Europe’s Satellite Navigation System Goes Live

Europe’s Satellite Navigation System Goes Live

JODY AMIET/AFP/Getty Images

Europe’s Galileo system reveals its superpower ambition.

Europe’s satellite navigation system, Galileo, went live on December 15. The project is a result of the European Union’s refusal to continue relying on the United States and shows its determination to join the “big leagues.” Until now, only the two Cold War superpowers—the U.S. and Russia—have had their own satellite navigation systems.

The milestone comes as the EU makes the military uses of its space program more public.

Satellite navigation—far beyond a simple convenience for travelers with a poor sense of direction—has been growing in importance. Automated vehicles of all kinds rely on navigation systems. They are heavily used in mining and have even led to the advent of “precision agriculture.” From construction to archaeology, more and more uses for the technology are being found.

But it is modern militaries that rely most heavily on satellite navigation, which is why Europe has been so determined to build its own.

Keeping track of your own forces and tracking enemy forces with pinpoint accuracy is a huge bonus on the battlefield. So are smart munitions—bombs, missiles and individual artillery projectiles—guided exactly to their target.

The world only really needs one navigation system. But no nation wants its military to be dependent on another’s—so half a dozen powers are working on their own version of the Global Positioning System (gps).

America’s gps, or Navstar, is the most well-known satellite navigation system. Russia developed its Global Navigation Satellite System (glonass) during the Cold War. It fell into disrepair, but Russian President Vladimir Putin invested heavily in its restoration, and it now covers the whole world.

The Chinese are working on their BeiDou or Compass system. It currently only operates in the Asia-Pacific region, but they plan to have global coverage by 2020. India and Japan are also working on their own regional systems.

Just about every major power in the world wants its own navigation system.

Independence from America has been at the heart of Europe’s efforts right from the start. In 2001, French President Jacques Chirac said that without Galileo, EU nations would become “vassals” to America. In 2002, EU Directorate-General for Transport and Energy (the department overseeing the Galileo satellite navigation project) noted that “Galileo will underpin the common European defense policy that the member states have decided to establish.” The report continued:

There is no question here of coming into conflict with the United States, which is and will remain our ally, but simply a question of putting an end to a situation of dependence. If the EU finds it necessary to undertake a security mission that the U.S. does not consider to be in its interest, it will be impotent unless it has the satellite navigation technology that is now indispensable. Although designed primarily for civilian applications, Galileo will also give the EU a military capability.

The system now has 18 satellites. It needs 24 to become fully operational. Another eight will be launched in 2017 and 2018. Europe aims to have a total of 30 satellites, so that it has spares for backup. Until it reaches full operational capacity in 2020, the system will not be available at all times.

The system also aims to be more accurate than America’s gps, giving accuracy to around one meter for free and within centimeters for paying customers.

At first, much of the Galileo system was relatively hostile to the U.S. American leaders worried that a nation they were at war with could benefit from Galileo. EU officials stated that they would not prevent American enemies from accessing Galileo in time of war. In fact, they planned to have Galileo operate on the same frequency as gps—meaning America could not jam an enemy’s access to Galileo without jamming its own access to gps.

U.S. Air Force officials threatened to shoot down European satellites if such a situation arose, causing Europe to back down. The frosty relationship caused by the two competing systems has since thawed.

The EU likes to emphasize that its system is a civilian project, unlike the Russian and American systems. But for all practical purposes, they are the same. Galileo is also set up so that, in times of crisis, it can be restricted to only European military personnel and emergency services.

German Member of the European Parliament Reinhard Bütikofer claimed that the European Commission had deliberately hidden how widespread the military uses for the project were. Until March 2011, documents “did not even hint at the extent of the military uses of the project,” he said.

Had he been paying better attention, he would have seen it from the start.

The military uses of other European space programs are also becoming more evident. On October 26, the EU released its first ever space policy document, which highlights the military importance of its efforts. “Space is also of strategic importance for Europe,” it notes. “It reinforces Europe’s role as a stronger global player and is an asset for its security and defense.”

The document states that EU space programs will consider “additional services” to help meet “emerging needs” in Europe’s “security and defense.”

Another major project of Europe’s space program is the Copernicus Earth Observation System. It was originally touted as a tool to support “environmental security.” But the EU has tweaked the wording, ever so slightly; its purpose now is to support “the environment and security.”

The European Parliament’s stated military purposes for the system include “border monitoring outside the EU” and “EU peacekeeping operations”—in other words, European military operations.

“There is no Earth-observation project as big as Copernicus,” said former EU chief scientific adviser Anne Glover. “It’s already abundantly clear that the system will also be used for military operations and surveillance purposes.”

The new policy document promised to “assess further the potential” of Galileo and Copernicus to “meet EU autonomy and security needs.”

Europe’s push for independence in space shows its aspirations to have a military independent of the U.S. The term “strategic autonomy” has become increasingly common in European official documents—both at the EU and national level. Europe wants to be able to act on its own and act around the world. And with the U.S. so dependent on technology, Galileo and Copernicus have the potential to turn America’s space advantage into a weakness.

Watch for Europe’s continued push to make its military independent of America’s gps. For more on the progress nations around the world are making in becoming space powers, read “The Quiet Space Race.”

Barack Obama’s Fitting Finish and the Remilitarization of Germany

Listen to the Trumpet Daily radio program that aired on December 28, 2016.

Throughout his presidency, Barack Obama has abandoned allies, embraced enemies, and reacted coolly to earthshaking catastrophes. Bret Stephens wrote, “Strategic half measures, underhanded tactics and moralizing gestures have been the president’s style from the beginning.” On today’s show, Stephen Flurry discusses Mr. Obama’s legacy and how it will impact the future of the United States.

Listen to or download Trumpet Daily Radio Show on:

http://app.stitcher.com/browse/feed/68064/details

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/trumpet-daily-radio-show/id1003885427

http://kpcg.fm/shows/trumpet-daily-radio-show

America’s ‘Shameful Ambush’ of Israel at the UN

America’s ‘Shameful Ambush’ of Israel at the UN

Albin Lohr-Jones/Pacific Press/LightRocket/Getty Images

‘When the chips are down, I have Israel’s back.’

“This was a stab in the back against the Israelis.” It was the “peak of hypocrisy” and “one of the biggest American rebukes of its long-standing ally in recent memory.” With a “dangerous parting shot,” the United States “joined the jackals at the UN.” Most of all, it was a “shameful ambush” of an ally.

These were just some of the reactions to the United States’ abstention from United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, which, among other things, condemns, reaffirms and reiterates that Israeli homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal. But on Friday, December 23, when America refrained from vetoing the resolution, these houses were referred to as impersonal “settlements.”

As the U.S. reversed decades of diplomatic precedent to betray Israel, the room erupted into applause.

But didn’t President Barack Obama affirm his friendship to Israel? He definitely said he would have Israel’s back. Here’s what the president told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (aipac) in March 2012 (emphasis added):

The fact is, my administration’s commitment to Israel’s security has been unprecedented. Our military and intelligence cooperation has never been closer. Our joint exercises and training have never been more robust. Despite a tough budget environment, our security assistance has increased every single year. …When one-sided resolutions are brought up at the Human Rights Council, we oppose them. When Israeli diplomats feared for their lives in Cairo, we intervened to save them. When there are efforts to boycott or divest from Israel, we will stand against them. And whenever an effort is made to delegitimize the state of Israel, my administration has opposed them. So there should not be a shred of doubt by now—when the chips are down, I have Israel’s back.

On the day after the resolution, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu noted the obvious fact that America’s abstention was not mere negligence or a change in position by the U.S. It was a “shameful ambush” engineered by the president.

“From the information that we have, we have no doubt that the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it, coordinated on the wording, and demanded that it be passed,” Netanyahu said on Sunday. “I told John Kerry [that] friends do not take friends to the UN Security Council.”

Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton also believes the United States must have cooperated in the resolutions formation. “The sponsors of the resolution … obviously had to consult with the Obama administration to tell them what was in the resolution so that it was sufficient for Obama to order an abstention,” Bolton told Fox News in an interview. “It was entirely predictable for people in the pro-Israel community in the United States. … We should’ve seen this coming.”

An Ancient Comparison

In a sort of sick irony, the passing of Resolution 2334 occurred only a day before the beginning of Hanukkah. Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon referenced the historical event in Israel’s formal response to the UN. He said:

Tomorrow night, Israel and the entire Jewish community around the world will celebrate the holiday of Hanukkah. Over 2,000 years ago King Antiochus [IV] banished the Jewish people from our temple in Jerusalem and issued decrees trying to sever us from religion and our heritage, but we prevailed. The Jewish people fought back. We regained our independence and relight the menorah candles in the temple. …We overcame those decrees during the time of the Maccabees, and we will overcome this evil decree today. …And we will continue to be a Jewish state, proudly reclaiming the land of our forefathers, where the Maccabees fooled their oppressors and King David ruled from Jerusalem.

On the day before the celebration of the Maccabean revolt, it became illegal for thousands of Jews to live in their homes. As analyst Charles Krauthammer put it, the “appalling” resolution “declares that any Jew who lives in the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem—the Jewish quarter, inhabited for 1,000 years—is illegal, breaking international law, essentially an outlaw, [and] can be hauled into the international criminal court and international courts in Europe.”

But, as Ambassador Bolton noted, it was “entirely predictable” for those who haven’t bought President Obama’s pro-Israel rhetoric. In “November 9 and the Onslaught Against Israel,” Trumpet writer Callum Wood wrote that “until now, President Obama has kept quiet on the [Israel] issue for fear of shedding negative light on the Clinton campaign. Post-November 8, that no longer matters.”

“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,” Wood continued. And that’s exactly what has happened. The special relationship with Israel is over, and now the rest of the world can see it.

Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry pointed to the breaking of the special relationship in his article “What Inspires President Obama’s Relationship With Israel?” In the lead up to Hanukkah in 2015, President Obama hosted Israeli President Reuven Rivlin and his wife for the first of two Hanukkah receptions in the East Room of the White House. Mr. Obama commented that “all of us come together, along with Jews around the world, to celebrate a band of Maccabees who inspire us even today.” Mr. Flurry wrote:

Is that true? Does that history inspire him today? When you look at the diplomatic insults and the hatred the Obama administration has poured on Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, when you look at the pressure this administration has put on Israel to negotiate with people who use terrorism, and when you look at how openly it has enabled Iran to obtain nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, wouldn’t you say that a leader like that finds Antiochus more of a model to follow than Judas Maccabeus?

To gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between Israel and the United States, read the above-mentioned articles. They show not only what has happened in the past, but what will happen because of the two nations’ broken relationship. President-elect Donald Trump says “things will be different” at the UN once he’s in office, but long-lasting damage has already been done. The brotherhood between Israel and the United States has been broken—and this was emphasized by Friday’s “shameful ambush” at the UN.

Was President Obama Behind the Anti-Settlement Resolution at the United Nations?

Was President Obama Behind the Anti-Settlement Resolution at the United Nations?

Amos Ben Gershom/GPO/Getty Images

Listen to the Trumpet Daily radio program that aired on December 27, 2016.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told United States Secretary of State John Kerry that “friends don’t take friends to the Security Council.” And yet, that’s exactly what the U.S. did to Israel last Friday. On today’s program, Trumpet Middle East correspondent Brent Nagtegaal discusses the response from Israel and the stunning revelation that the Obama administration was actually behind the resolution itself.

Listen to or download Trumpet Daily Radio Show on:

http://app.stitcher.com/browse/feed/68064/details

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/trumpet-daily-radio-show/id1003885427

http://kpcg.fm/shows/trumpet-daily-radio-show

Austrian Cardinal: ‘We Can’t Accommodate All Refugees’

Austrian Cardinal: ‘We Can’t Accommodate All Refugees’

FILIPPO MONTEFORTE/AFP/Getty Images

The ‘spiritual son’ of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is calling for a European solution to the migrant crisis.

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, archbishop of Vienna, admitted on Austrian television last Friday that he was rethinking his stance on the migrant crisis. During a Christmas discussion program with Evangelical Lutheran Bishop Michael Bünker, the archbishop said an “unbelievable number” of migrants are causing a “feeling of overcrowding” in Austrian society. The cardinal pointed to the rise of the anti-immigrant Austrian Freedom Party as a sign that the “country is worried” and said he’s no longer convinced that Austria should accept all refugees.

Instead, he stated that Europe needs to develop a common strategy to support nations in Africa and the Middle East so migrants can live peaceably in their own homeland. In the December 23 discussion, Cardinal Schönborn said (Trumpet translation throughout):

Sure, in the beginning, I also said, with [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel: “We can do it!” And many important experts in Austria said, “We can do it!” … We then realized that there is another dimension, and we need common European plans; we need more help on the ground. In the meantime, I believe this is clear: We cannot accommodate all refugees. We must first see that they can find and live in their homeland again.

Bünker agreed with Schönborn and added that terrorism was both a cause and consequence of the migrant crisis.

“Now it is very strongly claimed: Refugees bring terrorism,” said Bünker. “At the same time, one must also say that terrorism brings refugees! Most people on the run are fleeing precisely from this kind of terrorism, which we now have experienced in Nice and Berlin. I am thinking of the Christian communities in Syria, where many have fled the country because they have come between the fronts and become victims of terrorism.”

While Cardinal Schönborn and Bishop Bünker were vague about what steps Europeans should take to make it possible for migrants to “live in their homeland again,” they both agreed that the long-term solution to the migrant crisis was a united European response to the turmoil currently gripping Africa and the Middle East.

These remarks carry added significance due to the high-profile status of Cardinal Schönborn within the Roman Catholic Church. Vatican watchers have called Schönborn the “spiritual son” of Pope Emeritus Benedict xvi and indicated that he has a realistic chance of becoming the next pope. As a member of the Austrian noble family of Schönborn-Buchheim-Wolfstahl, he has deep connections to the aristocracy of the old Holy Roman Empire. In 2011, he conducted the funeral service for Otto von Habsburg, the last crown prince of Austria-Hungary.

Last September, Schönborn spoke on the 333rd anniversary of the Battle of Vienna, when a Habsburg emperor defended Vienna from an invading force of Ottoman Turks. He used this occasion to warn about “a third attempt at an Islamic conquest of Europe” if Europeans don’t return to their “Christian roots.”

The idea that a united Europe should fight against Islamic terrorism so that migrants can “live in their homeland again” heralds the fulfillment of two Bible prophecies that the Philadelphia Trumpet has proclaimed for over two decades.

The first prophecy, recorded in Daniel 11:40, shows that Jesus Christ’s Second Coming will be precipitated by a colossal clash of civilizations. The scripture reads, “And at the time of the end shall the king of the southpush at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.”

In his free booklet The King of the South, Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry explains that the king of the south refers to radical Islam led by Iran. The king of the north is a German-led superstate now being built in Europe that will operate under the overarching influence of the Catholic Church.

The key word in Daniel 11:40 is push, which in Hebrew means to gore, thrust at or wage war. The king of the south will goad the king of the north into war and be destroyed in a blitzkrieg-style invasion.

The second prophecy, recorded in Psalm 83, shows that the end-time Assyrians will make an alliance with the Edomites, Ishmaelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Gebalites, Hagarenes and others to destroy the nations of Israel. As Mr. Flurry explains in The King of the South, this is an end-time prophecy about Germany allying with a confederation of anti-Iranian Arabic and Turkish regimes in a bid to destroy end-time Israel, particularly America, Britain and the Jewish state. This confederation won’t fully form until after the king of the south has been destroyed.

Schönborn and Bünker highlighted the need for Europe to deal with the problem of radical Islamic terrorism before it can solve the migrant crisis in a way that will allow Germany to maintain a working relationship with pro-European Arabic and Turkish regimes across the Middle East. While this might sound positive, the Bible makes plain that this alliance will ultimately wreak staggering devastation on the nations of end-time Israel in the time just before Jesus Christ’s return.

To understand these world-changing prophecies, study The King of the South booklet for yourself.

President Obama’s Last Assault on Israel and a Nativity Scene That Predates Christ by 3,000 Years

President Obama’s Last Assault on Israel and a Nativity Scene That Predates Christ by 3,000 Years

Leigh Vogel/WireImage

Listen to the Trumpet Daily radio program that aired on December 26, 2016.

United States President Barack Obama took his parting shot at Israel last Friday by directing the U.S. to abstain from a vote condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The U.S. traditionally uses its veto power to support its ally in the Middle East. This recent move, however, exposes the Obama administration’s real attitude toward Israel. Listen to Stephen Flurry discuss the administration’s latest snub on today’s show.

Listen to or download Trumpet Daily Radio Show on:

http://app.stitcher.com/browse/feed/68064/details

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/trumpet-daily-radio-show/id1003885427

http://kpcg.fm/shows/trumpet-daily-radio-show