Deng Xiaoping Praised Herbert W. Armstrong’s Work for World Peace

Deng Xiaoping Praised Herbert W. Armstrong’s Work for World Peace

Trumpet

Both envisioned the construction of China’s Golden Bridge Cultural Exchange Center, modeled on Ambassador Auditorium.

In China’s Great Hall at 10 a.m., Wednesday, Nov. 7, 1984, the world’s most populous nation’s leader, Deng Xiaoping, greeted that venerable “ambassador for world peace without portfolio,” Herbert Armstrong. After group photographs, the two sat together at the rear of the room and, as was Mr. Armstrong’s custom, Mr. Deng was presented with a piece of handcrafted crystal titled Winter Trees by the famed American artisans at Steuben.

In addition, Mr. Armstrong gifted two photo albums to the 80-year-old head of state. The first featured the Little Ambassadors of Shanghai and their recent tour of the United States, which was sponsored by the Ambassador International Cultural Foundation (aicf). The other was a detailed collection of pictures of the Ambassador Auditorium in Pasadena, California, which was constructed 10 years previous, becoming a performing arts jewel and touted as the “Carnegie Hall of the West.”

The Worldwide News of Nov. 26, 1984, reported, “Mr. Armstrong suggested to Mr. Deng that the People’s Republic of China should have a high-quality concert hall and cultural center, which it now lacks.” He then offered to donate Ambassador Auditorium’s architectural blue prints and to aid in securing international finance to help with his proposed humanitarian endeavor.

His bold proposal gained further momentum when he generously “presented a contribution to the Chinese leader to begin the project. Deng Xiaoping praised the Ambassador Foundation for its efforts promoting world peace, and he explained the goals of China to Mr. Armstrong” (ibid). National newspaper and television coverage of the meeting followed, expanding the reach and impact of the visit and Mr. Armstrong’s recommendation and benevolent gifts.

After the successful meeting, the upbeat tone continued right into lunch at Draoyutai, the official Chinese government guesthouse. This was followed by eventful discussions between aicf officials and counterparts from the Soong Ching Ling Foundation (scl) and Chinese Peoples Association for Friendship With Foreign Countries regarding the implementation of the performing arts and cultural center project. Previously, the aicf and Friendship Association had cooperated in bringing the Peking National Acrobats and Little Ambassadors of Shanghai to tour the United States.

As little as five months after scl honorary chairman Deng had accepted Mr. Armstrong’s proposal and donation, the project gained further momentum when a delegation led by the scl and Friendship Foundation arrived at Ambassador College in Pasadena for follow-up talks with Mr. Armstrong and aicf and Ambassador Auditorium officials.

“The center, called the Golden Bridge Exchange Center, will be built in Beijing, China,” reported the April 15, 1985, edition of the Worldwide News. The 10-day talks featured meetings, facility tours and discussions between architectural, mechanical and electrical engineers from the Beijing Architectural Design Institute and Ambassador Auditorium’s house and stage managers, technical support supervisor, plant engineer, interior design and maintenance coordinators, architects from Ambassador College and Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall, the auditorium’s design company. On March 18, at his office in the Hall of Administration at Ambassador College, the Chinese delegation met with Mr. Armstrong for progress review and evaluation of construction material samples. They reportedly “told Mr. Armstrong at the end of their visit of the deep and lasting impression they gained from the visit” (ibid).

Sadly, the death of Herbert W. Armstrong in January 1986 and Deng Xiaoping in February 1997 stalled the progress of the project. The shelving of the project was exacerbated by the cadre that assumed control of the Ambassador International Cultural Foundation, ultimately destroying its humanitarian endeavors. These people simply lacked both the vision and diplomacy to further the momentum of humanitarianism worldwide as led by the internationally recognized ambassador for world peace.

Thankfully, Armstrong International Cultural Foundation founder and chairman Gerald Flurry followed in Mr. Armstrong’s footsteps and took the time to review those blueprints of Ambassador Auditorium before authorizing construction of its successor, Armstrong Auditorium. Visit the Armstrong Auditorium website for a detailed look at the U.S.’s latest “polished jewel lifting the human spirit.” Adorned with Swarovski-trimmed chandeliers, Baccarat crystal candelabra, American cherry wood veneers, Spanish marble and Azerbaijani onyx, the hall’s superb acoustics and soaring Swans in Flight sculpture combine to set Armstrong Auditorium apart as the jewel in the cultural crown of the Midwest United States.

To read more articles by this author, click here.

Congressman Wears Hoodie During Speech Amid Flaring Racial Tension

U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush wore a hoodie and sunglasses during his speech on the House floor on Wednesday to draw attention to the raging controversy over the killing of Trayvon Martin. The black teenager was shot by Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman on February 26. Martin was wearing a hoodie at the time.

In his speech, Rush said, “Racial profiling has to stop, Mr. Speaker. Just because someone wears a hoodie doesn’t make them a hoodlum.” Rush spoke for about a minute before being escorted from the floor for violating House rules on decorum.

Rush’s speech and costume were intended to publicize the killing and the controversy that has arisen since. Local police have not arrested Zimmerman for the shooting, citing an ongoing investigation and evidence that Zimmerman was defending himself from an attack. This has ignited outrage across the country, particularly among some in the black community.

Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam, an African-American religious group, has made a threatening criticism of the decision not to arrest Zimmerman. Farrakhan has said that, “Where there is no justice, there will be no peace. Soon, and very soon, the law of retaliation may … be applied.”

Meanwhile, a Black Panther group has printed and distributed “Wanted” posters featuring a photo of Zimmerman and a $10,000 bounty for his kidnapping. The group also called for thousands of black men to search the cities where he worked and to pursue him. The group’s leader said that Zimmerman “should be fearful for his life,” and said, “If the government won’t do the job, we’ll do it.”

Celebrity Spike Lee called his quarter of a million Twitter followers to action last Friday by retweeting Zimmerman’s home address. However, the address he posted was wrong. It was that of an elderly couple with no connection to Zimmerman and a different last name. They, along with Zimmerman and his father, have moved out of their home due to threats.

Jesse Jackson, who was voted the most important black leader in 2006, has concluded that Martin was a “kid shot down in cold blood by a vigilante.” Jackson also tried to widen the scope of the case, saying, “Blacks are under attack. … Targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business.”

Years ago, even when racial tension seemed to be in comparative decline, the Trumpet warned that racial division in the United States would become an explosive force of destruction. As some leaders stoke and spread the flames of resentment, watch for racial hatred—and violence—to break out.

Iran, Radical Islamists Taking Over North Africa

Iran, Radical Islamists Taking Over North Africa

ABDURASHID ABIKAR/AFP/Getty Images

Tehran and its radical Islamist proxies have the momentum.

One of the most disturbing aspects of radical Islamic terrorism is how easy it is to ignore.

Honestly, how many ever take the time to think seriously about al Qaeda, or the Taliban, or the radical elements within the Muslim Brotherhood? Most people forget or ignore those plotting their destruction, only interrupting their neglect for a fleeting moment of empathy when an Islamist bomb explodes in some place popular, or a terrorist guns down children in the playground.

Whether it’s because people are too worried by the personal and national crises they face, or too consumed with material infatuations, few take the time to think seriously on what’s happening in Iran or Egypt or Syria, let alone such obscure places as Somalia, Yemen, Ethiopia or Sudan. Because of this, most people fail to realize that despite the billions spent in the war on terror—or, most recently, President Obama’s outstretched open hand to Muslims—radical Islamist forces are gaining momentum.

Worse still, few stop to think about where radical Islam’s momentum will end.

Somalia

It received scant attention, but last month Somalia’s lead radical Islamist group, Harakat al-Shabaab al-Mujahedeen, which controls large swathes of territory in the south of the country, announced that it was officially joining the al Qaeda network. Al-Shabaab has long been affiliated with al Qaeda, but the public pledge by its leader to al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri that al-Shabaab “will march with you as loyal soldiers” was a sure sign of future violence and chaos in Somalia.

In his declaration of loyalty, al-Shabaab leader al-Zubair congratulated al-Zawahiri on his efforts to send U.S. forces packing in Pakistan and soon Afghanistan. He stated that with al Qaeda’s support and leadership, he hopes they can do the same in Somalia. Attacks on Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government and foreign peacekeepers have increased dramatically since al-Zubair’s pledge of allegiance.

The development of a strong al Qaeda/al-Shabaab axis will have dire consequences for the entire region, warned the National Interest, and it “threatens both the Horn of Africa—Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Eritrea and Djibouti—and East Africa, which includes Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.”

Uganda/Kenya/Tanzania

In July 2010, al-Shabaab waged twin attacks in Uganda that left 80 dead; since then, scattered attacks have continued. Since February 2012, a company of U.S. Marines has been in Uganda training the country’s soldiers to combat terrorism in East Africa to curb the spread of terrorist groups across the continent. The Marines has also sent small teams into four other African nations to help their armies combat the spread of Islam. But it looks like the effort is too little, too late.

Back in 1998, al Qaeda terrorists struck the U.S. Embassy in Kenya with a bomb that killed 213 people and injured another 5,000. In recent years, al-Shabaab has often attacked Kenya’s security forces, aid workers and tourists visiting Kenya. Last October, Kenya sent troops into Somalia to battle al-Shabaab, and the terrorist group responded by ramping up its attacks in Kenya. It carried out two grenade attacks in Nairobi and a string of deadly roadside bombs and grenade strikes in Kenya’s northeast. The attacks subsided until March 12 of this year, when al-Shabaab bombed Nairobi, claiming six lives and injuring 60 people. Kenyan media now say al-Shabaab’s presence has made its way to Kenya’s borders.

South of Kenya in Tanzania, the rise of Islamist communities has led some to call the nation “al Qaeda’s East African beachhead.” The government is concerned by the growing proclivity in many districts for residents to exhibit greater loyalty to the idea of a global Muslim caliphate than to the fairly young country of which they are citizens.

Ethiopia/Eritrea

Earlier this month, tensions peaked when Ethiopian forces invaded Eritrea and carried out attacks on Eritrean military posts. According to Ethiopian government spokesman Shimeles Kemal, Ethiopia waged the assault because Eritrea was training “subversive groups” that have carried out attacks inside Ethiopia. Analysts believe these unnamed “subversive groups” are radical Islamist terrorist outfits, and say Ethiopia’s decision to strike at them suggests the threat they pose is serious.

In November 2011, the Ethiopian government discovered a plot by Wahhabi Muslims within Ethiopia to transform the country into an Islamic country governed by sharia law. The same month, Kenyan media reported that Eritrea had delivered a shipment of arms to Somalia’s Islamist al-Shabaab movement. Eritrea has also been accused of supporting Islamist groups in Djibouti, Uganda and Sudan, and of providing safe haven to Ethiopian Islamists. Eritrea’s support of al-Shabaab, and of Islamic terrorism in general, is so serious that the United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions on the country.

Sudan

Next door in Sudan, President Omar Bashir has stepped up efforts to transform the nation into an Islamic state governed by Islamic law. Most recently, Bashir informed 500,000 to 700,000 Christians that under Sudanese law they were no longer citizens. He’s given them till April 8 to relocate to the secessionist state of South Sudan, after which the banished citizens will be considered illegal foreigners and treated as such.

Since the division of Sudan last year, President Bashir’s regime has found itself under increasing pressure from Sudan’s Islamist leaders, especially Hasan al-Turabi, the leader of the Sudanese branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Known as “Sudan’s Osama,” Turabi is the nucleus of terrorist activities and organizations in Sudan. According to multiple intelligence sources, Turabi has developed working relationships with both al Qaeda and Iran. The U.S. State Department says Hamas, al Qaeda and Palestinian Islamic Jihad all operate in Sudan.

Ryan Mauro, national security analyst at Family Security Matters, believes it won’t matter whether President Bashir himself transforms Sudan into an Islamist state or he’s replaced by a regime that will, because “Sudan is on the way to joining the ranks of Iran and Saudi Arabia.”

Yemen

Across the Red Sea in Yemen, new President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Al-Hadi is engaged in an intense, bloody struggle with al Qaeda as he seeks to build a new democratic regime. The future doesn’t look bright for Al-Hadi. Yemen’s Islamist groups only grew stronger, even taking control of vast tracts of territory, after the 2011 Yemeni uprising and the uncertainty surrounding the ouster of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh.

Al Qaeda was quick to make its feelings known. Within two hours of Al-Hadi being sworn in on February 27, an al Qaeda terrorist killed dozens when he drove a pick-up into the presidential palace in the southern port of Mukalla. In the days that followed, intense violence erupted across the nation, with al Qaeda terrorists attacking military outposts, ransacking ammunition warehouses, kidnapping and decapitating government officials, assassinating police officials and even destroying a fighter jet locked away on a secure airbase.

“Over 150 soldiers were slain in the four-day rampage, the deadliest spate of attacks against Yemen’s armed forces in the past year,” reported Time. Whatever happens, it’s unlikely al Qaeda will abandon its aspirations in Yemen any time soon.

The Iran Factor

The gravity of al Qaeda’s growing presence in North Africa is compounded by the nature of its relationship with the world’s most notorious state sponsor of terrorism: Iran. For years, intelligence experts closed their minds to the possibility of an axis forming between Sunni al Qaeda and Shiite Iran. But in recent years, growing evidence has emerged to prove that belief wrong.

Just this week, the trial in Germany of al Qaeda operative Ahmad Wali Siddiqui provided a stark glimpse into Iran’s direct support of Islamist terrorist attempts to conduct attacks in Europe. During his testimony, Siddiqui, a mid-level operative, discussed Iran’s central role in al Qaeda’s war on the West. According to this terrorist with firsthand knowledge, Tehran willingly facilitates the travel of terrorists between Pakistan, Afghanistan and the West and gives sanctuary to al Qaeda leaders and terrorists planning attacks.

Benjamin Weinthal and Thomas Joscelyn were present at Siddiqui’s trial this week and conveyed Siddiqui’s explanation of how “Iran was the principle gateway to jihad” for him and his counterparts.

Earlier this year, Seth Jones, a senior political scientist at rand, reported on his investigation of al Qaeda and its connection to Iran. “Evidence of the Iranian-al Qaeda partnership abounds—and much of it is public,” he wrote in Foreign Affairs. While al Qaeda has taken a beating in Pakistan and Afghanistan, “the group’s outpost in Iran has remained almost untouched for the past decade,” he wrote.

Then there’s the 2004 9/11 Commission Report, a government-sponsored investigation into al Qaeda’s Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S. On page 240, under the headline “Assistance From Hezbollah and Iran to al Qaeda,” the authors stated that “senior managers in al Qaeda maintained contacts with Iran and the Iranian-supported worldwide terrorist organization Hezbollah.” The report documented regular contact between Iranian security officials and senior al Qaeda figures prior to 9/11, and stated that “there is strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of al Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers.”

With stunning recklessness, the U.S. government rejected the commission’s recommendation to investigate further Iran’s support of al Qaeda. However, a handful of victims of 9/11 recruited professional assistance to continue the investigation. “We had no governmental authority, hardly any budget, and no access to classified intelligence or intelligence assets,” wrote Kenneth Timmerman, who helped in the effort. “But what we found and made public starting this May is enough to hang a fish” (FrontPageMag.com, Sept. 9, 2011).

After years of reviewing the intelligence—including conducting interviews with cia agents, Iranian defectors and others—private attorneys disclosed their findings while representing 9/11 victims in U.S. District Court. Reporting on the court proceedings on Ynet News, Ronen Bergman noted how the “huge amount of evidence included in the lawsuit comes together to form a fascinating charge: Starting in the 1990s, Iran and Hezbollah helped Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri create a new terror organization from scratch, to be headed by Afghanistan veterans and members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Iran trained group members, equipped them with advanced technological means, enabled them to move freely and provided them with plenty of terror-related expertise and experience accumulated by Hezbollah in its operations against Israel and the United States” (emphasis added).

Why is this relevant? Because very little has been done to expose—let alone destroy—this proven deadly Iran/al Qaeda axis!

Reality is, the ubiquitous presence of al Qaeda and other Islamist organizations throughout North Africa gives Iran enormous influence in this key region—a region that, as Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry has explained, includes the Red Sea and Suez Canal, two vital assets in world trade and geopolitics.

As challenging as it can be, it’s important we pay close attention to the Islamist wave sweeping through North Africa and the Middle East. The more momentum Iran and its radical Islamist proxies gain in this region, the better positioned they will be to fulfill their deadly ambitions. These ambitions include destroying the Jewish state, taking over Jerusalem and engaging in conflict with Europe. These are ambitions that Bible prophecy reveals will lead the world into World War iii!

Isn’t that something worth giving attention to?

EU—Mission Creep in Africa

EU—Mission Creep in Africa

Axel Schmidt/AFP/Getty Images

Why would EU security and defense elites use the Somali pirate threat as a reason to open an opportunity for land-based combat missions in East Africa?

The European Union launched its Operation Atlanta in December 2008 with the intent of contributing to the protection of shipping from attack by Somali-based pirates, which had been mounting an increasing threat to shipping off the Horn of Africa. The European Council has since extended this operation till 2014.

The maritime region within the Indian Ocean off the shores of the Horn of Africa currently has one of the heaviest of foreign naval presences of any global sea patch. In addition to the EU Operation Atlanta, a substantial international presence involves the U.S.-led, multinational group termed the Combined Maritime Forces. nato also operates a mission, in addition to which naval vessels from India, Japan, Russia and China, among others, also patrol the waters.

Operation Atlanta itself sports a force of around 1,500 military personnel including around 550 soldiers. Naval force concentration varies within a typical year from between five and 10 surface vessels deployed off the coast of Somalia and in the Indian Ocean. Auxiliary ships and patrol and reconnaissance aircraft add to this mix. The operation’s military units hail from a core group of 13 contributing countries. These include EU member nations France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. Non-EU countries such as Norway, Croatia and Ukraine also occasionally contribute to the operation.

Germany presently contributes one frigate—the combat support warship Berlinand 291 of Atlanta’s combined total of around 550 soldiers to Operation Atlanta. This comparatively small presence belies the influence that German military and defense elites have on the operation.

Consistent with Berlin’s historic postwar policy of being content with other nations bearing the brunt of such operations, the German senior defense and military cadre continue to bide their time waiting for the moment when it will appear that they are being pressured into a more significant role in European defense. This, notwithstanding the political posturing of politicians on all sides decrying any increase in Germany’s involvement in such missions as Operation Atlanta, let alone the now mooted extension of the operation’s brief to allow for land-targeted combat missions.

As reported by Spiegel Online, the EU has approved a strengthening of Operation Atlanta’s mission. “Last week, the European Union agreed to expand its anti-piracy mission to include land-based targets in Somalia. Spiegel Online has learned that air attacks up to two kilometers inland will be allowed. … The operations will be limited to air strikes against targets such as storage tanks, boats and radio facilities” (March 27).

In consideration of this latest extension of Operation Atlanta’s mission, it is interesting to note that, of all nations contributing to the operation, Germany’s force structure is the most ideally suited to hitting land-based targets.

“Germany is one of the few contributing countries that has helicopters on board its ships which could be used to attack targets along the coast of Somalia from the air. Military experts argue that such attacks should ideally be carried out with cannons mounted on helicopters, to hit the targets as accurately as possible and avoid civilian casualties. The helicopter cannons are considered particularly accurate, and the gun operators also have the advantage of having the target directly in front of them” (ibid).

One can see the forward-thinking nature of Germany’s military High Command in second guessing the future extension of Operation Atlanta into a land-based combat component in addition to maritime operations.

The real reasons for this becomes apparent when one is attuned to German defense and military elites’ plans for strengthening the EU presence in the crucial sea gate of the Gulf of Aden. This is part of the longer-term thinking of German strategists to ultimately surround the main Middle Eastern thorn in their side—Iran.

Take a look at a map of the region.

Germany has a military presence in a number of key locations around Iran. The German military is represented currently in Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa, Ethiopia, Sudan and in the Mediterranean off the coast of Lebanon. In addition to these crucial toeholds surrounding Iran, Germany is rapidly currying favor with key Gulf states, in particularly the most powerful military state in that region and confirmed enemy of Iran, Saudi Arabia.

Between now and when Germany’s participation in the extended mandate of Operation Atlanta is debated in Germany’s parliament, there will be much publicity given to a hue and cry against it. But it will be approved. German elites will see to that, just as they saw to it that the Luftwaffe was involved in air missions during the Balkan wars, yet leaving the bulk of ground missions to nato forces. The upshot was the colonization of the Balkan Peninsula by a German-dominated EU.

The superior intelligence that reveals Germany’s hand in moving toward a strengthened presence in the nexus between the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea comes from a Bible prophecy that predicts a northern power moving “south and east,” ultimately into “the pleasant land,” a term for the region that has generally been called Palestine (Daniel 8:9). This prophecy should be read in tandem with that of Luke 21:20, which speaks of a near future time when Jerusalem will be encompassed by an international military force. This, in fact, will be the final consummation of the ongoing (though presently stalled) Middle East peace process.

In fact, for a detailed exposé of Germany’s African and Middle Eastern strategy, read our booklet Daniel Unlocks Revelation. It exposes the German elites’ whole plan to counter the Iranian nuclear threat and move aggressively into a position of dominance in the Middle East and North Africa.

But more than that, it will give you a true vision of the much better world that will arise from the ashes of the surprisingly sudden war that these moves by German elites will soon trigger (1 Thessalonians 5:3).

Egyptian Protesters Fear Islamic Takeover

Egyptian protesters flooded the streets of Cairo on Tuesday. One year after the 2011 Egyptian revolution ousted ex-President Hosni Mubarak, many Egyptians are afraid of what constitution the newly elected government will draft.

The 100-member panel tasked with drafting a new constitution is dominated by Islamic parties. Muslims secured 70 percent of the panel members, and protesters accuse these parties of “hijacking” the 2011 Egyptian revolution. They say they are afraid that the new constitution will not represent all Egyptians fairly.

They are “against the fact that the Islamic current in Egypt and Islamic representatives at the parliament are the only representatives of Egyptians who are hijacking the whole revolution,” said May El Termesany, professor of Ottawa University.

Hundreds have protested against what they say is Islamist members disregarding “anyone else’s voice.” The demonstrators accuse Islamist members of parliament of leveraging their majority in the new government to customize the constitution-drafting process.

“What we are seeing right now, what we are witnessing is about the domination of the one single party on the making of the constitution. It doesn’t happen in any country,” said Coptic protester Rafik Magdy.

While many in the West believed the revolution would result in a democratic Egypt, the Trumpet forecast from the beginning that Egypt would turn into another Islamic state. This forecast is being proven true as Islamic parties continue to dominate the new political processes. Continue to watch as these parties seize more power—and transform Egypt into an Islamic state.

Germany—Changing Borders?

Germany—Changing Borders?

Boris Roessler/AFP/Getty Images

Moves are afoot within Germany to justify the changing of national and state borders.

Two events in Germany recently highlighted moves being considered by the government mooting changes to Germany’s national borders and also changes to its own federal state structure.

Being aware of the strong centralist tendencies of the German mind and also the Bible prophecy relating to Germany’s ultimate—though short-term—destiny to head 10 regional powers in Europe, we have long anticipated these developments.

One of the major considerations in respect of postwar Germany is the fact of the German League of Expellees (Bund der Vertriebenen—BdV) refusing to recognize Germany’s eastern borders as established by the 1945 Potsdam Agreement. This powerful lobby group claims that the resettlement of Germans from east of the Oder-Neisse river was unjust. Their position has powerful support in Berlin.

German-Foreign-Policy.com observes that “indemnities asked for by the League of German ‘Expellees’ can be linked to an old law of the Federal German State, which leaves ‘property questions’ systematically open. This has further been exacerbated by the claim by chairman of the German-Polish Society of the Federal Republic of Germany, Prof. Dr. Christoph Koch, that ‘Even the German-Polish border is confirmed only by a Border Confirmation Agreement’” (March 26).

Professor Koch maintains that, as of the current date, the unconditional recognition of Germany’s border with Poland has never been concluded. If this is the case, it leaves the situation wide open for Germany, by far the stronger regional power in Europe, to pursue a change to its eastern borders with a compliant Polish leadership.

During last week’s opening of the exposition of the “Home Nostalgia” conference of the League of Expellees in Berlin’s Crown Prince Palace, the presence of Chancellor Angela Merkel appeared to give implicit support to claimants for indemnity due to their expulsion from the pre-1945 territories occupied by Germany. This is in conformity with consistent Christian Democratic Union, Christian Social Union and Free Democratic Party policy that has backed claims for property indemnity for Germans forcefully repatriated from their properties east of the Oder–Neisse line since the time of the Adenauer government. It also synchronizes with the regular stance of conservative governments in Germany for moves to reclaim former German possessions east of that line, or to move the Polish border back to its pre-Potsdam Treaty status.

In parallel with the challenge to the legitimacy of Polish takeover of former German property and territory, the regularly raised voices of the Sudetenlanders for similar indemnity due to the forceful repatriation of German ethnics from former German-occupied Czech territory are becoming more strident. At the forefront is Bavarian statesman Edmund Stoiber’s wife, a former resident of Sudetenland. She is avidly supported by her husband in the quest for indemnity or a reversion to the pre-World War ii German-Czech border.

At the same time that the BdV cause is being given fresh support from Berlin, calls are being made within Germany for changes to its own state borders. In the wake of recent elections in Saarland, “On Sunday, the citizens of the western state of Saarland went to the polls. The small state has one of the highest debts in Germany, and some politicians think the solution is to merge states and centralize government” (Deutsche Welle, March 25).

While Germany’s federal structure and its division into separate states is enshrined in the nation’s constitution, it does not define any particular number of states per se.

“Indeed, there is an article in the constitution which allows for the reorganization of states according to certain rules. Among the conditions is a referendum for the concerned states. This has happened only once in the country’s history, when the states of Baden, Württemberg-Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern combined to form the state of Baden-Württemberg” (ibid, March 26).

Thus a historic precedent exists upon which an argument may be built for the further centralization of government in Germany by reducing the number of currently existing states. Such a move in the future would certainly streamline the administration of German political power, allowing it the administrative room to concentrate on welding together an international combine in Europe under Berlin’s control.

The book of Revelation, chapter 17 and verse 10 prophesies of a time to come when 10 kings, acting in complete concert, yield up their “power and strength” to one overarching power called “the beast.” At present, the European Union, a Franco-Germanic creation in the spirit of the Frankish Emperor Charlemagne, consists of 27 nations, with even more aspiring to be added to its monolithic structure. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that this unwieldy European Union, with its current concept of regionalization already in vogue, could change or even do away with certain national borders to achieve a more cohesive 10-region combine consistent with the Bible prophecy of its ultimate political structure.

Watch for more calls for the centralization of administration of German governance, domestically, and of the EU, internationally. These are but signs of the inevitable prophesied outcome of emerging Germanic power in Europe. Power of a nature that your Bible prophesies will even be turned against the King of kings upon His imminent return to put down all governments and finally impose peace and security globally (Revelation 17:14; Isaiah 9:6-7).