PCG Cites Israel to Scare Monger Against Obama

Shortly before Trump was elected President PCG released an article scare mongering that President Obama will do something bad to the State of Israel before he leaves office. The article is based on a columns by Caroline Glick and Charles Krauthammer who are very often quoted by PCG's writers. (Callum Wood, November 9 and the Onslaught Against Israel, November 9, 2016.)

Let's take a look.

UN Security Council resolutions are law. Israel has always had a bulwark of defense at the UN: America. The U.S. has used its veto power to trump the pro-Palestinian majority time after time. Without the veto, Israel would have been subject to a host of nation-crushing resolutions. 

But come November 9, the tables could drastically turn. The Obama administration needs do nothing at all—just sit back and allow the anti-Israel resolutions to surge in. With nobody to stop the resolutions, Israel would sit near-indefensible in the Security Council’s crosshairs.

PCG's "prophetic" script calls for the State of Israel to eventually became disillusioned with the United States and turn to the European Union for protection before being conquered by the European Empire. Consequently PCG gets very excited at any sign that US-Israeli relations are going to turn bad. They think their script is about to launch into action and Christ will soon return to make PCG members God like beings.

The article scare mongers that President Obama is about to use the UN Security Council to compel the State of Israel to accept terms that PCG's leaders condemn. To make this believable he states that President Clinton did something like this just before his term of office ended.

Israel has weathered similar last-minute attempts at a Palestinian state. On Dec. 23, 2000, less than a month before leaving office, President Bill Clinton took one last shot at a two-state solution. He presented his idea as “parameters” for future peace talks. 

Among other things, Clinton’s parameters included giving full sovereignty of the Temple Mount to the Palestinians—just like UNESCO is trying to do today. Furthermore, Israel was to agree that eastern, southern and northern neighborhoods of Jerusalem would be transferred to the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Of the West Bank, 94 to 96 percent would be transferred to the PLO, plus an additional 1 to 3 percent of sovereign Israeli land.

Internationally the State of Israel is only recognized as having the right to rule over its 1949 borders. The land acquired during the 1967 Six Day War is viewed as not belonging to the State of Israel. This includes East Jerusalem. This is why the US and Australian Embassies are in Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem.

Although the author seems to think this is terrible he mentions that Clinton's proposal had the following benefits for the State of Israel.

The pro-Israel aspects of the deal were the denial of the Arab-sought “right of return.” The Arabs also had to agree to end all hostilities upon signing the deal. Still, Israel would be giving up everything in return for little more than a promise. 

Despite the heavily one-sided deal, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak accepted the terms, albeit with reservations. He was willing to return Israel to indefensible borders and recognize Palestinian statehood!

Thousands of Palestinians were expelled during the Israeli War of Independence and to a numerically lesser extent the Six Day War. Those Palestinians yearned to return home but, for the most part, the State of Israel has refused to let them return to where they had lived before those wars.

The author insists that proposed border, that was quite similar to the internationally recognized border of the State of Israel, are indefensible even though the State of Israel was able to seize the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula during the Suez Crisis of 1956 and seized those territories again as well as the West Bank and the Golan Heights in the Six Day War of 1967.

Today, the dangers are even greater. Mr. Obama doesn’t need Israel and the PLO to agree to his terms—he just needs the UN Security Council. Where Clinton tried coercion and failed, President Obama could impose his will.

Well now that Trump will be President what can President Obama do in less than three months that he could not reverse if he wanted to?

The author says the State of Israel will be coerced to accept these proposed terms by President Obama or be dragged to court.

What do you do when your sole protector becomes your chief adversary? 

Sadly, Israeli diplomacy has become complacent. Tucked safely behind the wall of American veto power, it has not had to exercise much effort to defend itself. With the wall gone, Israel is forced to act. But it may already be too late. ... 

Israel can only make so many promises to other nations before it runs out of bargaining power. At that stage, the Security Council resolutions will pass, and Israel will face the courts.

At the end of the article the author reveals that this article is motivated by hope that PCG's tapestry of prophecies will soon launch and lead to the return of Christ and the deification of PCG members.

Regardless of whether President Obama takes action or not, the writing is on the wall: The special relationship with Israel is over. 

And what happens when America abandons Israel? Bible prophecy forecasts that East Jerusalem will fall to the forces of radical Islam.... Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry noted in 2004, “If the brotherhood between superpower America and the Jewish state is broken, that is probably when half of Jerusalem will be taken.” 

Despite its grave consequences, this prophecy is just one of a trail of dominoes. When it falls, it will ultimately lead to good news for Jerusalem and the whole world.

In other words this article is, in one sense, not about the State of Israel. Rather its purpose is to insist that PCG's tapestry of predictions will soon come to pass to prove themselves right. That is the real point of this article. The State of Israel is used as a prop to insist that PCG is right about their predictions. But their predictions are sure to fail.

By saying that East Jerusalem is fated to fall to "radical Islam" this side steps the issue of the international community viewing the State of Israel as having no right to rule over East Jerusalem because it is not part of the internationally recognized 1949-67 borders.

And so we see PCG's leaders continuing to look at the horizon for their words to be fulfilled.