This Is Not How You Reverse The Curse: Trump Administration Set To Announce Support For A ‘Two State Solution’

Many had believed that the “two state solution” would be “dead” under a Trump administration, but that is turning out not to be the case at all.  According to an Israeli news source, the Trump administration is about to publicly declare support for a “two state solution”, and officials have reportedly been in contact with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office regarding “ideas to promote the two state solution.”  This is extremely alarming, because I have previously written about how those that bless Israel will be blessed and those that curse Israel will be cursed.  UN Security Council Resolution 2334 was a major step toward dividing the land of Israel, and when Barack Obama refused to veto that resolution in December he put the United States on the wrong side of that equation.  In an article back in January, I listed 10 things that Trump could do to try to reverse the curse that Obama had brought on America, but instead it appears that Trump is also being seduced by the idea that a “two state solution” will bring lasting peace to the Middle East.

According to Ynet News, the decision has already been made.  It is going to be the position of the Trump administration that a “two state solution” is needed in the Middle East, and there have already been discussions between Israeli officials and Trump administration officials about how to move the process forward…

The Trump administration clarified in recent days to the Prime Minister’s bureau that it intended to support the ‘two-state solution’ as the base for negotiations in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The clarifications were part of the preparations currently underway for the first meeting between Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump since the latter assumed the American presidency. That meeting is to take place next week in the US capital.

American officials have been in communication with Jerusalem, and they have sent a series of messages for the prime minister with ideas to promote the two-state solution. This would lay the groundwork for a joint statement from both the heads of government supporting this step.

And to be honest, this shouldn’t exactly be a huge surprise.

Shortly after being elected, Trump told the Wall Street Journal that he wanted to get the Israelis and the Palestinians to agree to “the ultimate deal”, and that he wanted to do so “for humanity’s sake”…

President elect-Donald Trump wasted no time placing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict high on his foreign policy agenda, telling The Wall Street Journal on Friday that he hopes to end the conflict after taking office in January.

“That’s the ultimate deal,” said Trump. “As a deal maker, I’d like to do … the deal that can’t be made. And to do it for humanity’s sake. He referred to the conflict as the “war that never ends.”

Of course Trump knew when he made that statement that the Palestinians would never agree to a deal that does not give them their own state.

So the truth is that Trump has been thinking about a Palestinian state for a long time, but now he is going to publicly come out and back one.

All of those pundits on the right and the left that were suggesting that the “two state solution” was now dead were completely wrong.  Sadly, Trump is a lot more like his predecessors when it comes to foreign policy than many were anticipating, and so far he is not nearly as pro-Israel as many supporters of Israel were hoping.

In fact, just a few days ago the Trump administration released a statement denouncing any new Israeli settlements or the expansion of any existing settlements in the West Bank.  The following comes from the official White House website

“While we don’t believe the existence of settlements is an impediment to peace, the construction of new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements beyond their current borders may not be helpful in achieving that goal. As the President has expressed many times, he hopes to achieve peace throughout the Middle East region.”

And the Trump administration was not happy about a new Israeli law that was just passed that retroactively legalized about 4,000 “settler outposts” in Judea and Samaria.  So far Trump is not loudly denouncing this new law, but much of the rest of the world is definitely doing so

France called the bill a “new attack on the two-state solution”, while Britain said it “damages Israel’s standing with its international partners”.

Turkey “strongly condemned” the law and Israel’s “unacceptable” settlement policy, and the Arab League accused Israel of “stealing the land and appropriating the property of Palestinians”.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres boldly proclaimed that this new law “is in contravention of international law and will have far reaching legal consequences for Israel”, and another UN official says that Israel has crossed “a very thick red line”

The law crossed a “thick red line” toward annexation of the West Bank, the United Nations said earlier Tuesday.

UN envoy for the Middle East peace process Nickolay Mladenov said the bill set a “very dangerous precedent.”

“This is the first time the Israeli Knesset legislates in the occupied Palestinian lands and particularly on property issues,” he told AFP.

“That crosses a very thick red line.”

Tensions in the Middle East are on the rise again, and we could literally see missiles start flying back and forth at any minute.

There is going to be a tremendous amount of pressure on Trump to try to bring peace to the Middle East, and Trump is already making it clear that he believes that a “two state solution” is the “ultimate deal”.

But if Donald Trump were to broker a deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians that would permanently divide the land of Israel into two states, he would greatly curse this nation, and so many of the things that I talk about in my new book would begin to happen.

It wouldn’t matter that Donald Trump is a conservative Republican that was backed by more than 80 percent of all evangelical Christians that voted in the last election.  If Donald Trump is successful in dividing the land of Israel, we will be greatly cursed, and there will be disastrous consequences for the United States, for the Middle East, and for the entire planet.

So some of Donald Trump’s new evangelical Christian buddies need to start talking some sense to him before he does something that will be absolutely catastrophic for all of us.

The Danger Zone: Why Israel Greatly Fears Barack Obama’s Last Few Months In Office

barack-obama-and-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-public-domain

Between right now and January 20th, 2017 is a real “pressure point” for U.S. relations with Israel.  Barack Obama has always desired to “leave a legacy” in the Middle East, and at this point the only option for accomplishing anything tangible is through the United Nations.  The Israeli government is extremely concerned that Obama may attempt to take such action before he leaves office, and so they recently asked Secretary of State John Kerry if the U.S. would promise to veto any anti-Israel resolutions that come before the UN Security Council for the rest of Obama’s time in the White House.  Unfortunately for Israel, the New York Post is reporting that Kerry flatly refused to make such a promise…

Israel faces a unique window of danger from Nov. 9 to Jan. 20: What might President Obama do in his final days in office to slam the Jewish state?

Start with Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent flat refusal to promise a US veto on any upcoming anti-Israel resolution in the UN Security Council.

On Saturday, Haaretz reports, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Kerry he’s counting on Washington to stick to its policy of nixing anti-Israel resolutions. Kerry’s reply: The administration has yet to make a decision on the matter.

Barack Obama knows that he is the only one standing in the way of a UN Security Council resolution that would formally recognize a Palestinian state, that would set the basic parameters for that state, and that would grant the Palestinians East Jerusalem as their capital.

If Obama decided not to use the U.S. veto power to block such a resolution, it would be legally binding on both Israel and the Palestinians, and the next president would not be able to go back and reverse course.  It would take another UN Security Council vote to rescind the resolution once it has been passed, and the votes would simply not be there to do that.

So there is a great deal of concern about what Obama may do during his last few months in the White House.  In fact, there is so much concern in Congress that 88 U.S. Senators sent him a letter last month asking him to continue to block any anti-Israel resolutions at the United Nations.

Unfortunately, there is also a lot of pressure on Obama to support such a resolution.  About a week ago, I wrote about how the New York Times editorial board has actually formally endorsed a UN resolution that would establish a Palestinian state.  For the most important newspaper in America to take such a stand is extraordinary.

136 countries have already recognized a Palestinian state, and the international pressure on Obama to do something before he leaves the White House is intense.  The Obama administration has not indicated which way they are going to go just yet, and that is leaving many people very, very nervous.

And without a doubt, the United Nations has moved in a very anti-Israel direction recently.  If you have not heard about it yet, last week UNESCO (the cultural arm of the United Nations) adopted an anti-Israel resolution that denies Israel’s historic connection to the Temple Mount.  The following comes from Haaretz

UNESCO adopted an anti-Israel resolution Thursday that disregards Judaism’s historic connection to the Temple Mount and casts doubt on the link between Judaism and the Western Wall.

Twenty-four countries voted in favor of the decision while six voted against and 26 abstained while just two were missing from the vote.

Incredibly, the resolution says that the Temple Mount is sacred only to Muslims, and it accuses Israel of being “the occupying Power”

UNESCO said it “firmly deplores the continuous storming of Al-Aqṣa Mosque/Al-Ḥaram Al-Sharif by Israeli right-wing extremists and uniformed forces, and urges Israel, the occupying Power, to take necessary measures to prevent provocative abuses that violate the sanctity and integrity of Al-Aqṣa Mosque/Al-Ḥaram Al-Sharif.”

This move by UNESCO was so outrageous that it has even become an issue in the U.S. presidential campaign.  Donald Trump has strongly denounced UNESCO, and he repeated his pledge to recognize Jerusalem “as the one true capital of Israel”

“I have said on numerous occasions that in a Trump administration, the United States will recognize Jerusalem as the one true capital of Israel,” he said. “The United Nations’ attempt to disconnect the state of Israel from Jerusalem is a one-sided attempt to ignore Israel’s 3,000-year bond to its capital city, and is further evidence of the enormous anti-Israel bias of the U.N.”

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have both announced that they will not support a UN Security Council resolution that sets the parameters for a Palestinian state.  So that makes the upcoming January 20th deadline that much more important.

It may surprise you to hear that Clinton has come out so strongly against such a resolution, but the truth is that both candidates desperately need the Jewish vote in this election, and so both of them are taking positions that will appeal to Jewish voters.

To get an idea of just how important the Jewish vote is, check out the following excerpt from a recent MSN article

Jews may account for roughly only 2 percent of the American adult population, but their concentration in a number of swing states and counties makes them a potentially pivotal demographic in this fall’s presidential election.

Eighty to 85 percent of Jews turn out to vote in national elections—more than 20 percent higher than the national average during the 2012 presidential election. More than one million eligible Jewish voters also live in 11 battleground states: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Even though Hillary Clinton is a habitual liar, it is unlikely that she will break her pledge to Jewish voters to veto any anti-Israel UN Security Council resolutions, because she will need their votes again in 2020.

So if we can get to January 20th and there is no UN Security Council resolution to divide the land of Israel, perhaps we can breathe a bit of a sigh of relief.

But between then and now, there will be a massive amount of international pressure on Barack Obama to support such a resolution, and if he does support such a resolution the consequences for our nation will be exceedingly great.

For decades, we have seen a pattern of judgment on anyone that is involved in trying to divide the land of Israel.  Just recently we witnessed another amazing example of this phenomenon with the death of Israeli politician Shimon Peres, and this is something that I discussed during my recent appearance at Morningside

Attempting to divide the land of Israel is a big mistake, but it is a mistake that our leaders keep on making over and over again.

Whether it is Barack Obama or some other president, someday the U.S. government will play a major role in helping to formally establish a Palestinian state.

And when that happens, all hell will break loose in this country.

So let us pray that this will be delayed for as long as possible.

Personally, my hope is that we can get to January 20th without Barack Obama doing something very, very foolish at the United Nations.

About the author: Michael Snyder is the founder and publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog and End Of The American Dream. Michael’s controversial new book about Bible prophecy entitled “The Rapture Verdict” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.*

The New York Times Calls For Obama To Support A UN Resolution That Would Divide The Land Of Israel

time-clock-abstract-public-domain

While most Americans are focused on the endless circus surrounding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, a drama of earth-shattering importance is playing out behind the scenes.  Most people seem to assume that we don’t have to be concerned about Barack Obama anymore because his second term is scheduled to end in a few months, but the truth is that an absolutely critical decision is in his hands right now.  Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have said that they will not support a proposed UN Security Council resolution that would formally establish a Palestinian state, that would set the parameters for the new state, and that would grant them East Jerusalem as their capital.  So at this moment there is a tremendous amount of international pressure on Barack Obama to support such a resolution, because the U.S. veto power on the UN Security Council is the only thing standing in the way of formally dividing the land of Israel.  I wrote about this in August, in September, and now I am writing about it again in October.  If Obama is going to do this, it needs to happen by January 20th, 2017, and so for the next few months we are officially in “the danger zone”.

On Thursday, the New York Times editorial board added their voice to the growing chorus of those calling for a “parameters resolution” in a piece entitled “At the Boiling Point With Israel“…

The best idea under discussion now would be to have the United Nations Security Council, in an official resolution, lay down guidelines for a peace agreement covering such issues as Israel’s security, the future of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees and borders for both states.

In the article, the New York Times editorial board also strongly endorsed the U.S. State Department’s recent condemnation of Israel’s plan to build new housing units in the West Bank.

I have included the official State Department statement on this matter below.  Just like Barack Obama did at the UN recently, the State Department referred to Israel’s presence in the West Bank as an “occupation”…

We strongly condemn the Israeli government’s recent decision to advance a plan that would create a significant new settlement deep in the West Bank.

Proceeding with this new settlement, which could include up to 300 units, would further damage the prospects for a two state solution. The retroactive authorization of nearby illegal outposts, or redrawing of local settlement boundaries, does not change the fact that this approval contradicts previous public statements by the Government of Israel that it had no intention of creating new settlements. And this settlement’s location deep in the West Bank, far closer to Jordan than Israel, would link a string of outposts that effectively divide the West Bank and make the possibility of a viable Palestinian state more remote.

It is deeply troubling, in the wake of Israel and the U.S. concluding an unprecedented agreement on military assistance designed to further strengthen Israel’s security, that Israel would take a decision so contrary to its long term security interest in a peaceful resolution of its conflict with the Palestinians. Furthermore, it is disheartening that while Israel and the world mourned the passing of President Shimon Peres, and leaders from the U.S. and other nations prepared to honor one of the great champions of peace, plans were advanced that would seriously undermine the prospects for the two state solution that he so passionately supported.

Israelis must ultimately decide between expanding settlements and preserving the possibility of a peaceful two state solution. Since the recent Quartet report called on both sides to take affirmative steps to reverse current trends and advance the two state solution on the ground, we have unfortunately seen just the opposite. Proceeding with this new settlement is another step towards cementing a one-state reality of perpetual occupation that is fundamentally inconsistent with Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state. Such moves will only draw condemnation from the international community, distance Israel from many of its partners, and further call into question Israel’s commitment to achieving a negotiated peace.

As you can see on the official State Department website, that press release was issued on October 5th.

At the exact same time, Hurricane Matthew was rapidly gaining strength, and it ultimately became the first category 5 hurricane to form in the Atlantic since 2007.  It proceeded to slam into the southeastern United States, causing billions of dollars of damage in the process.  The following comes from Wikipedia

Preparations began in earnest across the southeastern United States as Matthew approached, with several states declaring a state of emergency for either entire states or coastal counties; widespread evacuations were ordered for extensive areas of the coast. On October 6, U.S. President Barack Obama declared a federal state of emergency for Florida.[1] The federal disaster declaration was later extended to include Georgia and South Carolina.[2] In Florida, over 1 million lost power as the storm passed to the east, with 478,000 losing power in Georgia and South Carolina.

When will we learn?

For decades the pattern has always been the same.  Every time we come against Israel, the consequences are immediate and they are dramatic.

Unfortunately, our leaders never seem to learn, and now we stand on the precipice of perhaps the biggest betrayal of Israel of all time.  Here is more from the New York Times about why they believe it is important to put “pressure” on Israel in the form of a UN Security Council resolution…

The most plausible pressure would come from Mr. Obama’s leading the Security Council to put its authority behind a resolution to support a two-state solution and offer the outlines of what that could be. That may seem like a bureaucratic response unlikely to change anything, but it is the kind of political pressure Mr. Netanyahu abhors and has been working assiduously to prevent.

No, such a resolution would not just be “a bureaucratic response”.

A UN Security Council resolution would be legally binding on both Israel and the Palestinians, and whoever is elected in November would not be able to go back and undo it.

Such a resolution would permanently divide the land of Israel, it would give formal UN recognition to a Palestinian state for the very first time, and it would hand East Jerusalem over to the Palestinians.

And according to the Times of Israel, the UN Security Council could begin discussing these matters as soon as next Friday…

The Security Council is expected to hold a session next Friday under the official banner: “The settlements as the obstacle to peace and a two-state solution.”

The meeting, initiated by the Palestinians, is considered the opening salvo to a resolution condemning Israel for settlement activity.

This process could result in just a resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity, but there is also a tremendous amount of concern that Obama could use this as an opportunity to “leave a legacy” in the Middle East.  Here is more from the Times of Israel

Israeli government members have been worried that Obama, before leaving office in January but after a successor is chosen in November, may seek to impose or advance a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or at least set out parameters for how it should be solved, including through the Security Council by not using the US veto for any anti-Israel resolutions.

According to a Channel 2 report Thursday, an Israeli official charged that the “disproportionate criticism” from Washington over the latest construction plans was “an alibi” to cover plans by Obama to take anti-Israel actions in the final weeks of his presidency.

If this happens, it will be the worst thing that Barack Obama has done during his entire time in the White House.

Whether it is Barack Obama or someone else, the truth is that someday the U.S. government will have a major role in dividing the land of Israel, and it is one of the most important prophetic markers that we are watching for.

Because once the land of Israel gets divided, all hell is going to break loose in America.

I have discussed the potential consequences for dividing the land of Israel on television, and in my new book I warn about all of the historic disasters that are coming to this nation.

If we get to January 20th and another president takes over and there has been no UN Security Council resolution, perhaps we can breathe a little bit of a sigh of relief.

But if Barack Obama does what the New York Times and so many others are urging him to do, the consequences for this country and for the world will be absolutely unimaginable.

So while you are keeping up with the latest insults that Trump and Clinton are hurling at one another, don’t forget about Obama, because what he decides to do regarding Israel in the months ahead is going to have dramatic implications for all of us.

About the author: Michael Snyder is the founder and publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog and End Of The American Dream. Michael’s controversial new book about Bible prophecy entitled “The Rapture Verdict” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.*

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!