Hamas Calls for Martyrdom Outside the Temple War (Revelation 11)


Terror network: Joint Hamas-Hezbollah radio station targets Israeli Arabs

April 17, 2019

The calls for terrorist attacks are aired 24 hours a day and are directed at Israeli Arabs.

By World Israel News Staff

Giving new meaning to the term ‘terror network,’ Hezbollah is now airing Hamas incitement using an antenna in Lebanon, according to Israel’s Channel 12.

A Hamas station in Judea and Samaria, used to enlist “martyrs” to carry out attacks against Israelis, was discovered by the Israeli Shin Bet security agency a couple of months ago, according to the report.  The station has since been closed down.

However, soon after, says Channel 12, an antenna was positioned at a Lebanese army position. Hezbollah began using it to air the Hamas broadcasts.

Hezbollah is a terrorist organization; it is also a member of the Lebanese government.

The calls for terrorist attacks are aired 24 hours a day and are directed at Israeli Arabs.

The Hamas station is called “Al-Aqsa,” which is the name of a mosque built on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and the name of the Hamas military wing.

The Israeli military has described  Al-Aqsa as airing “sermons, political speeches, and children’s shows which inspire youth to become suicide bombers when they grow up.”

The Hamas messages now airing via the Hezbollah antenna are heard on 101.6 FM, right next to the Israeli “Radio North” station on 101.5 which has many Israeli Arab listeners.

Hezbollah antenna near the Lebanese border with Israel (Screenshot/Channel 12)

“Rise up and prepare. Follow in the footsteps of the fortunate martyrs,” says a broadcaster on the joint Hamas-Hezbollah radio station.

In an interview with Channel 12, a former senior Shin Bet member says that the antenna planted by Hezbollah is located near the Lebanese border with Israel. The transmitters are so strong, he says, that the broadcasts can be heard hundreds of kilometers away in the Greater Tel Aviv area.

The broadcasts can also be heard in prisons located in the north and center of Israel.

Channel 12 says it asked the Defense Ministry to explain why Israel, with its cyber capabilities, cannot shut down the Al-Aqsa broadcasts coming through the transmitters in Lebanon.

The Israeli news channel says it was directed to the Israel Communications Ministry, which responded that, in fact, the antenna is only about three kilometers from the Israeli border and that an official complaint has been filed with the International Telecommunication Union, which has been relayed to Lebanese authorities.

Al-Aqsa RadioHamasHezbollahLebanon

History Says Expect The Sixth Seal In New York (Revelation 6:12)

If the past is any indication, New York can be hit by an earthquake, claims John Armbruster, a seismologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

Based on historical precedent, Armbruster says the New York City metro area is susceptible to an earthquake of at least a magnitude of 5.0 once a century.

According to the New York Daily News, Lynn Skyes, lead author of a recent study by seismologists at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory adds that a magnitude-6 quake hits the area about every 670 years, and magnitude-7 every 3,400 years.

A 5.2-magnitude quake shook New York City in 1737 and another of the same severity hit in 1884.

Tremors were felt from Maine to Virginia.

There are several fault lines in the metro area, including one along Manhattan’s 125th St. – which may have generated two small tremors in 1981 and may have been the source of the major 1737 earthquake, says Armbruster.

There’s another fault line on Dyckman St. and one in Dobbs Ferry in nearby Westchester County.

“The problem here comes from many subtle faults,” explained Skyes after the study was published.

He adds: “We now see there is earthquake activity on them. Each one is small, but when you add them up, they are probably more dangerous than we thought.”

“Considering population density and the condition of the region’s infrastructure and building stock, it is clear that even a moderate earthquake would have considerable consequences in terms of public safety and economic impact,” says the New York City Area Consortium for Earthquake Loss Mitigation on its website.

Armbruster says a 5.0-magnitude earthquake today likely would result in casualties and hundreds of millions of dollars in damage.

“I would expect some people to be killed,” he notes.

The scope and scale of damage would multiply exponentially with each additional tick on the Richter scale. (ANI)

Another Trumpian Moment in Iraq

Donald Trump‘s troop visit infuriates Iraqi lawmakers: ‘The American occupation of Iraq is over‘

PCN Staff Writer

By Philip Issa – Associated Press – Thursday, December 27, 2018

— President ’s surprise trip to may have quieted criticism at home that he had yet to visit troops in a combat zone, but it has infuriated Iraqi politicians who on Thursday demanded the withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Arrogant” and an “a violation of national sovereignty” were but a few examples of the disapproval emanating from following ’s meeting Wednesday with U.S. servicemen and women at the al-Asad Airbase.

Trips by U.S. presidents to conflict zones are typically shrouded in secrecy and subject to strict security measures, and ’s was no exception. Few in or elsewhere knew the U.S. president was in the country until minutes before he left.

But this trip came as curbing foreign influence in Iraqi affairs has become a hot-button political issue, and ’s perceived presidential faux-pas was failing to meet with the prime minister in a break with diplomatic custom for any visiting head of state.

On the ground for only about three hours, the American president told the men and women with the U.S. military that Islamic State forces have been vanquished, and he defended his decision against all advice to withdraw U.S. troops from neighboring Syria, He declared: “We’re no longer the suckers, folks.”

The abruptness of his visit left lawmakers in smarting and drawing unfavorable comparisons to the occupation of after the 2003 invasion.

“ needs to know his limits. The American occupation of is over,” said Sabah al-Saidi, the head of one of two main blocs in ’s parliament.

, he said, had slipped into , “as though is a state of the United States.”

While didn’t meet with any officials, he spoke with Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi by phone after a “difference in points of view” over arrangements led to a face-to-face encounter between the two leaders getting scrapped, according to the prime minister’s office.

The visit could have unintended consequences for American policy, with officials from both sides of ’s political divide calling for a vote in Parliament to expel U.S. forces from the country.

The president, who kept to the U.S. air base approximately 100 kilometers (60 miles) west of , said he had no plans to withdraw the 5,200 troops in the country. He said Ain al-Asad could be used for U.S. air strikes inside Syria.

The suggestion ran counter to the current sentiment of Iraqi politics, which favors claiming sovereignty over foreign and domestic policy and staying above the fray in regional conflicts.

“ should not be a platform for the Americans to settle their accounts with either the Russians or the Iranians in the region,” said Hakim al-Zamili, a senior lawmaker in al-Saidi’s Islah bloc in Parliament.

U.S. troops are stationed in as part of the coalition against the Islamic State group. American forces withdrew in 2011 after invading in 2003 but returned in 2014 at the invitation of the Iraqi government to help fight the jihadist group. ’s visit was the first by a U.S. president since Barack Obama met with then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki at a U.S. base outside in 2009.

Still, after defeating IS militants in their last urban bastions last year, Iraqi politicians and militia leaders are speaking out against the continued presence of U.S. forces on Iraqi soil.

Supporters of the populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr won big in national elections in May, campaigning on a platform to curb U.S. and rival Iranian involvement in Iraqi affairs. Al-Sadr’s lawmakers now form the core of the Islah bloc, which is headed by al-Saidi in Parliament.

The rival Binaa bloc, commanded by politicians and militia leaders close to Iran, also does not favor the U.S.

Qais Khazali, the head of the Iran-backed Asaib Ahl al-Haq militia that fought key battles against IS in northern , promised on Twitter that Parliament would vote to expel U.S. forces from , or the militias would force them out by “other means.”

Khazali was jailed by British and U.S. forces from 2007 to 2010 for managing sections of the Shia insurgency against the occupation during those years.

’s visit would be a “great moral boost to the political parties, armed factions, and others who oppose the American presence in ,” Iraqi political analyst Ziad al-Arar said.

Still, the U.S. and developed considerable military and intelligence ties in the war against IS, and they continue to pay off in operations against militants gone into hiding.

Earlier in the month, Iraqi forces called in an airstrike by U.S.-coalition forces to destroy a tunnel used by IS militants in the Atshanah mountains in north . Four militants were killed, according to the coalition.

A hasty departure of U.S. forces would jeopardize such arrangements, said Iraqi analyst Hamza Mustafa.

Relations between the U.S. and also extend beyond military ties. U.S. companies have considerable interests in ’s petrochemical industry, and American diplomats are often brokers between ’s fractious political elite.

’s Sunni politicians have been largely quiet about the presidential visit, reflecting the ties they have cultivated with the U.S. to counterbalance the might of the country’s Iran-backed and predominantly-Shiite militias.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Abdul-Mahdi accepted ’s invitation to the White House during their call, though the Prime Minister’s office has so far refused to confirm that.

• Associated Press reporters Ahmed Sami and Ali Jabar contributed.

How Babylon the Great and Israel are Preparing for War With Iran

ANALYSIS: How Israel and the US are Preparing for War With Iran

You probably didn’t know this but normalizing relations with Israel is against the Quran and Islamic faith.

At least that’s what Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said to participants in a Quran knowledge competition in Tehran on Monday.

Never mind that the Quran, in chapter 5:21, explicitly says that the Land of Israel has been given to the Jewish people by God as a perpetual covenant, this is what Khamenei really thinks and he’s acting upon it too.

As I wrote at the end of March, Iran is actively preparing for war with Israel and recently held a massive drill named Bayt al-Maqdis” or Beit HaMaqdish in Hebrew.

Bayt al-Maqdis (or Temple in English) was the name the early Muslims gave to Jerusalem.

The Islamic Republic, furthermore, is slowly but steadily turning Syria and Iraq into proxy-states based on the Lebanon model and is feverishly working to improve its missile arsenal.

In Syria, Iran is continuing its entrenchment as was proven by the Israeli air force (IAF) last weekend.

On Saturday morning, IAF warplanes again used Lebanese airspace to bomb an Iranian missile plant in Masyaf which is located in the Hama Province.

The Israeli jets launched brand-new supersonic Rampage missiles at the plant in Masyaf and destroyed not only a number of buildings but also dozens of Iranian ‘Earthquake 2’ missiles which are able to carry a warhead of half a ton.

The Iranians also succeeded to lease a port in the Latakia Province in Syria which is now being used by the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps to ship unknown cargo from Iran to Syria via the Mediterranean Sea.

Israeli military experts think it will be a matter of time before Iran will station a part of its naval fleet in the port and will use the vessels, among them cruise-missile equipped submarines, in a future war with Israel.

You might ask what the Israeli army is doing except for launching airstrikes in Syria to counter the growing Iranian threat to the Jewish state.

Israel is aware that a future confrontation with Iran and its terrorist proxies will most likely be a missile war which will be fought on several fronts.

After all, Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani last year boasted that Iran is a superpower when it comes to asymmetric warfare and warned the United States not to start a war with the Islamic Republic.

The Iranian army and the IRGC are no match for the IDF or the US army in a conventional war and this is the reason Iran is working to improve its long-range missile arsenal while building facilities for mid-range and short-range missiles in both Lebanon and Syria.

Iran’s Shihab-3 has a reach of roughly 1200 kilometers and the recently tested Khorramshar missile is able to hit targets across Israel from Iran since it has a range of more than 1,800 kilometers.

The prospect of a multi-front missile war with hundreds of projectiles pounding Israel every day has led to intense cooperation between the Israeli military and the US army while the Trump Administration is trying to strangle the Islamist regime in Tehran by means of a heavy sanction regime.

The US Administration last week designated the IRGC – a heavily armed force of 150,000 men- a terrorist organization a move which is considered a declaration of war by Iran.

The decision by President Trump has led to increasing tensions and Iranian threats to the US military in both Iraq and Syria while Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu made clear he was behind the move against the IRGC.

“Thank you for answering another one of my important requests, which serves the interests of our country and the countries of the region,” Netanyahu wrote on his Twitter account.

Trump’s decision came into effect on Monday and has already led to the shut-down of the wildly popular Instagram account of Quds Force commander Soleimani.

Another indication that Israel is working in tandem with the US to contain Iran came in the form of a unique missile defense drill which was held in Israel recently.

The Americans brought their Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system to Israel where it was integrated in Israel’s multi-layered missile defense systems such as the Arrow a mid-altitude missile interceptor.

The 230-servicemen strong THAAD force landed on the Nevatim airbase in southern Israel and got short notice to rapidly deploy the system in Israel Maj.Gen. Andrew Rohling the commander of the US army in Germany revealed.

“The ability to rapidly surge combat-ready forces into and across the theater is critical to projecting forces at a moment’s notice to support our allies and partners across the theater,” Rohling said.

Aside from the THAAD system, the US military will also use the Aegis system on navy vessels to help Israel protecting itself in the anticipated missile war.

Yair Ramati, former director of the Israeli Missile Defense Organization (IMDO) says that the Aegis missile interceptor will play an important role in the defense of Israel during such a war.

The two allies will conduct another missile defense drill coming summer when the Israeli military will send a contingent servicemen to Alaska to test the new version of the Arrow 3 which has been developed by Israel Aerospace Industries and Boeing in the U.S.

The Arrow 3 is able to score a direct hit at a target which flies at supersonic speed because it has highly precise sensors and an extremely agile interceptor.

The joint drills between the Israeli army and the US military will result in better preparation for “real-life challenges” according to Brig Gen. Ran Kochav of Israel’s missile defense unit.

Another indication the US is seriously taking in account that the current tensions with Iran will boil over and will cause a new armed conflict in the Middle East is the deployment of American F-35 stealth fighter planes to the United Arab Emirates.

An unspecified number of American F-35’s landed at the al-Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates on Monday.

Too Late to Save US From Bolton

To Avoid an Iraq-Style Disaster Under Trump, Bolton Must Go

President Donald Trump’s instincts on a number of key foreign-policy issues over the past two years have not only been right, but also represent sorely needed policy course-corrections. Yet since his inauguration, some of the president’s closest advisors have consistently steered him away from his better ideas, leaving us to languish in losing wars—and unnecessarily risking getting us into new ones.

For Trump to escape the molasses pit of failed wars, he must replace some key advisors with capable people who are aligned with his views and can implement his vision. The first of those ineffectual advisors who needs to go is John Bolton.

Bolton has long served in government and the Washington think-tank establishment, but his foreign-policy prescriptions have been outright disastrous for the United States.

Most famously, Bolton was one of the leading advocates for invading Iraq in 2003. Yet even after the invasion was proven to be a disastrous move (remember, there were no Al Qaeda forces in Iraq, and ISIS didn’t exist, prior to the invasion Bolton promoted), he still defends this mistake to this day, calling it “fully justified.”

Evidence of his unrepentant views abound. He has called for the bombing of Iran and directly advocated “regime change” operations (as he has or does seek in North Korea, Libya, Syria, Cuba, and Venezuela). As Trump routinely reiterated during the 2016 campaign, the invasion of Iraq is a sixteen-year-and-counting disaster—resulting in 4,568 American troops killed and more than 32,000 wounded—repeating the mistake in Iran would be orders of magnitude worse, as Iran is bigger than Iraq, much more populous, and has far more capacity to strike back.

Attacking Iran, however, is wholly unnecessary to preserve American security, as our conventional and nuclear deterrents are more than sufficient to deter them indefinitely. Military strikes against Iran would unequivocally weaken our security and unleash outcomes that could spiral out of anyone’s control.

Because he never learned the failed lessons of the Iraq invasion, Bolton continues to openly, routinely, and emphatically maintain his advocacy for regime change as the primary tool of statecraft. This policy stands in direct contravention for what Trump campaigned on, what got him elected, and what he says he still believes. If he is to get re-elected, then he’s going to have to make changes between now and November 2020.

What Trump has needed from the beginning are advisors who understand his thinking on foreign policy, are aligned with his views, and have the ability to turn the president’s vision into operational reality. Neither the previous nor the current national security advisor have had this ability. There is, however, a Washington, DC-based expert who does.

Douglas Macgregor isn’t a household name, but it’s not because he lacks a hefty resume. He has a Ph.D., has written several books on national security, and is a highly decorated combat soldier. Full disclosure: I’ve known Macgregor since 1990 when I served under him in an Army cavalry squadron. Over those nearly thirty years, I’ve watched as he has been right on one major national-security issue after another.

He was the director of the Kosovo Air Campaign for NATO in the late 1990s. Macgregor advised the Secretary of Defense on operational planning prior to the 2003 Iraq war (but his advice on using the Iraqi army to provide civil security after the war was tragically ignored). He advised against military intervention in Libya in 2011 and has devised a comprehensive new plan to reorganize and modernize the U.S. military.

For all his accomplishments and credentials, however, there are two things that would make Macgregor uniquely appealing as Trump’s next national security advisor.

The first is that he is aligned with Trump’s stated instincts on key foreign-policy subjects. Instead of trying to bend the president to his way of thinking—as both McMaster and Bolton appear to have attempted—Macgregor would be able to turn Trump’s vision into policy reality.

Second, unlike the vast majority of senior officials in Washington, he is not a shameless self-promoter and genuinely desires to see the nation prosper above all. I saw this play out firsthand in 1991 during and after Desert Storm.

The 2nd Squadron, 2nd U.S. Cavalry won the largest tank battle since World War II, known as the Battle of 73 Easting. In this fight, the Squadron defeated a much larger, dug-in tank force. Most of the notoriety for this fight went to former National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster, who was the commander of the 120-man armored unit (Eagle Troop) that was at the center of that fight.

I was a lieutenant serving under McMaster during that battle and can confirm he fought with great distinction. But he wasn’t the sole reason for the squadron’s battle success, nor possibly, the biggest reason for it. That title more appropriately belongs to Macgregor.

It was Macgregor—then an Army major and the operations officer of the seven-hundred-man squadron—that formulated the attack plan for the entire battle group, had trained the men prior to deployment, and was responsible for deciding how to employ the four company-sized units (Eagle Troop being one of them) at the key moments of the battle.

During the fight, he led from the front—at one point being in front of Eagle Troop’s forward-most scouts, making it hard for us to shoot the enemy—and made sure the entire enemy formation was utterly annihilated before passing the fight to U.S. armored divisions trailing behind.

Yet almost no one knows about Macgregor’s indispensable role in the Battle of 73 Easting. Why? Because he contented himself with allowing the Squadron commander and McMaster to have the public praise. Knowing he did his duty and the squadron had major success was enough for him.

He could provide the same caliber of quality, selfless service to the president.

With simmering foreign-policy challenges in China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and South America, it’s important for U.S. national security that Trump’s better instincts get transformed into effective policy. Bolton and status-quo Washington got Iraq wrong. Trump and Macgregor got it right. Trump’s best chance to reap a number of major foreign-policy successes in his second two years may hinge on hiring an advisor like Macgregor.

Daniel L. Davis is a former lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army who retired in 2015 after twenty-one years, including four combat deployments. The views in this article are the author’s alone and do not reflect the views of any organization. Follow him @DanielLDavis1.

Image: Reuters