page 5

^a An article posted by "Women in Green" on Friday, February 14, 2003:

If you are so sure that "Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history", I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of Palestine:

When was it founded and by whom?

What were its borders?

What was its capital?

What were its major cities?

What constituted the basis of its economy?

What was its form of government?

Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat?

Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?

What was the language of the country of Palestine?

What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine?

What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date.

And, finally, since there is no such country today,  what caused its demise and when did it occur?

You are lamenting the "low sinking" of a "once proud" nation. Please tell me, when exactly was that "nation" proud and what was it so proud of?

And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call "Palestinians" are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over -- or thrown out of -- the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War?

I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day "Palestinians" to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history won't work here.

The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal with military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy. For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it "the Palestinian people" and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the "West Bank" and Gaza, respectively?

The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less claim to nationhood than that Indian tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so called "Palestinians" have only one  motivation: the destruction of Israel, and in  my book that is not sufficient to consider them a nation" -- or anything else except what they really are: a terrorist organization that will one day be dismantled.

In fact, there is only one way to achieve peace in the Middle East. Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side should, pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited on it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of their terrorist organization from the land of Israel and accepting Israel's ancient sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria.

That will mark the end of the Palestinian people. What are you saying again was its beginning?

 =============================================
 Women For Israel's Tomorrow  (Women in Green)
 POB 7352, Jerusalem 91072, Israel
 Tel: 972-2-624-9887 Fax: 972-2-624-5380 
 mailto:michael@womeningreen.org http://www.womeningreen.org
 To contribute: https://host5.apollohosting.com/womeningreen/donation.html

                 WHO IS OCCUPYING THE HOLY LAND?

Ruth Matar's (founder and president of "Women in Green") interview with Joseph Farah on IsraelNationalNews.com, April 24, 2002.

RM: Just about two weeks ago, the UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION in Geneva endorsed a 1982 UN Resolution affirming the legitimacy of using "all available means, including armed struggle" against Israel's "occupation of Arab lands". Forty of the fifty-three nations on the commission approved it, including six European members: Austria, Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. And how did the United States vote? You might be surprised to learn that the United States is not a member of the UN Human Rights Commission, having been kicked off by a coalition of European and Arab countries.

The key words here are "occupation of Arab lands". The UN Human Rights Commission says it is okay to use armed struggle-that is terrorism-against Israel's "occupation of Arab lands". Unfortunately, not only the Arab states, and the European Union, and pretty much the rest of the countries of the world use these terms, but our own country-I am an American citizen-uses these terms as well.

On November 19, 2001, in Louisville, Kentucky, the United States Secretary of State, Colin Powell, called for "an end of Israeli occupation" and a "Palestinian state". And President George W. Bush on October 6, 2001, made a shocking statement. On behalf of the United States, he officially endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state. He said, and these are his exact words: "A Palestinian state has always been part of the United States ‘vision’.”

This statement prompted me to do a radio program on Yasser Arafat vis-a-vis the United States. In this program, I posed a very pertinent question: Has a Palestinian state really always been a part of the United States vision?

Was a Palestinian state part of the vision of the United States when Yasser Arafat supplied the weapons used by the terrorists who killed two hundred forty-one American Marines in Beirut in 1983?

Was a Palestinian state part of the vision of the United States when Yasser Arafat was involved in the planning of the first World Trade Center bombing in New York in February 1993, which killed six people and injured thousands? These are just a few examples of terror perpetrated against the United States and her citizens in which Arafat played a major role.

However, what really inspired me to delve into this question of Yasser Arafat vis-a-vis the United States was an op-ed article in the Jerusalem Post, about how US Ambassador Cleo Noel and his assistant G. Curtis Moore, were machined gunned in Khartoum, Sudan in February of 1973, on the direct orders of Yasser Arafat; and how an audio tape of Arafat's voice ordering this murder has mysteriously disappeared, and has been hidden by the US State Department and others for twenty-nine years!

The author of this article was Joseph Farah. And since reading Mr. Farah's article, I am an unabashed admirer of his. I read every article of Mr. Farah that I can get my hands on. The Women for Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green) are honored to have Mr. Farah as our guest on tonight's program.

Who is Mr. Farah? Professionally, Mr. Farah is the Editor and Chief Executive Officer of  WorldNetDaily.com, which is the leading independent news site on the worldwide web. He writes a daily column in WorldNetDaily.com called "Between the Lines", as well as commentary for the Jerusalem Post.

He is a journalist who is not afraid to go against the current; he is not afraid to be deemed politically incorrect. As I am a Jewish-American, with very little admiration of the media's treatment of Israel, I find the writings of Mr. Farah refreshing and courageous, especially since Mr. Farah is an Arab- American.

RM: Mr. Farah, a few minutes before this show I received a phone call from Susie Dym, the spokesperson for Cities for Israel, a Zionist non-government association. She informed me that former President George Bush Senior gave a letter of guarantee to then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, which included the following sentence: "In accordance with US traditional policy, we do not support the creation of an independent Palestinian state." Susie Dym checked with Mr. Yossi Ben Aharon, who was Yitzhak Shamir's Bureau Chief. He was and still is Yitzhak Shamir's closest confidant. Mr. Ben Aharon confirmed that there was such a letter of guarantee given by George Bush Senior to then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and that the above sentence was part of this letter.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry, when questioned, said that this letter was secret, and they could not divulge its contents. However, a copy of this letter has been obtained from the archives of the French newspaper Le Monde.

FARAH: I would very much like to see that letter. If I can get my hands on it, I will give it as much publicity as I can here in the states. I believe most Americans simply don't understand this history at all. This is a very recent phenomenon-the whole notion of a Palestinian state. Even in the eyes of Arabs, it is a very recent phenomenon, and certainly there has been a reversal of US policy, which is inexplicable and incomprehensible. I have been lecturing all over North America on the subject of the Middle East. The number one question is "how do we resolve these problems?"-"how do we achieve peace?" My answer for these questions is that it begins with the de-legitimization of Yasser Arafat as the soul representative and spokesman for the Palestinian people. We will not make any progress in the solution
until Arafat is no longer in the equation.  If you look at the last thirty years of conflict between Arabs and Israelis, the one common denominator, the one constant is Yasser Arafat. How many different Prime Ministers have there been? How many governments in Israel have there been? All the Arab leaders have changed in that period; a bunch of American Presidents have come and gone; but the one constant is Yasser Arafat. And its time for people to realize that HE is the one central obstacle to peace.

RM: There is another constant that I think is very harmful, and that is everybody seems to have bought the big line that the Jews are occupying Arab land. Do you think we are occupying Arab land? How can we occupy our own country?

FARAH: Not by any conventional definition of the word "occupation" at all, because how did Israel obtain those lands? They obtained those lands because they fought a war of survival, a war of aggression by the Arabs in 1967, and they captured those lands. They didn't capture them from Yasser Arafat; they didn't capture them from the Palestinians; they captured them from Egypt and Jordan. Those are the lands we are now talking about turning into a Palestinian state. If indeed they're worth talking about being turned into a Palestinian state today, why is it that prior to 1967 the Arabs didn't turn them into a Palestinian state.

RM: That is the question! Golda Meir once said: "There's no such thing as a Palestinian people." Do you agree with that?

FARAH: I do agree with it. There is no Palestinian culture. There is no Palestinian language. There's nothing unique about Palestinian Arabs that would distinguish them in any way from the residents of Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, or any other country. They speak the same language. Even the term "Palestinian", prior to 1948-- what does it mean? When you mentioned the word "Palestinians" or "Palestine" to people at that time, the image that was brought to people's mind then were "Jews".

RM: An elderly Jewish lady, Charlotte Wahl, gave me a copy of her passport from that time, and it says "Palestine".

FARAH: Most of the people we think of today, or refer to, as Palestinians, actually came from other Arab lands, including Yasser Arafat. He was born in Egypt.

RM: When you talk about Jews who settle here in their biblical heartland, Judea and Samaria, those settlements are called "an obstacle to peace",  but when the Egyptian Arafat settles here, he's not considered and obstacle to peace.

FARAH: Jews are always referred to as "invaders" by the Arabs, but most of the Arabs today that we call Palestinians came from some other place, and most of the people that we refer to as "Palestinian refugees" have never even lived in the land that is referred to as Palestine. They were born elsewhere.

RM: I understand that the real figures of Arabs that left because their leaders told them to go for a short time, then they could come back and get all the Jews possessions after they were conquered-were about 400-600 thousand, and now we have millions who claim they are refugees.

FARAH: The other crazy thing about it is, look at the increasing number of Arabs in Israel over the recent years. If the conditions are so horrible for Arabs in Israel, whether you're talking about the Palestinian Authority territories or you're talking about Israel proper, why is it that the Arab population is increasing-and I'm not talking about population birthrate, I'm talking about immigration from Arab lands. Just in recent years, you're talking about half a million more Arabs who have come from Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, from all the surrounding Arab countries. They come to Israel for good reasons. They come there because it's a freer place to live, even for Arabs. There are more opportunities for them in Israel than there are elsewhere; better medical care-you name it. This is what I discovered as an Arab-American journalist covering the Middle East-Israel was the only country in the Middle East where I was free to do my job without fear of censorship, without fear of death; or, for that matter, just reporting the truth. So, the conventional wisdom about the Middle East is practically one hundred percent erroneous.  And that's the problem. You talk about the big lies. It's very difficult to counter the big lies. The bigger the lie, the tougher it is to counter it, because it always sounds like you're exaggerating when you tell the truth. And usually when there's a debate, the truth may lay somewhere in the middle. It's not true in the Middle East debate. The truth doesn't lie in the middle, and if you try to pretend that it lies in the middle, you come to the wrong conclusions about what to do.

RM: One thing I think is a terrible thing, and I think it's our fault-maybe it's because we still have the ghetto mentality. We adopt the semantics of this big lie "occupied territory". We don't object and ask: "What do you mean "occupied territories"? Its ours!" But we say we want security, that's what we want. I think this is a great part of the problem.

FARAH: My number one argument against the Palestinian state is NOT Israel's security, even though I think that's a very legitimate argument to make. But my number one argument against it as an Arab American is that it's the wrong thing to do for Arabs. There are opponents of Arafat living in Israel who have tried desperately to avoid coming under his control. I'm trying to think of the man's name who was circulating a petition in East Jerusalem several months ago and gathered about ten thousand signatures of the Arabs--- 

RM: I want to tell you something interesting. This was years ago during the Rabin days. We had a demonstration in the middle of Jerusalem at Zion Square. Two Arabs came up to us, and they said: "We want to join your organization." And we thought they were just putting us on. That sounded fishy to us. But, they persisted and explained they were Jerusalem Arabs and that if Arafat took over then their lifestyle would change completely and they would be totally at his mercy (we did not let them join). In any case, that was very interesting to us.

FARAH: That's why the problem really begins with Arafat. As long as he is recognized, not only as a leader of Palestinians, but the soul legitimate leader-which in effect what the US and Israel has done over the years with the OSLO accords-we're never going to get anywhere. Because Arafat's ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel. The interim goal is the establishment of yet another totalitarian Arab police state in the Middle East.

Why would anyone want to do that? I had a debate with Pat Buchanan on the radio last week, and I said: "Pat, I just don't understand why you are promoting this idea of a Palestinian state. There never has been the idea of a Palestinian state in the history of the world. Why would we want to create one now? And he said: "There never was an Iraq either, until the colonial powers established one." And I said: "Precisely my point! Why would we want to make that mistake again?" There's lots of us who are wishing there was no Iraq right now, and why would we want to create another one? 

RM: Before we leave that whole question of the settlements being an obstacle to peace, I was very interested to see in one of your articles that the Arabs have built many more settlements in Judea and Samaria since 1967 than the Jews have.

FARAH: That's right and we never hear about those settlements. We constantly hear about Israeli settlements, which I think is another term that is misguiding in adopting that term which is obviously chosen by the Arafat crowd-these are not settlements, they are communities. I visited dozens of them. In American terms, we would call them suburbs. They're not exactly militarized zones. They're just places where ordinary people live and want to live in peace.

RM: You heard that Colin Powell thinks that the UN fact-finders are going to give Israel a fair deal. I doubt that very much.

FARAH: The UN has tremendous biases against the US and Israel, and they demonstrate those biases every chance they get. I can certainly understand Ariel Sharon's reluctance to give the UN carte blanche to come in there. Who knows who they will have to investigate this? So many of the UN members are human rights violators themselves. They have axes to grind. Terry Larsen is an example.

RM: There was an article on the front page of the Jerusalem Post newspaper recently. Shimon Peres runs an organization called the Peres Center for Peace. The article reported that the Peres Center for Peace gave Terry Larsen one hundred thousand dollars.

FARAH: Since 1948, the UN has not done anything in Israel's best interest. Since the creation of the State of Israel, the UN has been biased against it. I would be very cautious about accepting whoever the UN would assign to this kind of investigation in Jenin. I think Israel would be more open to US investigators, but the US is not on that committee.

RM: I was shocked to learn that the US is not on the UN Human Rights Commission. They were kicked off. We have people like Iran, Syria, etc, but not the US. Those are the judges of human rights  violations. I wonder when the fact-finding committee comes here, if they will investigate the fact that the Arabs used a ten-year old boy as a suicide bomber. I think that is the ugliest, the most immoral thing that I can think of -to use a child for such a thing.

FARAH: Exactly, and its one of the least understood stories about how some of those Israeli soldiers were killed. Israeli soldiers, much like US soldiers, would be very reluctant, even in the most trying circumstances, to shoot a ten-year old boy. We don't know that he was ten, but he looked about ten as we understand it. Strapped with bombs-its and unconscionable kind of activity that's going on, and its not very well understood here. Benyamin Netanyahu made the point on a television program-I repeated in a column I wrote, and I've been questioned about the sources ever since. Yet, I guess it is widely known in Israel.

RM: It is definitely widely known. On the day after the thirteen soldiers were killed in that ambush, I spoke to David Parsens at the Christian Embassy in Jerusalem, and he told me about this. He said that it was a child--unfortunately that the remains after being blown up, how do they know that it was ten. Now it has been confirmed from several quarters, not just Netanyahu.

FARAH: This is what Israel has to put up with. They have to put up with suicide bombers who are children. They have to put up with the booby traps in the homes in Jenin. I believe that Israel went out of its way in the Jenin campaign to assure that there were minimal civilian casualties. Meanwhile, the United States is bombing in Afghanistan from 30,000 feet. There are certainly going to be civilian casualties in that kind of a campaign. And the US has certainly done all it can do under trying circumstances to avoid civilian casualties. But, they happen in wars, and they happen in particular when terrorists hide behind civilians as they did in Jenin.

RM: And this little boy is not the only child suicide bomber. In fact, they were interviewing on Channel Two a boy about fourteen who said he doesn't want to die. He wants to go home. And there was a little girl who said that her uncle insisted that she be a suicide bomber, and he also wanted her to recruit her friends in her class. It breaks your heart.

FARAH: Something like this breaks your heart as a serious American. And this is why I believe the establishment of a Palestinian state is in the worst interest of the Arabs. That's the case that I'm trying to make here in the US to people. And I have to tell you that it's beginning to resonate among other Arab Americans. I'm not alone any more. I'm not the only one saying this. There's a rising chorus of opinion on the subject that supports what I'm saying from Arabs and Arab Americans.

RM: It's difficult to understand how Arafat, who has done such cruel immoral murders, like ordering the execution of the US diplomats, and hijacking and killing American citizens-

FARAH: That's right-innocent civilians. Not only Israelis. That's another point I'm trying to bring home here in the States. A few weeks ago I put together a list of American civilians who have been killed at the hands of Arafat, and it numbered close to a hundred. That doesn't include the Marine barracks bombing and some of the things you mentioned earlier. But, just innocent civilians, including the two diplomats that you mentioned. How on earth the United States can just wipe that slate clean and forget about it, and literally that's what they're trying to get the American people to do is to forget about it. There's a great reluctance to let Americans know the horrors that this man has perpetrated on Americans because despite all of that-despite all the misinformation the government has been spreading-Americans still broadly support Israel, I'm happy to say, and have a better understanding of it than our own State Department seems to do.

RM: Yes, and they are hanging onto their own prejudices. I don't expect anything better from them. But you know, nonetheless, it's amazing how Arafat is successful and that he survives. He's even promoted by the US and the international community.

FARAH: He survives because the same kind of terrorism that he perpetrates against Israelis and Americans, he perpetrates against his own people. Look at the so-called collaborators who are summarily lynched publicly now. This is how he maintains power. When you have absolute power at your disposal, and you have no inhibitions about using it, you can last a long time.

RM: Okay, that's with his own people, right? He terrorizes them, and they are afraid to stand up to him. So, I think by this time they are effectively brainwashed. But, 80% of the Arabs on the West Bank support suicide bombings. That ought to tell you something. But, I'm asking something more, Mr. Farah. Why is he still promoted by the United States and the international elite as the head of state of a new nation?

FARAH: I think there are a couple of reasons. One reason is, clearly the United States made a mistake a long time ago. Obviously, as far back as 1973, when they covered up the murders of the diplomats, in a systematic campaign that has gone on from administration to administration. They made a mistake. Governments never like to admit it made mistakes. That's number one.  Why did they make the mistake in the first place, and why did they continue to cover it up? I think the easiest answer-it may not be the only one-but the simplest answer, and I think the one that is becoming increasingly apparent is Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the primary sponsor of Yasser Arafat financially, and the Saudis have a great influence in the United States because of their vast oil wealth, and they use their clout very very effectively.

RUTH: Isn't that sad! Somebody called Saudi Arabia an "oil company with a flag".

FARAH: But, it's worse than that. When President Bush was conducting his campaign a couple of months ago in Afghanistan, he talked about the horrors of the Taliban. How this was one of the worst regimes in the history of the world which is certainly true. It was modeled after Saudi Arabia. The Saudis sponsored the Taliban. The kind of government that we saw from the Taliban is EXACTLY the same kind of government that is in place in Saudi Arabia today.

RM: Then, why is our government still coddling them?

FARAH: Because of the oil wealth. Sadly, I think if the Taliban had that kind of oil wealth, they might have been dealt with differently. It's a very immoral decision. It's wrong.

RM: Mr. Farah: A final question, and a very personal one. I am asking this question as a Jewish- American of an Arab-American. Ever since today's program with you as my guest was advertised in Friday's Jerusalem Post, I have had several emails, including from the United States as well, asking: what makes this guy, Joseph Farah, tick? Isn't he afraid to be targeted by Arab extremists?

FARAH: Well, I have been threatened. There's certainly been a lot of intimidation. What makes me tick, Ruth, is very simple. Two things about me that you have to know-one is that I'm a Christian; I'm a man of faith. I believe very strongly in the Bible and in G-d. That's the central motivating force in my life.

RM: I really think that believing Christians are going to be part of the salvation of Israel. I really believe that.

FARAH: Well, as Christians we're taught to seek the truth, and that the truth will set us free. How can we do anything other than that? The other thing about me is that I'm a journalist. I've always been a journalist. 25 years I've spent in daily news gathering, and that is part of my profession-the seeking of truth. I went to the Middle East as a correspondent and had many of the same misconceptions about the conflict that other journalists had. But when you look, and you actively seek out the truth, and you find it, you've got to report what you see.

RM: One final request: Please tell our listeners how they can access your writings on the net, for fair coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict!

FARAH: Our news site is called WorldNetDaily.com, or a simpler way is wnd.com. I write a daily column for World Net Daily, as well as the weekly Jerusalem Post column, and it's becoming increasingly popular in Israel.

RM: It certainly is. Everybody knows right away who you are.

RM: This is exactly what Israel needs: an ambassador of truth like Mr. Farah. Too bad that not everyone is willing to give Joseph Farah a platform. For instance, in today's Jerusalem Post, there is an article about Rabbi Eric Yoffie, President of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, and Rabbi Stander of Temple Rodef Shalom in Waco, Texas. They have invited Crown Prince Abdullah Abdul Bin Azziz to stop by for a tete-a-tete with Jewish leaders after his meeting with President Bush at his ranch.

In a letter sent to the Crown Prince last week, Rabbi Yoffie and Rabbi Stander wrote that the meeting "would be an opportunity for us to learn more about your people and your religious faith, and for you, in turn, to gain a better understanding of the American Jewish community, its religious faith, its devotion to dialogue among the major religious traditions, and its deep commitment to peace."

I despair when I read about some of my co-religionists being so utterly divorced from reality. Here is the dictator of Saudi Arabia, who supports the most radical form of Islam, Wahibism. Fifteen of the nineteen suicide bombers on September 11 were Saudi nationals. The state controlled Saudi newspaper writes articles about Jews using human blood for the baking of pastries during the Jewish festival of Purim. Saudi Arabia supports worldwide terror financially, including stipends for the families of suicide bombers. And the head of the Union of American Hebrew Reform Congregations, and a Texas Rabbi wants Crown Prince Abdullah to speak in the Waco, Texas synagogue. Have these rabbis lost it completely?

On the other hand, Representative Tom DeLay, a Republican of Texas, who is the House Majority Whip, suggested yesterday, as reported in USA Today, that Israel should not withdraw from territory captured in the 1967 War, and he equated Israel's struggle against the Palestinians with the US war on terrorism. In his speech yesterday, DeLay called Israel "the lone fountain of liberty" in the Middle East, and said Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's administration is "nothing more than a holding company for terrorist subsidiaries".

He pointedly changed the phrase "West Bank" in the text of his speech to "Judea and Samaria", terms used by those who claim these Biblical Jewish territories should remain part of the modern Jewish state. He said: "I have toured Judea and Samaria, and stood on the Golan Heights. I didn't see occupied territory. I saw Israel."

And US Senator, Jim Inhofe, Republican from Oklahoma, made a speech on the Senate floor, where he gave seven reasons that Israel has the right to its land:
1. The first reason is that Israel has the right to the land because of all of the archaeological evidence.
2. The second proof of Israel's right to the land is the historic right. 
3. The third reason that the land belongs to Israel is the practical value of the Israelis being there.
4. The fourth reason I believe Israel has the right to the land is on the grounds of humanitarian concern.
5. The fifth reason Israel ought to have their land is that she is a strategic ally of the United States.
6. The sixth reason is that Israel is a roadblock to terrorism.
7. The seventh reason: I believe very strongly that the US ought to support Israel; that it has a right to the land. This is the most important reason:
Because G-d said so!

What we desperately need at this time is for each of us to become an ambassador of truth like Joseph Farah, Tom DeLay and Senator Inhofe.

^c An e-mail letter I received on Saturday, 08 Feb 2003:

Dear Annelore, Nancy just forwarded your email and I have just viewed your site.  You have heard correctly.

On Sat.morning, my son Jon was outside watching for the shuttle's return.  He called me on his cell and he was crying and shouting at the same time. He said, "I'm watching the shuttle break up over my head!  Oh, mother! God is giving us a serious warning! Columbia is going down!  He then said the same as y'all that Columbia is another name for America...one of our favorite anthems is "Columbia the Gem of the Ocean." I hurried and turned on the TV, while Jon was still on the phone, and watched the shuttle breaking into brilliant pieces. I told Jon I thought it was a serious omen and no accident that it was coming down over Texas, Bush's home state. We both began praying that the astronauts had not suffered. I knew that several of them were men of deep faith. I felt the most grief for Ramon, as Israel has had so much sorrow and grief and this would have given them some joy. But God does His will and purpose and as you said, the astronauts were not being punished but only being used for His Purpose. 

Indeed, I thought of Isa. 57:1...the righteous are taken from the evil to come!

Every time I hear Bush pushing for war, Proverbs comes to my spirit:  Pride goes before a fall and a haughty spirit before destruction. I think Saddam may have a real ace up his sleeve and if this war begins it will unleash horrors this world has never before seen! We know God's timing is as important as His truth (I loved that you used the same example that I always do, the angels in the Euphrates) and we also know that Satan tries to spoil God's time table (as if he could!) and if it is NOT the time for war right now, God will give warning and it had better be heeded.

I long for Yeshua's return and yet I feel a great sadness for all the suffering that will take place before it happens.(did you get the story I sent you that I was led to write?  THE RETURN)

You have created a wonderful website (I love the mountains!) and are giving sincere warning.  It will be heeded with those who have ears to hear. 
Shalom,  J.H. (the signed person is known to me)