Author's posts

Jonathan Cahn’s new book draws on ancient biblical prophecies

By Lauren Green | Fox News

Author Jonathan Cahn is known for writing historical narratives that mix politics, espionage, and biblical prophecy. Cahn joins Lauren Green to discuss his new book, ‘The Oracle: Jubilean Mysteries Unveiled,’ and how it continues this trend by being based on real people, real events, and predictions for the future.

It’s sometimes hard to tell the difference between truth and fiction when reading Jonathan Cahn‘s books. So much of what he writes about is based on real people, real events, and predictions for the future that one commentator called him a modern-day Nostradamus, the 16th Century astrologer, physician and seer, known for his predictions.

Cahn’s new book “The Oracle: Jubilean Mysteries Unveiled,” is in line with his previous offers, “The Harbinger” and “The Paradigm,” historical narratives that mix politics, espionage, and biblical prophecy.

Cahn said the story is merely the vehicle through which he delivers his message of biblical truth. He’s Jewish but was an atheist until he researched some of the biblical prophecies tied to the Jewish tradition of the reading of the scrolls.

“They’re appointed words that are read every week on the Sabbath in the synagogues,” Cahn said.

This latest book draws on primarily two things — the year of jubilee and Moses’ prophetic words.

First, the Old Testament mandate of the year of jubilee. The Mosaic Law (the Law of Moses) stipulated that every seven years the Israelites were to return property to their original owners. Slaves would be freed, land would be given back, etc. But the 50th year, came at the conclusion of the heavenly number of the seventh of seven, the year of jubilee. This end of the cycle of seven sevens would be the Shmita, or Sabbatical year.

Next, a biblical prophecy, from the words of Moses that predicted a foreigner’s visit to the Land of Israel and sees its desolation (Deuteronomy 29: 22). Cahn said that visitor came 150 years ago, and that it was Mark Twain, whose famous book “The Innocents Abroad,” described the desolation of the Holy Land.

The reading of the Jewish scrolls during the same week showed the words of Moses predicting the visit.

You can choose to not believe all that Cahn ties together, but regardless, it’s a fascinating way to view today’s events, and even today’s politicians, like President Trump, whose coming to power is also featured in the book as predicted in biblical prophecy.

“Continuously, the Bible says God sends His word into the world, and it affects history,” Cahn said.

The fact of the matter is, the Bible says that God’s Word has power, that it’s not just words written on paper. Hebrews 4:12 says, “For the word of God is alive and active….”

That’s either true or it isn’t. Cahn believes it is, and has written his narratives to convince his readers.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10067

Next for Turkey? Nuclear Weapons!

by Burak Bekdil
September 18, 2019 at 5:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14896/turkey-erdogan-nuclear-weapons

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan now wants to make Turkey a rogue state with nuclear weapons.

  • For several decades, Turkey, being a staunch NATO ally, was viewed as the trusted custodian of some of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In the early 1960s, the U.S. started stockpiling nuclear warheads at the Turkish military’s four main airbases
  • Presently, the nuclear warheads in Turkey at Incirlik airbase still remain at the disposal of the U.S. military under a special U.S.-Turkish treaty. That treaty makes Turkey the host of U.S. nuclear weapons. According to the launch protocol, however, both Washington and Ankara need to give consent to any use of the nuclear weapons deployed at Incirlik.
  • “Countries that oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons should not have nuclear weapons themselves.” — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Hürriyet, 2008.
  • If Turkey overtly or covertly launched a nuclear weapons program — as Erdoğan apparently wishes — the move could well have a domino effect on the region. Turkey’s regional adversaries would be alarmed, and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Greece might be tempted to launch their own nuclear weapons programs. Erdoğan should not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons.

During the 17 years he has ruled NATO-member Turkey, the country’s Islamist strongman, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has rarely missed an opportunity stealthily to convert Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s secular, pro-Western establishment into a rogue state hostile to Western interests. Erdoğan now wants to make it a rogue state with nuclear weapons.

“They say we can’t have nuclear-tipped missiles, though some have them. This, I can’t accept,” Erdoğan said in a September 4 speech, while conveniently forgetting that Turkey has signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1980. In other words, Turkey’s elected leader publicly declares that he intends to breach an international treaty signed by his country. Turkey is also a signatory to the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which bans all nuclear detonations, for any purpose.

For several decades, Turkey, being a staunch NATO ally, was viewed as the trusted custodian of some of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In the early 1960s, the U.S. started stockpiling nuclear warheads at the Turkish military’s four main airbases (Ankara Mürted, Malatya Erhaç, Eskişehir and Balıkesir). If ordered, Turkish air force pilots were tasked with hitting designated Warsaw Pact targets.

Squadrons of jets designated for carrying nuclear bombs were kept at each airbase (first F-100s, followed by F-104s and finally by F-4s) on a round-the-clock basis. Each base housed a small U.S. military unit in charge of the nuclear stockpile. In addition, a Turkish-U.S. military base in Incirlik in southern Turkey kept nuclear warheads to be operated by U.S. military. “With that role Turkey significantly added to NATO’s deterrence in Cold War years,” said Yusuf Kanlı, a prominent columnist and president of the Ankara-based think tank, Sigma Turkey, in a private interview on September 9.

After the end of the Cold War, the nuclear weapons in Turkish possession (at the four airbases, except Incirlik) were gradually removed, while nuclear guardianship came to a halt. Presently, the nuclear warheads at Incirlik still remain at the disposal of the U.S. military under a special U.S.-Turkish treaty. That treaty makes Turkey the host of U.S. nuclear weapons. According to the usage protocol, however, both Washington and Ankara need to give consent to any use of the nuclear weapons deployed at Incirlik.

This is not, in fact, the first time Erdoğan has voiced an eagerness to make Turkey a nuclear-armed state. As early as 2008 — when he was the poster child of naïve Western statesmen and intellectuals who believed he was a reformist democrat — Erdoğan said: “Countries that oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons should not have nuclear weapons themselves.” Despite his use of the plural “countries,” Erdoğan was apparently pointing his finger at the country he hates the most: Israel, not the United States.

In a 2010 speech, Erdoğan described Israel as “the principal threat to peace” in the Middle East. In that speech, he repeated his skepticism about whether Iran intended to use its nuclear-fuel program to build nuclear weapons, and said there was no such uncertainty concerning Israel’s undeclared arsenal.

If Turkey overtly or covertly launched a nuclear weapons program — as Erdoğan apparently wishes — the move could well have a domino effect on the region. Turkey’s regional adversaries would be alarmed, and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Greece might be tempted to launch their own nuclear weapons programs. Erdoğan should not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10064

Biblical Archaeologists Discover The City Of Edom, And Why This Is An Amazing Marker On The End Times Bible Prophecy Timeline

The untold story of a thriving and wealthy society in the Arava Desert – in parts of Israel and Jordan – during the 12th-11th centuries BC has been revealed by a Tel Aviv University study. “Using technological evolution as a proxy for social processes, we were able to identify and characterize the emergence of the biblical kingdom of Edom,” explained. Prf. Ezra Ben-Yosef  of TAU’s Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures, who led the study with Prof. Tom Levy of the University of California, San Diego. “Our results prove it happened earlier than previously thought and in accordance with the biblical description.”

by Geoffrey Grider September 18, 2019

The biblical kingdom of Edom has always been a significant puzzle for biblical archeology. Although evidence of it is present in the Bible, the archeological record has always had trouble interpreting the text, which said that it existed as a kingdom long before the kings of Israel.

Of all the many exciting discoveries in biblical archaeology that we have been bringing you over the years, this one today about Edom is perhaps one of the most exciting. Why? Because the prophet Daniel tells us that, in the time of Jacob’s trouble, some of the only areas that Antichrist will not be able to get his grimy paws on are Edom and Moab. And now, biblical archaeologists in Israel have found the remains of Edom.

“He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.” Daniel 11:41 (KJV)

Why won’t Antichrist be able to get his hands on Edom and Moab? Because that is also where the red rock city of Selah Petra is, the place where the Jewish remnant will flee to protection that we read about all through the Bible. How exciting is this? We are getting closer and closer each and every day, keep your eye on the Eastern skies. He is coming.

The Biblical Kingdom of Edom Has Always Been A Significant Puzzle For Biblical Archeology

FROM THE JERUSALEM POST: The untold story of a thriving and wealthy society in the Arava Desert – in parts of Israel and Jordan – during the 12th-11th centuries BCE has been revealed by a Tel Aviv University study.

“Using technological evolution as a proxy for social processes, we were able to identify and characterize the emergence of the biblical kingdom of Edom,” explained. Prf. Ezra Ben-Yosef  of TAU’s Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures, who led the study with Prof. Tom Levy of the University of California, San Diego. “Our results prove it happened earlier than previously thought and in accordance with the biblical description.”

“Send ye the lamb to the ruler of the land from Sela to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. For it shall be, that, as a wandering bird cast out of the nest,so the daughters of Moab shall be at the fords of Arnon. Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noonday; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth. Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the face of the spoiler: for the extortioner is at an end, the spoiler ceaseth, the oppressors are consumed out of the land. And in mercy shall the throne be established: and he shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness.” Isaiah 16:1-5 (KJV)

According to the study, which was published Wednesday on the open access scientific journal PLOS ONE, the kingdom’s wealth appears to have been built on a “high-tech network” of copper, the most valuable resource in the region at the time. Copper was used in ancient times to craft weapons and tools, and the production process for copper is incredibly complex.

“Copper smelting was essentially the hi-tech of ancient times,” Ben-Yosef told The Jerusalem Post.

Using a methodology called the punctuated equilibrium model, the research team analyzed findings from ancient copper mines in Jordan and Israel to create a timeline of the evolution of copper production from 1300-800 BCE. They found a significant decrease of copper in the slag – the waste of copper extraction by smelting – at the Arava site. This implies that the process became more efficient and streamlined, something the researchers say is a result of the military invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I of Egypt (the biblical “Shishak”), who sacked Jerusalem in the 10th century BCE. Rather than result in destruction in the region, the researchers argue that it instead sparked a “technological leap” in regards to copper production and trade.

 “We demonstrated a sudden standardization of the slag in the second half of the 10th century BCE, from the Faynan sites in Jordan to the Timna sites in Israel, an extensive area of some 2,000 sq.km., which occurred just as the Egyptians entered the region,” Ben-Yosef said. “The efficiency of the copper industry in the region was increasing. The Edomites developed precise working protocols that allowed them to produce a very large amount of copper with minimum energy.”

However, as Egypt was a weaker power at this time, it is unlikely that they would have control over the copper trade, allowing it to remain a local enterprise. Ben-Yosef explained that Egypt was primarily an importer of goods at the time, so they had an interest in streamlining efficiency in the region. In fact, this was not the only new innovation introduced to the region by the invasion of Shoshenq I – the camel was first introduced to the region at this time as well.

“Our new findings contradict the view of many archaeologists that the Arava was populated by a loose alliance of tribes, and they’re consistent with the biblical story that there was an Edomite kingdom here,” Ben-Yosef explained. “A flourishing copper industry in the Arava can only be attributed to a centralized and hierarchical polity, and this might fit the biblical description of the Edomite kingdom.”

While archeology had never doubted the existence of the Edomite kingdom, it was widely assumed to have emerged around the late eighth century BCE in Edomite Plateau, located in Jordan near Petra and southeast of the Dead Sea.

“Before they built their capital in the plateau, the Edomites were a complex and organized kingdom, but they were still nomadic,” Ben-Yosef explained to the Post. “They dwelt in tents. They didn’t have villages or cities, but they had cemeteries and smelting sites.” The Edomites eventually did settle in cities on the plateau and built settlements along the trade routes, but these findings prove that they possessed a centralized system of organization long before they settled.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10061

Report: US satellites detected Iran priming drones, missiles ahead of Saudi strike

Two Pentagon officials told NPR that U.S. intelligence saw this as “circumstantial evidence” that Iran launched the attack from its soil.

Saudi Arabia’s largest oil field and processing facility were attacked by 10 drones on Sept. 14, 2019, an aggression that is expected to affect at least 5 percent of the world’s oil production.

(September 17, 2019 / JNS) U.S. satellites detected Iran priming drones and missiles before striking two Saudi Aramco oil facilities on Saturday, two Pentagon officials told National Public Radio.

They told NPR that U.S. intelligence saw this as “circumstantial evidence” that Iran launched the attack from its own soil.

The more than 20 cruise missiles and drones that hit the oil facilities were launched from southern Iran, reported CBS News, citing a senior U.S. official.

“A U.S. team has been on the ground at the oil facilities and identified the specific types of drones and cruise missiles fired,” reported CBS News. “The wreckage was moved to a facility outside the Saudi capital of Riyadh, where it will be used to make what one U.S. official called, ‘a very compelling forensic case’ that Iran launched ‘a complex and coordinated attack’ on Saudi Arabia.”

Bottom of Form

The news outlet said that “in addition to the wreckage, the forensic case will include radar tracks reconstructed after the fact that show the cruise missiles and drones coming out of Iran.”

On Tuesday, U.S. Vice President Mike Pence on Tuesday echoed U.S. President Donald Trump’s comments.

“In the wake of this weekend’s unprovoked attack on several oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, I promise you we’re ready,” said Pence at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. “As the president said, we don’t want war with anybody, but the United States is prepared. We’re locked and loaded. And we’re ready to defend our interests and our allies in the region. Make no mistake about it.”

Pence reiterated Trump’s comments on Monday that it appears Iran was behind it, and that U.S. intelligence is looking to determine if that was actually the case, as U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been dispatched to Saudi Arabia.

The vice president warned, “If Iran conducted this latest attack to pressure President Trump to back off, they failed. America is ready to defend our interests.”

“We’re evaluating all the evidence. We’re consulting with our allies,” said Pence, adding that “the president will determine the best course of action in the days ahead,” and that “the United States of the America will take whatever action is necessary to defend our country, our troops and our allies in the Gulf.”

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10057

Mark Levin: ‘If Netanyahu gets voted out, it will be a disaster for Israel’

Fox News host Mark Levin lauds Trump-Netanyahu relationship as a high point in US-Israel relations. ‘Bibi is enormously popular in the US’.

Yoni Kempinski, 15/09/19 21:25

A defeat for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in this week’s Knesset election would be a “disaster for Israel” Fox News host, lawyer, former chief of staff to the US Attorney General, and pundit Mark Levin said during an interview with Arutz Sheva.

Speaking with Arutz Sheva just days after he endorsed Netanyahu’s reelection bid, Levin took aim at the media, the Israeli electoral system, Blue and White chief Benny Gantz, and Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit for his decision to indict the prime minister, calling the charges ‘weak’.

Levin argued that the three indictments pending against Netanyahu rested on trumped up charges, and criticized the media – particularly the Israeli media – for accepting Mandelblit’s indictments without questioning the basis of the charges.

‘The Media In Israel Is Even Worse Than In the US’

“I find that in free societies – and quasi-free societies, such as Europe – that the media continues to advance a hard progressive agenda.

“It’s very difficult for those of us who do not embrace that agenda to have their viewpoint honestly provided to the public. That’s why more and more, whether it’s President Trump or Prime Minister Netanyahu, that they have to figure out ways, such as social media, to get around it and to communicate it to the public.

“In the case of Israel, it is even worse than in the United States. There is no counterbalance channel, like Fox News, or other channels like that. There is no significant radio presence, as there is in the United States with talk radio, and you have a near-monopoly of a single ideology.

‘Juicing the Charges Against Netanyahu’

“So what happens is that you get an Attorney General who has these three ridiculous allegations against the Prime Minister. I’ve looked thoroughly at all three of them. I’m sure no other American has looked at them, and I’m sure few Israelis have. And they have the media tell them what is in those allegations. Those allegations are really prepared for the media. That’s why, particularly the third allegation, which everybody says is the toughest, is actually the weakest.

“The third allegation is, essentially, that one news outlet wanted special treatment. And in exchange for special treatment, it would run more positive stories about the Prime Minister. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister was unhappy about his Minister of Communications, and he got rid of him. That is all you have. There is no direct evidence that there was a positive story written about the Prime Minister in exchange for some policy. To have bribery, you have to have something other than an Attorney General who lectures the media on journalistic ethics. That’s what he’s doing in there. And then he also disagrees with the Prime Minister’s policies. If you want to be the Prime Minister, you have to run for it.

 “Now look at the other two” charges. “Cigars and champagne. What the Attorney General did is he actually combines cigars and champagne that were given to the Prime Minister from two people. And one person wasn’t even requesting anything. And he did that because what would otherwise look like a minimal gift now looks massive. You know what that’s called in the United States?…Juicing the charges – in other words, it’s called ‘prosecutorial misconduct.’”

“Then in the second [charge], [the AG] claims that Netanyahu was trying to deliver favored legislation to one news outlet over another. Not only didn’t he support the legislation, he opposed it, and the Knesset was suspended before it could even consider the legislation.”

“When you’re making allegations against a head of state, your allegations need to be solid as a rock. And these allegations – as somebody who was chief of staff to an Attorney General in the United States… is just so repulsive, it’s just unconscionable.”

‘Netanyahu Is Enormously Popular In the US’

“If he’s not the greatest Prime Minister that Israel’s ever had, he’s certainly one of two. In the United States he is enormously popular. I don’t think [the indictments] have had an effect on him in the United States…or in most of the world.”

“Look at his accomplishments, with respect to the United States. I don’t think there’s another Prime Minister who could work so closely with our president the objectives that he has achieved: recognizing Jerusalem as the capital, moving our embassy to Jerusalem, the recognizing the sovereignty over the Golan Heights, closing down the terrorist PLO office in Washington, cutting off American taxpayer dollars to PA terrorists who kill Israelis.”

“The relationship between Netanyahu and Trump, the United States and Israel, has never been this strong.”

Levin called the charges against Netanyahu an “attempt to try and destroy a sitting prime minister while he’s accomplishing a lot of things; while he’s facing the Iranians, while he’s building the economy.”

“Who really cares if the American Jewish Left like or dislike Netanyahu? I don’t really care. The American Left is very similar to the Israeli Left – they’re out of their minds.”

‘Blue and White Party is Just Remake of Labor’

“This Blue and White party – it’s not a ‘Blue and White party’. They can try and deceive the public about what they really are. But it is a remake of the Labor party. Look at Gantz – he’s weak on the Iranian deal. The guy said ‘There’s some good things in there. People shouldn’t respond hysterically.’”

“Nobody is responding hysterically. Smart people with sober thinking believe, and rightly, that it was a disaster, for our country, America, for Israel, and for surrounding countries.”

“Obama was the worst president not just for America, but for Israel…and what does Blue and White do? They hire [Obama’s] top adviser to advise Gantz. And we’re supposed to believe that this is a centrist party.”

Levin defended Netanyahu’s March 2015 address to a special joint session of Congress during which he lobbied against the Iran nuclear deal.

“I don’t think viewed that as going against Obama. I think he viewed it as explaining to the Israeli people and the American people, in a joint session of Congress, and to the whole world exactly what this Iranian regime is, that it is a threat to the whole world and the United States and to Israel.”

Lambasting President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry for not only the Iran nuclear deal, but the passage of the United Nations Security Council measure against Israel after Trump’s election, Levin called the two the “worst individuals” with regard to Israel.

“Obama and John Kerry were these worst individuals when it came to my own country I think, and when it comes to Israel. Even on their way out the door, their actions in the UN were despicable.”

‘A Netanyahu Loss Would Be A Disaster For Israel’

Urging Israelis to support Netanyahu’s bid for reelection, Levin asked that voters consider what they “want from a prime minister.”

Netanyahu “has opened up your economy. You’ve got one of the great technological explosions on the face of the earth.”

“For a little country that is surrounded by enemies to be successful is a miracle. And when it comes to foreign policy, you’re not going to find someone better on foreign policy than this. He works with all countries. His relationships with a lot of these countries are really important.”

“Meanwhile, you have General Gantz…and how the Iranians have tapped into his conversations. And how he’s been absolutely unwilling to tell the Israeli people what he said in those phone calls. Obviously, there are things that he said that are embarrassing. Otherwise, he could answer, at least with simple yesses and noes. And this is a problem, because the Iranians know what he said, while the Israeli people don’t know what he said, heading into an election.”

“In the US, if you had a low level official who had his phone tapped by the Iranians, he wouldn’t get security clearance, let alone become President of the United States. So Gantz is telling people to trust him. The last person who ran in the United States on ‘trust me’, was Jimmy Carter, who was an absolute disaster.”

Again comparing Netanyahu to Winston Churchill, as he did last week, Levin said that if Netanyahu were defeated Tuesday, as Churchill was in the July 1945 UK general election, it would be a “disaster” for Israel.

“After World War II, the British voted Churchill out of office. I think it would be a disaster if the Israelis vote Netanyahu out of office. I don’t think they will, but if they will, they will regret it. Especially with Gantz, he’s a lightweight.”

‘Israeli Electoral System – A Disaster’

“Let’s be honest. Your electoral system is a disaster. Having elections with all these minor parties…to be it is a disaster. Not that ours is perfect. But to have a prime minister who is so successful for so long to have to travel through these ups and downs, is really quite remarkable.”

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10054

Trump Says That The Military Response To The Attack On Saudi Arabia Will Be “Proportionate”

September 16, 2019 by Michael Snyder

Trump administration officials are telling reporters and that there is no doubt that the attack on the oil production facilities in Saudi Arabia originated from Iranian soil, although Trump himself is being less dogmatic in his public statements.  It appears that Trump wants all of the evidence to come in before making a final decision about what to do, but clearly he is leaning toward military action against Iran.  And when we hit Iran, there is a very high probability that they will hit back.  In fact, the Iranians have already stated unequivocally that they will defend themselves.  So as I discussed yesterday, we are potentially facing a scenario that could ultimately lead to World War 3.  

It is true that Trump did tell reporters on Monday that he does not want war, but war may be coming anyway.  If the evidence that he is shown clearly demonstrates that the attack on Saudi Arabia came from Iran, President Trump is going to feel forced to respond militarily.

Trump has indicated that he will have all the evidence that he needs to make a final decision very soon, and when a reporter asked Trump if a military response to the attack on Saudi Arabia would be “proportionate”, Trump responded affirmatively

‘I think we just want to find out the final numbers and see – You look at a vector, and you look at – there are lots of different things we can look at,’ Trump told DailyMail.com as he left the White House for New Mexico. ‘And we’ll know for certain over the next pretty short period of time.’

Asked if he would order military action if he is sure who was behind the attack, Trump said: ‘Then we’re going to decide.’

When a reporter asked if the response would be proportionate, Trump responded: ‘I would say yes.’

In other words, if it is ultimately determined that Iran was behind the attack on Saudi oil production facilities, we should probably expect the U.S. to hit similar facilities in Iran in return.

Such an attack could spark a much broader conflict, and it could easily set off a chain of events that nobody will be able to stop.

Even though the Houthi rebels in Yemen have publicly taken responsibility for the attack in Saudi Arabia, at this point virtually everyone is coming to the conclusion that Iran did it.

For example, this is what the Saudi-led military coalition in Yemen is saying

The Saudi-led military coalition battling Yemen’s Houthi movement said on Monday that the attack on Saudi Arabian oil plants was carried out with Iranian weapons and was not launched from Yemen according to preliminary findings.

Coalition spokesman Colonel Turki al-Malki said that an investigation into Saturday’s strikes, which had been claimed by the Iran-aligned Houthi group, was still going on to determine the launch location.

And a “senior Trump administration official” has told ABC News that the U.S. has solid evidence that the Iranians “launched nearly a dozen cruise missiles and over 20 drones from its territory”

Iran launched nearly a dozen cruise missiles and over 20 drones from its territory in the attack on a key Saudi oil facility Saturday, a senior Trump administration official told ABC News Sunday.

It is an extraordinary charge to make, that Iran used missiles and drones to attack its neighbor and rival Saudi Arabia, as the region teeters on the edge of high tensions.

In addition, CNN is reporting that an unnamed “U.S. official” has told them that the Trump administration “has assessed that the attack originated from inside Iran”…

The US has told at least one US ally in the Middle East, that they have intelligence showing that the launch was “likely” coming from staging grounds in Iran, but they have not shared that intelligence yet. “It is one thing to tell us, it is another thing to show us,” said a diplomat from the region.

A US official separately tells CNN that the US has assessed that the attack originated from inside Iran. The official spoke on condition of anonymity.

So it sounds like the decision has already been made.

And even President Trump himself is telling the press that it is looking like Iran is responsible

A day after threatening an armed response over an attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, President Donald Trump said Monday that it looks as if Iran was responsible – but he doesn’t want war.

“Well, it’s looking that way,” Trump said when asked whether Iran is responsible for the missile and drone strikes this weekend on a major source of oil for the Saudis and the world. “As soon as we find out definitively, we’ll let you know. But it does look that way.”

I think that Trump is hesitant to actually use the military, and he definitely does not want to get the U.S. into yet another endless Middle East war.

But if the evidence shown to him indicates that Iran directly attacked Saudi oil production facilities, the pressure on him to do something will be immense.

At this point, even one of the top Democrats in the Senate is calling for a military response “if that’s what the intelligence supports”

Sen. Christopher Coons (D-Del.) said Monday that the U.S. may need to use military force against Iran if intelligence reports determine Tehran was behind recent attacks on two Saudi oil refineries.

“This may well be the thing that calls for military action against Iran if that’s what the intelligence supports,” Coons said Monday on “Fox & Friends.”

As much as the Democrats like to attack Trump, most of them are simply not going to go against the intelligence community.  And so if the intelligence ultimately indicates that Iran was responsible for the attack, most Democrats in Congress will end up supporting a military option.

In the end, it is so hard to predict what Trump will do when it comes time to make a final decision.  Back in June, he called off a military strike against Iran at the last moment, and it is entirely possible that such a thing could happen again.

And as it stands right now, the Russians are clearly urging Trump not to pull the trigger

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, asked about the U.S. statement, said: “We have a negative attitude towards rising tensions in the region and call for all countries in the region and outside of it to avoid any hasty steps or conclusions which may deepen destabilisation.”

In a separate statement on Monday, Russia’s foreign ministry said it believed that the exchange of strikes on civilian targets was “a direct consequence of the ongoing sharp military and political crisis in Yemen”.

In addition, the Chinese are warning that a “revenge attack” against Iran could cause the region to “spiral out of control”

China has warned President Trump that he is being manipulated by warhawks into believing “conspiracy theories” that Tehran was behind the attack on Saudi oil facilities and that any “revenge attack” on Iran could cause the Middle East to “spiral out of control.”

The warning was contained in an editorial posted by the Global Times, which is widely recognized as a Communist Party mouthpiece.

The Russians and the Chinese both understand how close to World War 3 we potentially are, and they both desperately want to avoid such a scenario.

Unfortunately, we live at a time of wars and rumors of wars, and circumstances seem to be inexorably pulling the entire globe toward military conflict.

It certainly appears that Trump would like to avoid a war with Iran, but is there a clear way out at this point?

If the intelligence that he is presented with clearly indicates that Iran was responsible for the attack against Saudi Arabia, it is going to be exceedingly difficult for him to do nothing.

So it is quite likely that a “proportionate response” is coming, and that could set off a chain of events that nobody will be able to control.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10051

6 Of The Last 8 U.S. Recessions Were Preceded By Oil Price Spikes – Damage To Saudi Oil Industry Could Take “Months” To Repair

September 16, 2019 by Michael Snyder

When the price of oil rises dramatically, that tends to be really bad for the U.S. economy.  Because we are so spread out and goods are transported over such vast distances, our economy is particularly vulnerable to oil price shocks, and that is one reason why the events that we just witnessed in the Middle East are so alarming.  According to an article that was published by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco in 2007, five of the last seven U.S. recessions that had occurred up to that time “were preceded by considerable increases in oil prices”.  Since that article was published in 2007, the recession that began in 2008 hadn’t happened yet, and of course that recession was immediately preceded by the largest oil price spike in history.  So that means that six of the last eight U.S. recessions were preceded by oil price spikes, and now we may be facing another one.  It is being reported that it may take “months” for Saudi Arabia to fully repair the damage that was done to their oil industry, and that could fundamentally alter the balance of supply and demand in the global marketplace.

Yesterday, I discussed why high oil prices are so bad for our economy.  When the price of oil is too high, it can cause inflation and hurt economic growth simultaneously.  The article from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco that I mentioned in the last paragraph tried to explain why this happens in very basic economic terms

Oil price increases are generally thought to increase inflation and reduce economic growth. In terms of inflation, oil prices directly affect the prices of goods made with petroleum products. As mentioned above, oil prices indirectly affect costs such as transportation, manufacturing, and heating. The increase in these costs can in turn affect the prices of a variety of goods and services, as producers may pass production costs on to consumers. The extent to which oil price increases lead to consumption price increases depends on how important oil is for the production of a given type of good or service.

Oil price increases can also stifle the growth of the economy through their effect on the supply and demand for goods other than oil. Increases in oil prices can depress the supply of other goods because they increase the costs of producing them. In economics terminology, high oil prices can shift up the supply curve for the goods and services for which oil is an input.

Needless to say, the unprecedented attack on Saudi oil production facilities was going to cause the price of oil to rise substantially.  In fact, when global markets opened up on Sunday evening we witnessed quite a dramatic spike

In an extraordinary trading day, London’s Brent crude leaped almost $12 in the seconds after the open, the most in dollar terms since their launch in 1988. Prices subsequently pulled back some of that initial gain of almost 20%, but rallied again as traders waited in vain for an Aramco statement clarifying the scale of damage.

So where is the price of oil going from here?

One analyst quoted by Oilprice.com believes that we could soon see it hit $80 a barrel, and others believe that it could move up toward $100 a barrel not too long from now.

In the days ahead, global markets will be watching Saudi Arabia very carefully.  The longer it takes them to resume normal production levels, the higher the price of oil will go.

According to Bloomberg, one analyst is already publicly admitting that “full resumption could be weeks or even months away”…

All eyes are on how fast the kingdom can recover from the devastating strike, which knocked out roughly 5% of global supply and triggered a record surge in oil prices. Initially, it was said that significant volumes of crude could begin to flow again within days. While Aramco is still assessing the state of the plant and the scope of repairs, it currently believes less than half of the plant’s capacity can be restored quickly, said people familiar with the matter, asking not to be identified because the information isn’t public.

”Damage to the Abqaiq facility is more severe than previously thought,” said Amrita Sen, chief oil analyst at Energy Aspects Ltd. “While we still believe up to 50% of the 5.7 million barrels a day of output that has been disrupted could return fairly swiftly, full resumption could be weeks or even months away.”

That is really bad news, and that is assuming that there won’t be any more attacks like we just witnessed.

If there are more attacks, Saudi oil production could be far lower than normal for an extended period of time, and that would be catastrophic for the global economy.

Most Americans don’t realize this, but a lot of Saudi oil actually gets shipped to the west coast.  The following comes from Fox Business

Drivers in California, however, could be hit the hardest. Nearly half of what Saudi Arabia exports to the U.S. is sent to the West Coast, as reported by Reuters. In the year that ended in June, the West Coast imported an average of about 11.4 million barrels of Saudi crude every month – much of which went to California refineries.

The Golden State already has among the highest average gasoline prices in the country – at $3.63 per gallon as of Monday.

We are going to see higher gasoline prices right away, but in the short-term we should be able to handle them okay.

But if there are more attacks like the one we just saw, or if a major war breaks out in the Middle East, the price of gasoline could easily spike to levels that we have never seen in this country before.

The U.S. economy was already deeply struggling even before the attack in Saudi Arabia, and so this could definitely push us over the edge.  We should all be getting prepared for an extended economic downturn, because it looks like that is precisely what we could be facing.

Hopefully we won’t see any more attacks on oil production facilities, but the attack on Saturday clearly demonstrated how extremely vulnerable such facilities are to terror attacks.  And with Middle East tensions currently at an all-time high, USA Today is warning that our future “may well get much rockier soon”…

The new threat is tension among nations in the region, as well as the ability to attack based on new and relatively simple technology. Drones can be flown long distances carrying weapons just powerful enough to attack oil facilities. Middle East tensions are severe enough that attempts at similar attacks are not over.

Oil futures do not trade based on the present. They trade on forecasts about oil supply and demand in the future. The future looks rocky and may well get much rockier soon.

We are truly in uncharted territory, and we desperately need peace and calm to prevail in the Middle East.

Sadly, that is not likely to happen, and every new wave of violence is going to mean more economic pain for all of us.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10048

Trump says he and Netanyahu discussed possible US-Israeli defense treaty

By Robert Gearty | Fox News

President Trump said he spoke Saturday to Israel leader Benjamin Netanyahu about the possibility of a “mutual defense treaty” between the two nations—just days before Israeli voters go to the polls to decide the fate of their embattled leader.

Trump said in a tweet that such a defense pact — a Netanyahu priority — would “further anchor the tremendous alliance between our two countries.”

“I look forward to continuing those discussions after the Israeli Elections when we meet at the United Nations later this month!” Trump said.

The comments just three days before the election on Netanyahu’s political future were the latest effort by Trump to back Netanyahu, perhaps his closest personal ally on the world stage.

The timing of the Trump tweet appeared aimed at bolstering Netanyahu’s effort to remain in power by showcasing his close ties to Trump, Reuters reported.

Opinion polls predict a close race, five months after an inconclusive election in which Netanyahu declared himself the winner but failed to form a coalition government.

Some Israeli officials have promoted the idea of building on Netanyahu’s strong ties to the Trump administration to forge a new defense treaty with the U.S.– focused especially on guarantees of assistance in any conflict with Iran, Reuters reported.

But some of Netanyahu’s critics have argued that such an agreement could tie Israel’s hands and deny it military autonomy.

Netanyahu thanked Trump for his announcement, saying he looked forward to meeting him at the United Nations General Assembly, The Wall Street Journal reported.

 “The Jewish State has never had a greater friend in the White House,” Netanyahu said.

The White House didn’t immediately elaborate on the tweet. A mutual defense treaty could take months to formalize, the Journal added.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10045

If You Think The Price Of Oil Is Skyrocketing Now, Just Wait Until The War Starts…

September 15, 2019 by Michael Snyder

In the aftermath of the most dramatic attack on Saudi oil facilities that we have ever seen, the price of oil has exploded higher.  The Wall Street Journal is calling this attack “the Big One”, and President Trump appears to be indicating that some sort of military retaliation is coming.  Needless to say, a direct military strike on Iran could spark a major war in the Middle East, and that would be absolutely devastating for the entire global economy.  Just about everything that we buy has to be moved, and moving stuff takes energy.  When the price of oil gets really high, that tends to create inflation because the price of oil is a factor in virtually everything that we buy.  In addition, a really high price for oil also tends to slow down economic activity, and this is something that we witnessed just prior to the financial crisis of 2008.  And if this crisis in the Middle East stretches over an extended period of time, it could ultimately result in a phenomenon known as “stagflation” where we have rapidly rising prices and weaker economic activity simultaneously.  The last time we experienced such a thing was in the 1970s, and nobody really remembers the U.S. economy of the 1970s favorably.

The damage caused by the “drone attacks” in Saudi Arabia was immense.  According to the Daily Mail, “huge plumes of black smoke” could be seen pouring out of a key Saudi oil facility…

Infernos raged at the plant in Abqaiq, Bugayg, and the country’s second largest oilfield in Khurais yesterday morning after Tehran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen fired a flurry of rockets.

Huge plumes of black smoke could be seen coming from the oil facility.

Houthi rebels in Yemen have publicly taken responsibility for the attacks, but they may or may not be telling the truth.

At this point, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is completely rejecting that explanation, and he is claiming that there is “no evidence the strikes had come from Yemen”

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Iran for coordinated strikes on the heart of Saudi Arabia’s oil industry, saying they marked an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply.

The strikes shut down half of the kingdom’s crude production on Saturday, potentially roiling petroleum prices and demonstrating the power of Iran’s proxies.

Iran-allied Houthi rebels in neighboring Yemen claimed credit for the attack, saying they sent 10 drones to strike at important facilities in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province. But Mr. Pompeo said there was no evidence the strikes had come from Yemen.

And according to Reuters, another unnamed “U.S. official” told them that the attacks came from “west-northwest of the targets”…

The U.S. official, who asked not to be named, said there were 19 points of impact in the attack on Saudi facilities and that evidence showed the launch area was west-northwest of the targets – the direction of Iran – not south from Yemen.

The official added that Saudi officials had indicated they had seen signs that cruise missiles were used in the attack, which is inconsistent with the Iran-aligned Houthi group’s claim that it conducted the attack with 10 drones.

Of course drones don’t have to travel in a straight line, and cruise missiles don’t either, and so we may never know for sure where the attacks originated.

But we do know that the Houthi rebels in Yemen are being backed by Iran, and we also know that the Shia militias in Iraq are also being backed by Iran.

So whether the attacks originated in Yemen, southern Iraq or Iran itself, it is not going to be too difficult for U.S. officials to place the blame on the Iranians, and we should expect some sort of military response.

In fact, President Trump posted the following message to Twitter just a little while ago

Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed!

Of course U.S. airstrikes against Iran itself could ultimately spark World War 3, and most Americans are completely clueless that we could literally be on the precipice of a major war.

According to the Saudis, the equivalent of 5.7 million barrels a day of oil production were affected by the attacks.  Saudi Arabia typically produces about 9.8 million barrels a day, and so that is a really big deal.

When the markets reopened on Sunday night, oil futures exploded higher.  In fact, according to Zero Hedge this was the biggest jump ever…

With traders in a state of near-frenzy, with a subset of fintwit scrambling (and failing) to calculate what the limit move in oil would be (hint: there is none for Brent), moments ago brent reopened for trading in the aftermath of Saturday’s attack on the “world’s most important oil processing plant“, and exploded some 20% higher, to a high of $71.95 from the Friday $60.22 close, its biggest jump since futures started trading in 1988.

As I write this article, the price of Brent crude is currently sitting at $66.89, although at least one analyst is warning that the price of oil could soon shoot up to “as high as $100 per barrel” if the Saudis are not able to quickly resume their previous level of production…

The oil market will rally by $5-10 per barrel when it opens on Monday and may spike to as high as $100 per barrel if Saudi Arabia fails to quickly resume oil supply lost after attacks over the weekend, traders and analysts said.

Saudi officials have already told us that they anticipate that a third of the lost oil output will be restored on Monday.

But because of the extensive damage that has been done, restoring the remainder of the lost output could take “weeks” or even “months”.

In the short-term, President Trump has “authorized the release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve“, and that should help stabilize prices somewhat.

However, if a full-blown war with Iran erupts, nothing is going to be able to calm the markets.  In such a scenario, the price of oil could easily explode to a level that is four or five times higher than it is today, and that would essentially be the equivalent of slamming a baseball bat into the knees of the global economy.

The times that we are living in are about to become a whole lot more serious, but most Americans are not even paying attention to these absolutely critical global events.

In fact, even the mainstream media seems to believe that the new allegations against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh are more important.

That is because they don’t understand what is really happening.

Trust me, keep a close eye on the Middle East, because things are about to start breaking loose there in a major way.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10042

Iran-Backed Militants Launch Drone Strike On Saudi Arabia’s Aramco Refineries Wiping Out Over Half Of The Kingdom’s Oil Refining Capabilities

Fires raged at the plant in Abqaiq, Bugayg, and the arab country’s second largest oilfield in Khurais this morning after mounting tensions between Riyadh and Tehran finally came to a head prompting Houthi rebels in Yemen to launch the flurry of rockets. A military spokesperson for these Yemeni rebels, who are locked into a bloody civil war, claimed responsibility for the strike on Saudi Arabia’s state-owned oil giant Aramco.

by Geoffrey Grider September 14, 2019

Half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production power is feared to have been wiped out after Iran-backed militants turned two of the world’s most valuable refineries into infernos with a devastating drone strike.

Iran is fighting a proxy war on many fronts including Saudi Arabia and Israel, by supplying weapons and funding to Islamic terror groups in Yemen, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. These one-off type of attacks can be, as you can see here, devastatingly effective. In this recent drone strike attack on Saudi Arabia, it wiped out half of the kingdom’s production power to produce oil.

So it’s a good thing that the United States, due largely to the shale boom in the Permian Basin of West Texas, has just this month surpassed Saudi Arabia at now over 11 million barrels per day. The United States isn’t expected to cede its crown any time soon. The EIA expects US oil production to stay ahead of Russia and Saudi Arabia through 2019.

Attacks took place at 4.00 am at world’s largest oil processing plant Abqaiq

FROM DAILY MAIL UK: A eye-watering 5 million barrels per day of crude production has reportedly been destroyed – more than 50 per cent of the kingdom’s 9.65 million daily output which is relied upon around the globe. Fires raged at the plant in Abqaiq, Bugayg, and the arab country’s second largest oilfield in Khurais this morning after mounting tensions between Riyadh and Tehran finally came to a head prompting Houthi rebels in Yemen to launch the flurry of rockets.

A military spokesperson for these Yemeni rebels, who are locked into a bloody civil war, claimed responsibility for the strike on Saudi Arabia’s state-owned oil giant Aramco.

The Houthi fighters have previously launched attacks over the border, hitting Shaybah oilfield with drones last month and two oil pumping stations in May. Both attacks caused fires but did not disrupt production.

The Saudi government has not yet officially confirmed the scale of the damage, by two well-connected sources told Reuters that 5 million barrels worth of daily production had been impacted.  Yahia Sarie announced that the Houthi’s were taking responsibility for the attacks on Saturday in a televised address carried by the Houthi’s Al-Masirah satellite news channel.

He said the Houthis sent 10 drones to attack an oil processing facility in Buqyaq and the Khurais oil field, warning that attacks by the rebels against the kingdom would only get worse if the war in Yemen continues.

Sarie said: ‘The only option for the Saudi government is to stop attacking us.’

Iran denies supplying the Houthis with weapons, although the UN, the West and Gulf Arab nations say Tehran does. Drone models nearly identical to those used by Iran have been used in the conflict in Yemen. The attacks highlight how the increasingly advanced weaponry of the Iran-linked Houthi rebels – from ballistic missiles to unmanned drones – poses a serious threat to oil installations in Saudi Arabia, the world’s top crude exporter.

The international energy watchdog said that the global oil markets are for now ‘well supplied with ample commercial stocks.’ The International Energy Agency said in a statement: ‘We are in contact with Saudi authorities as well as major producer and consumer nations.

Permanent link to this article: http://discerningthetimes.me/?p=10039