There are many exempted from the paying of tithes: spiritual corporations, the owners of uncultivated lands, those who have acquired lawful prescription, or heave obtained a legal renunciation, or received a privilege from the pope. At first, the tithe was payable to the bishop, but later the right passed by common law to parish priests...." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14741b.htm [bolding added]

Please note that according to Catholic sources based on historical documentation, the saints including any leadership were supported solely by freewill giving, not the tithe, from the time of the Apostles and for about 500 years, until the Catholic church reinstituted it. They in fact became the appointed priesthood and in many places that were controlled by the Catholic church it became a state or provincial law that tithing was required. In fact in Quebec Canada it remains a provincial law that the tithe is required.

The questions become, that since the tithe was instituted under the Mosaic Law which was given to the Hebrew people, is it to be kept, while the other Laws are not? Are the Hebraic Roots leaders the "new" Levite priesthood, or is that authority and job aligned to "Christian pastors", which some Christians claim also replaces the Levite priesthood? 

If the Law of Moses is to be kept for tithing, then the rest of the Law must also be kept, according to the Word of God. That includes the food Laws, clean/unclean, circumcision, stoning rebellious children and stoning those caught in adultery, which includes far too many in leadership and outside of leadership. 

Galatians 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. 
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

New Testament on Tithing

Matt.23: 23.  Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.  (LAW)

Luke 11:42 42.  But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. (LAW-same instance)

Luke 18: 10.  Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

 11.  The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

 12.  I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.  (LAW)

Hebrews 7: 1.  For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

 2.  To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

 3.  Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

 4.  Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

 5.  And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

 6.  But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

 7.  And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.

 8.  And here men that die receive tithes; (under the LAW) but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

This scripture is the favorite of many who teach the NT church is to pay tithes…not because of the law, but because Abraham paid to Melchisedec a tenth of the spoils of war one time….BEFORE IT BECAME LAW!  That’s the argument…tithes predates the law and so supersedes the law.   Not because he was instructed to by God , but because he chose to.

Animal sacrifice predates the law too, does that supersede the law?  Nobody that teaches a required tithe teaches a continued animal sacrifice.  But, it predates the law!  Why chose one over the other?  Is it perhaps because the preacher or organization lives off of the tithe?  The Levites had no other means of support.  They obtained no inheritance with Israel.   Do preachers today claim to have no inheritance with the rest of the church?  Hardly.

Other Used NT Scriptures to support Tithing.

1 Cor. 9: 4.  Have we not power to eat and to drink?

 5.  Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

 6.  Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?

 7.  Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?

 8.  Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?

 9.  For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

 10.  Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

 11.  If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

 12.  If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.

 13.  Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?

 14.  Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

But they rarely teach the rest of this line of thought…

 15.  But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.

 16.  For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!

 17.  For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.

 18.  What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

So, did Paul mention the law of the tithe? No.  Did Paul teach that ministers are not to support themselves? No.  Did Paul teach that ministers are not to be condemned for living off of charity.  Yes.

Acts 18: 3.  And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers.  (Here we see Paul supported himself at this time as a tentmaker.)

Paul goes on to say…

Acts 20: 33.  I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel.

 34.  Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me.

 35.  I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.

Acts 28: 30.  And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,  (apparently Paul wasn’t supplied a parsonage, which many today think they somehow deserve)

Another popular verse to support the tithe…

Gal.6: 6.  Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

 (They teach this means to pay tithes)

Communicate:Strong's Exhaustive Concordance

Romanized  koinoneo

Pronounced koy-no-neh'-o from GSN2844; to share with others (objectively or subjectively): KJV--communicate, distribute, be partaker.   No mention of money or tithes or any amount. 

Philippians 4: 14.  Notwithstanding ye have well done, that ye did communicate with my affliction.

 15.  Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only.  (Did that mean that Paul taught them to tithe and they rebelled?  It gives no indication of that rendering.  It does seem to indicate a purely voluntary giving.)

And finally,…

1 Timothy 5: 17.  Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

 18.  For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.  (No mention of tithes or a requirement to financially support the ministry.)

I believe if you love the Lord, love the truth, and love the ministry you will most likely be moved with a desire to support the efforts of the gospel.  I do not believe that believing this makes it acceptable criteria for teaching what the NT does not teach, that the tithe is a requirement for membership in the body, or any body of believers.  I don't believe it is a legitimate prohibition against voting as a member in good standing.  Having the baptism of the holy spirit is the only requirement for being in "good standing".  

1 Cor.12: 13.  For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

How To Be Saved & How to Live Saved

These buttons don't work, but to get to the real website that displays this selection, just click here.http://answeredhere.com/Download.html
I don't endorse the teaching found here on tithing, but otherwise agree with  the doctrine. Fred.

"The Mark of the Beast"?

Newest form of "chip" 


(NaturalNews) Being microchipped is now being spun as a method of protecting the health of hospital patients. To help mask the practice of this bodily invasion with a trendy, high-tech appearance, microchipping sensors are being referred to as "electronic tattoos" that can attach to human skin and stretch and move without breaking.


Supposedly the comparisons of this hair-thin electronic patch-like chip to an electronic tattoo are being made because of how it adheres to the skin like a temporary tattoo using only water.


The small chip is less than 50 micrometers thick, which is thinner in diameter than a human hair. It is being marketed as a "safe" and easy way to temporarily monitor the heart and brain in patients while replacing bulky medical equipment currently being used in hospitals.


This device uses micro-electronics technology called an epidermal electronic system (EES) and is said to be a development that will "transform" medical sensing technology, computer gaming and even spy operations, according to a study published last week.


The hair-thin chip was developed by an international team of researchers from the United States, China and Singapore and is described in the Journal of Science.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033427_electronic_tattoos_microchipped.html#ixzz1WGQWIx89

For other videos regarding this, go here.http://yedies.blogspot.com/2010/11/microchipping-humans-by-2017.html

Update:http://worldviewweekend.com/news/article/will-electronic-tattoos-replace-internet-passwords-and-all-other-forms-identification

Ahmadinejad: Palestinian statehood only 'first step'

This hot off the Jerusalem Post
By REUTERS
08/26/2011 14:03

Iranian president urges Palestinians not to settle for a 2-state solution but "to strive for complete return of their land."

    TEHRAN - The creation of a universally-recognized Palestinian state would be just a first step towards wiping out Israel, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Friday.

He spoke weeks ahead of a UN General Assembly in New York where the Arab League plans to seek full UN membership for a Palestinian state.

RELATED:
Ahmadinejad vows 'decisive response' to Israeli attack
Ahmadinejad: Israel is greatest threat in Mideast

Ahmadinejad, restating a position expressed soon after taking office in 2005 that Israel was a "tumor" to be wiped off the map, urged Palestinians not to settle for a two-state solution that is backed by [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud] Abbas but to strive for a complete return of what they consider their land.

"Recognizing the Palestinian state is not the last goal. It is only one step forward towards liberating the whole of Palestine," Ahmadinejad told worshippers at Friday prayers on international Qods Day -- an annual show of support for the Palestinian cause.

"The Zionist regime is a center of microbes, a cancer cell and if it exists in one iota of Palestine it will mobilize again and hurt everyone."

"It is not enough for them to have a weak, powerless state in a very small piece of Palestine. They should unite to establish a state but the ultimate goal is the liberation of the whole of Palestine," he said.

"I urge the Palestinians never to forget this ideal. Forgetting this ideal is equal to committing suicide. It would be giving an opportunity to an enemy which is on the verge of collapse and disappearance."

1 Thessalonians 5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them

from http://english.aljazeera.net/
Libya: freedom is in the air 
towards the end of the original post we read:
The three countries should experiment with open borders and the free movement of people, goods, and ideas to show that the dawn of Arab democracies will not have any semblance to the era of Gaddafi, Mubarak and Ben Ali. Mr Al-Arabi has a golden opportunity to make this a reality. Just as Arab youth are steadfast in the struggle for freedom and democracy, their elder statesmen should meet them halfway in helping reconstruct a better Arab world.

Tunis, Cairo and now Tripoli: the call of freedom
Green Square, Tripoli, impatiently waits to join Tahrir Square and Habib Bourguiba Boulevard in an epic call for freedom across Arab geography. Tomorrow it will be the turn of Marjah Square and Yusuf Al-Azm, Syria, as the circle gets wider, and the dance for freedom louder, drowning out and silencing the guns of brutality for good.
Larbi Sadiki is a Senior Lecturer in Middle East Politics at the University of Exeter.
to read the entire piece, go here

Dumping Gaddafi won't change the ire of Libya for Israel. It may signal a worsening of events!

19 hours 59 min ago - Libya from http://blogs.aljazeera.net/liveblog/Gaza

Hamas welcomes the revolution freeing Tripoli and congratulates Libyans on the great victory they have achieved, Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Hamas, said in a short statement to the press on Monday.
Hamas wishes that this victory is a turning point in the history of the Libyan towards freedom and prosperity, Abu Zuhri added.

1 Thessalonians 5
 1.  But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
 2.  For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
 3.  For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
 4.  But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
 5.  Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
 6.  Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. 


Ezekiel 38
 1.  And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
 2.  Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,
 3.  And say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:
 4.  And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:
 5.  Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:
 6.  Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.
 7.  Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.
 8.  After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
 9.  Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.
 10.  Thus saith the Lord God; It shall also come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought:
 11.  And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates,


14.  Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say unto Gog, Thus saith the Lord God; In that day when My people of Israel dwelleth safely, shalt thou not know it?
 15.  And thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts, thou, and many people with thee, all of them riding upon horses, a great company, and a mighty army:
 16.  And thou shalt come up against My people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in thee, O Gog, before their eyes.
 17.  Thus saith the Lord God; Art thou he of whom I have spoken in old time by my servants the prophets of Israel, which prophesied in those days many years that I would bring thee against them?
 18.  And it shall come to pass at the same time when Gog shall come against the land of Israel, saith the Lord God, that my fury shall come up in my face.
 19.  For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken, surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel;
 20.  So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.
 21.  And I will call for a sword against him throughout all my mountains, saith the Lord God: every man's sword shall be against his brother.
 22.  And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone.(volcanic activity)
 23.  Thus will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I am the Lord.

For better understanding of the timing of the rapture and how these things will unfold, go here


Anybody notice an increase in volcanic activity lately? go here


God is still on the throne!  Don't despair for the obvious world events, what is not obvious to the world, we are to be observing!

Gaddafi is dead- pictures, timeline, etc: go here

Biometrics: Pushing Us Further Into A Cashless Society

Keeping the faith

Slated for completion in 2014, the Tri-Faith Initiative in Omaha, Nebraska is an experiment in religious coexistence between Jews, Muslims and Christians.

By The Forward


Deep in America’s heartland, a Reform synagogue, a nondenominational mosque and an Episcopalian church are all putting down roots on a 37-acre tract of land that once belonged to a Jewish country club. A body of water called Hell Creek runs through the development, over which the faith groups plan to build “Heaven’s Bridge.”

Fantastical as it sounds, this interfaith campus is currently in the works in Omaha, Neb. Slated for completion in 2014, the Tri-Faith Initiative is an experiment in religious coexistence in a city better known as a hub of corn-fed conservatism.
 

	Jon Meyers (left) and John Waldbaum (right) of Temple Israel talk with Azhar Kalim of Omaha’s new Islamic center.
	Photo by: Justin Limoges Photography / The Forward

“The only other place where such a thing exists is Jerusalem,” said Dr. Syed Mohiuddin, chairman of the Creighton University School of Medicine. Mohiuddin’s organization, the American Institute of Islamic Studies and Culture, is building a mosque on the campus. “Jerusalem is so important to these three faiths. We are sort of reproducing that model.”

If the experiment works, the city of Omaha — with a metropolitan area population of about 900,000, including 5,500 Jews, 6,000 Muslims and 4,500 Episcopalians — will become a beacon of cooperation in a world of interreligious strife. But before that can happen, the three groups still need to navigate fears, stereotypes and bureaucratic hang-ups.
 

China Calls for Global “Supervision” of Dollar, New World Currency

Written by Alex Newman
Tuesday, 09 August 2011 11:00

The communist Chinese dictatorship blasted the U.S. government for endangering its massive dollar holdings, calling for America to rein in its out-of-control debt by slashing military spending and welfare. The regime also demanded international supervision of the dollar and even suggested the creation of a new global reserve currency.

The attack came in the form of an editorial from Xinhua News Agency, one of the dictatorship’s official propaganda arms, following the downgrade of American debt last week by Standard & Poor's (S&P). It immediately made headlines around the world.

“China, the largest creditor of the world's sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States to address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China's dollar assets,” read the commentary. “To cure its addiction to debts, the United States has to reestablish the common sense principle that one should live within its means.”

The stinging Xinhua editorial also proposed “substantial cuts” to America’s “gigantic military expenditure and bloated social welfare costs.” Otherwise, it warned of more credit downgrades and increased financial turmoil to come.

Most alarming to observers, however, was the direct attack against the dollar.

“International supervision over the issue of U.S. dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country,” the regime said. “All Americans, both beltway politicians and those on Main Street, have to do some serious soul-searching to bring their country back from a potential financial abyss.”

But news of the S&P downgrade led to turmoil in China’s economy as well. Chinese stocks, for example, dropped sharply on Monday. The nation’s controlled currency, however, was allowed to rise significantly against the dollar before dropping back on Tuesday.

Chinese people also expressed outrage in recent days that the communist regime had invested so much of its foreign reserves in American debt. Furious bloggers cited by the New York Times complained that the dictatorship was forcing people to live in poverty so it could lend money to out-of-control American politicians.

China is the U.S. government’s largest single creditor, with over $1 trillion in treasuries as well as more than a trillion in other dollar-denominated assets. The U.S. government is officially above $14 trillion in debt, but the real figure including unfunded liabilities is estimated in the tens of trillions — possibly even hundreds of trillions. State and local governments are facing hundreds of trillions in debts and unfunded liabilities, too.

The Chinese regime’s editorial touted the fact that its own credit-rating agency, Dagong Global, downgraded U.S. Treasuries well before S&P. It also lambasted Western commentators for their arrogant response when the Chinese agency announced the downgrade, saying the move by S&P had proven that it was simply telling investors “the ugly truth.”

Dagong boss Guan Jianzhong took the opportunity to go on the attack as well. In comments e-mailed to CNBC, he said the dollar was being “gradually discarded by the world” and that the “process will be irreversible.”

“I think the most pressing issue facing the U.S. at the moment is to reflect on the crisis which happened in relation with the debt ceiling," Guan told the financial news agency. "They should get a clear understanding that the continuous decline of the debt service capability will inevitably result in the outbreak of a sovereign debt crisis.”

Speculation about the regime’s potential diversification from dollars has also been making headlines for days. "China will be forced to consider other investments for its reserves. U.S. Treasuries aren't as safe anymore,” director Li Jie of Central University of Finance and Economics’ Reserves Research Institute told Reuters. “There is a class of assets out there that are more risky than AAA, but less risky than AA+. China didn't consider these investments before, but now it would be forced to do so."

Another Chinese economist, Ding Yifan of a state-controlled “think tank,” told Reuters that the chances of even more money-printing by the Federal Reserve were rising. As investors move away from dollars assets, he warned, it could leave the American central bank no choice but to buy up U.S. Treasuries, which would “definitely add more uncertainties to the global economy.”

But China’s dictatorship is hardly the only entity talking about getting out of dollars and treasuries. PIMCO, the world’s largest bond fund, dumped its treasuries earlier this year.

"In addition to an existing nearly US$10 trillion of outstanding Treasury Debt, the U.S. has a near-unfathomable US$66 trillion of future liabilities," noted PIMCO boss Bill Gross in his August investment outlook, urging investors to consider how the American government would be able to service its obligations. "One rather clever way for the US to pay its bills to foreign creditors is to pay them in depreciated dollars."

Indeed, former Federal Reserve boss Alan Greenspan recently boasted about the fact that the U.S. government would always be able to pay its bills because the privately owned central bank can just print more money. But rather than calming investors, the statement appears to have made matters worse.

Some analysts even interpreted all of the recent financial turmoil as a challenge to the global fiat-currency system itself. As the dollar continues plunging even against other currencies that are themselves rapidly depreciating, gold — which more than a few investors believe is due for a short-term correction soon — is still surging to record highs. Confusion and panic are growing as investors scramble for safe-haven assets.

The International Monetary Fund recently predicted that China’s economy would surpass America’s by 2016. Despite all of the Chinese regime’s boasting and lecturing, however, countless economists believe that its economy will soon experience a spectacular crash of its own.

With financial chaos reigning from America and Europe to Japan and China, some analysts are forecasting another major economic crisis on the horizon — potentially worse than the most recent recession. Stocks and currencies are still dropping as debt crises around the world dominate the headlines.

Where the global economy might go from here is uncertain. But with the calls for a new world currency growing louder as panic continues to spread, there will likely be a bumpy ride ahead for world markets.

U.S. debt crisis sidelines an emergency attack on Iran

 America's national debt crisis and Pentagon budget cuts are pushing to the margins emergency plans for an operation against Iran.

By Amir Oren an opinion piece found in Haaretz.com

• Published 02:45 09.08.11
• Latest update 02:45 09.08.11

The American trigger finger is itchy. Itchy, but flinching - the wallet is emptier than the magazine. Iran is provoking. It is pressing ahead with its nuclearization and upping the rate of its assaults on U.S. forces in Iraq, as well as their lethality.

To this end, Iran is enlisting the help of local Iraqi organizations that receive equipment, training and guidance from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds force; and it is using them to strike at the rearguard of the American forces, which are supposed to be leaving Iraq by the end of the year.

Iran wants to depict the planned U.S. withdrawal as a frightened escape under fire (in the same vein as the withdrawal of American forces from Lebanon following the terror attack on the Marines headquarters in Beirut in 1983 ); it wants to push pro-Iranian political elements into putting pressure on the Iraqi government not to ask the Americans to extend their stay in the country - a move that would require legislation to grant immunity to the foreign forces. Once forces do leave, it wants to make sure Tehranian influence is supreme.
During a recent Congressional hearing, Gen. Martin Dempsey, who will take over as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the end of September, warned that the nuclearization and indirect assaults on the U.S. forces in southern Iraq could lead Tehran to err gravely in underestimating America's determination to mount a strike against Iran.

But Dempsey also advocated caution. He stressed that he preferred the path of sanctions and diplomacy and would advise the president to launch a preemptive attack only in the event of a clear and present threat - to a high degree of certainty - of an Iranian strike against vital U.S. national interests.
Dempsey's statements appeared to indicate that based on the current pace of Iran's nuclearization - without any weapons development or the transferal of arms to a terror organization - such conditions have yet to be met. A preemptive strike, as far as Dempsey is concerned, must be focused, must serve a broad political initiative involving America's allies, and must rely on a broad plan for the period following the operation.
Under the current economic and political circumstances, the Obama administration will not be in any hurry to do Israel a favor and pull the nuclear chestnuts out the Iranian fire by means of a preemptive strike against Tehran's nuclear facilities, material storage locations and missile sites.
America's national debt crisis and Pentagon budget cuts are pushing to the margins emergency plans for an operation against Iran.

Ehud Barak got this message during his meetings in Washington last week with senior administration officials: While discussing the goings on in the region, their minds were clearly more focused on more worrying and pressing matters at home.

When it comes to a choice between nuclear and deficit, deterrence and austerity, economics wins out. Security can wait.

Obama's hands are tied by the economic and leadership crises. He will not embark on a head-on collision course with Iran, aside from acute responses to the killing of his soldiers.

Election season looms; his personal approval rating has been compromised. With the list of tasks ahead topped by Al-Qaida, Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran will have to fight for a place between North Korea, Libya (where NATO appears to be treading water and getting nowhere ), Yemen and even Somalia.

According to the current head of the Joint Chiefs, Adm. Michael Mullen, the U.S. national debt is the greatest security risk facing the country. This is an allusion to the direct blow to America's economic strength and the political implications of Obama's compromise with Congress that seeks to find the missing dollars in the Pentagon budget.

If indeed there is a certain degree of American deterrence against Iran, it is only enough to prevent Tehran from using nuclear arms, which it doesn't yet have. Activity in Iraq and the gradual progression to nuclearization is not being deterred.

On the eve of his retirement last week, Mullen's deputy, General James Cartwright, complained that the United States does not have non-nuclear arms that can be readily and reliably deployed within 24 hours. Conventional warheads are now being developed for the inter-continental ballistic missiles that fly fast and do not penetrate the airspace of countries whose consent may be required. Until then, for testing, they are using concrete warheads.

The scenario: Mass fatalities among U.S. soldiers in Iraq as a result of an attack by pro-Iranian forces leads to the launch of a concrete missile into the Iranian desert, as a final warning. But it won't be a precursor to the realization of the hopes of Barak and Netanyahu - just a meager and cheap substitute, in the spirit of the times.

To go to the original post, click the title of this posting.