Monday, February 10, 2014

Birth of a Revolution

by: Michael D. Evans
Birth of a RevolutionPresident Jimmy Carter was the last Liberal Left president to attempt with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini what President Barack Obama is now attempting to do with Iranian President Rouhani: negotiate. Rouhani, a Shi’a cleric, has learned his lessons well from Khomeini.
When Carter entered the political fray in 1976, America was still riding the liberal wave of anti-Vietnam War emotion. Carter was persuaded that the Shah was not fit to rule Iran. In his anti-war pacifism, Carter never got it that Khomeini, a cleric exiled to Iraq, was preparing Iran for revolution. His weapon of choice was not the sword but the media. Using tape cassettes smuggled by Iranian pilgrims returning from the holy city of Najaf, he fueled disdain for what he called “gharbzadegi” (the plague of Western culture).
Carter pressured the Shah to make what he termed human rights concessions by releasing political prisoners and relaxing press censorship. Khomeini could never have succeeded without Carter. The Islamic Revolution would have been stillborn.
Under Carter’s predecessor, Richard Nixon, the U.S. had enacted what became known as the “Twin Pillar Doctrine.” His approach was to establish American military substitutes in various regions, especially in Iran and Saudi Arabia, to deter the Soviet Union and provide protection for U.S. interests. Iran received such a designation and was thus guaranteed access to U.S. arms in abundance.
Carter perceived Khomeini as a religious holy man in a grassroots revolution than the founding father of modern terrorism. Carter's ambassador to the UN, Andrew Young, said, "Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint." Carter's Iranian ambassador, William Sullivan, said, "Khomeini is a Gandhi-like figure" ( Carter adviser James Bill proclaimed on February 12, 1979, that Khomeini was not a mad mujahid, but a man of "impeccable integrity and honesty" (
Just as Carter administration officials pursued a relationship with Khomeini, so did Barack Obama state during his first election campaign that he wanted to sit down without preconditions for talks with Iran’s president and leaders from other rogue states.
Farah Pahlavi, wife of the former Shah, told me during an interview in her home, “My husband said to me that if Jimmy Carter keeps this up, ultimately Khomeini will come back and with him will come an Islamic revolution. The Russians will invade Afghanistan, Iraq will go to war against Iran, and who knows what horror will come upon the world.”
During the same interview, the empress talked about Carter’s human rights issue:
“What happened to those who cared so much for human rights? How come when the Shah left, the Iranian people didn't have any rights anymore? What happened to the women?…There is oppression which exists in the name of religion in Iran. What happened to those who cared?
Asadollah Alam, appointed prime minister by the Shah in July 1962, was Pahlavi’s personal confidant. Alam and the Shah had been classmates at the exclusive Swiss boarding school, Institut Le Rosey. He remained in office through major industrial and social reforms implemented by the Shah, sometimes referred to as the “White Revolution.” Alam wrote of the Shah’s concerns over Carter’s election in his diary: “Who knows what sort of calamity he [Carter] may unleash on the world?”
In an interview with President Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the former president of France during the time of America’s first crisis with Iran, I was told that in 1979 he met with Carter in Guadalupe for a summit, as did Helmut Schmidt of Germany and James Callahan of Great Britain. Carter told this group of men that the US was going to support Khomeini instead of the Shah of Iran. In essence, Mr. d’Estaing said he realized the US was trading its strongest pro-Western Persian Gulf ally in favor of a terrorist Muslim cleric. “I was horrified,” said d’Estaing. “The only way I can describe Jimmy Carter is that he was a ‘bastard of conscience.’”
Congress took on the task of human rights in 1961 as a direct result of the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. and the Nixon administration’s foreign policy debacles. A law was passed that established official prerequisites for the limitation or rejection of assistance for a nation or nations that repeatedly deny basic civil liberties for people. The law was an attempt to dissociate the U.S. from the unethical and abusive actions of beneficiaries of foreign assistance. Aid would no longer be dependent on a seeming pro-American stance; it would be given to those nations which valued human rights and self-determination.
What made pursuing a human rights agenda even more attractive to Carter’s foreign policy team was a congressional amendment to the Act in 1976 that made the president responsible for the determination of which countries were guilty of abusing the human rights of its citizens.
The escape clause giving the president more decision-making latitude lay in the words “extraordinary circumstances exist which necessitate a continuation of security assistance for such country” ( This allowed a sitting president leeway to determine what aid to which countries was in the national interest of the U.S. Such wording made it possible for Carter to launch his campaign against the Shah of Iran while simply ignoring other abusive regimes such as the one in Indonesia and ultimately being instrumental in the Shah’s ouster.
With the election of Jimmy Carter and his stance against the Shah, the U.S. was suddenly deprived of level heads that would have provided access to Persian Gulf oil. A relationship that for decades had been friendly had become adversarial. A deviously clever, manipulative fanatic was suddenly in control of all decision-making in Iran, an old man who had no desire to negotiate with his sworn enemy—the “Great Satan”.
As the Iranians relentlessly pursued the Shah’s assets, purported to be stashed in American banks, Khomeini’s negotiators demanded a total of $24 billion dollars be transferred to a bank in Algeria. Just days before Carter was to leave office, Iran capitulated and agreed to Carter’s demands to pay off loans owned to U.S. banks. In marathon sessions new drafts were produced, new documents drawn, and the Bank of England was approved as the repository of escrow funds. Shortly after 4:00 A.M. on Inauguration Day, January 20, 1981, the Carter administration relinquished $7.977 billion to the Iranians. According to one source, the transfer required fourteen banks and the participation of five nations acting concurrently.
Since the talk of lessening sanctions on the Islamic republic, former President Carter has been surprisingly silent. Could it be that even he realizes the danger of a nuclear Iran?

Friday, February 7, 2014

Cut Israel in Half

by: Michael D. Evans
Cut Israel in HalfSecretary of State John Kerry is on an all-out sprint to force Israel into accepting the US “framework proposal,” a document that would outline a preliminary agreement on key issues and could receive at least a partial Israeli and Palestinian approval by April 29. My long-time friend, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, described Kerry as “obsessive and messianic” in his efforts to coax Israel into a peace agreement (
This is fundamentally the Bill Clinton roadmap for peace which he proposed in 2000. It gave the Palestinians a state with East Jerusalem as its capital, as well as a large portion of the West Bank. The nine-month gestation goal is very similar to the story of two women who claimed the same child. King Solomon, in his wisdom, declared, “Give me a sword. I will divide the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other.” Mercy prevailed because of Solomon’s judgment.
In John Kerry’s case, it appears the opposite has happened. He has stated, “If these talks fail, we will be faced with intense boycott pressure.” Without question, his statement was diplomatic blackmail. A nice Jewish—state—you—got—there—I—hate—to—see—anything—happen—to—it. Kerry his repeated his threat worldwide thus building a campaign to delegitimize that nation of Israel. People are very sensitive to this, especially as there are talks of boycotts and other dire consequences.
The Secretary of State is holding a “boycott” gun to the head of Israel. His acidic words are eating away at the foundation of Israel’s economy. The largest Dutch bank divested itself from Israel’s Bank Hapoalim because the latter funds the presence of “squatters” on Palestine territory in contravention of international law ( This move is the latest step in a rash of European efforts  to divest from Israeli economic enterprises located on what is perceived to be Palestinian land.
Response to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s appeal that Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians accept a Jewish state, the opposite has been done—Abbas stated clearly that he would not recognize Israel. The Obama/Kerry plan calls for a NATO force to be assigned indefinitely to any future Palestinian state. In addition, the PA has no tolerance for a single Jew living in any territory it controls.
Prime Minister Menachem Begin was confronted by then-President Jimmy Carter over this same issue. At Camp David, Carter told Mr. Begin that the United States did not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Begin responded, “The State of Israel does not recognize your non-recognition. It was and is our capital long before Washington, DC was yours.” He went on to say, “Mr. President, if the governor of Pennsylvania (which has many towns named after Israeli towns, i.e., Bethlehem) stated that only whites could reside in his state, would you have supported this?”
Carter responded, “Adamantly not! If he did that, he would be a racist.”
“Then you are asking me, as Prime Minister of Israel, to support a policy that is equally racist—one which would only allow Arabs, but not Jews, to live in our Bible Land.”
In March 2013, President Barack Obama visited Yad Vashem, the memorial in Jerusalem to the six million Jews murdered in the Holocaust ( While there, he declared, “Here on your ancient land, let it be said for all the world to hear, the State of Israel does not exist because of the Holocaust, but with the survival of a strong Jewish State of Israel, such a Holocaust will never happen again.” Mr. Obama was right then, but his present “framework” plan led by Secretary of State John Kerry undermines everything the president said.
It would be a tough sell to convince the Jewish people that its greatest enemy—Iran—a country that wants to wipe Israel off the map, and is but the turn of a screwdriver away from going nuclear, should have uncompromising US support to stand down the nations that wish to boycott it. At the same time, it would be equally difficult to convince Israel, the United States’ greatest ally in the world that it should surrender half its capital and a large portion of its land to a destabilized terrorist state that weekly launches rockets into Israel. The threat is that if Israel does not acquiesce to pressure from Secretary of State Kerry, the US would lead a boycott against Israel—one that would decimate its economy and make the Jewish state even more vulnerable.
Dr. Michael Evans is a #1 New York Times bestselling author. His latest fiction book, Born Again: 1948 is available at

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

The Elephant in the Room

by: Michael D. Evans
The Elephant in the RoomBenjamin Netanyahu has again challenged Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for his failure to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. During a Likud meeting earlier this week, the prime minister said: "The chairman of the PA was quoted today as saying he is not prepared to recognize the Jewish state. And this comes with him knowing there will not be an agreement without recognition of the nation state of the Jews."  Netanyahu also called “absurd” the idea that Israel would acquiesce to a Palestinian state without the reciprocity of the PA recognizing the Jewish state. Abbas’ failure to acknowledge the Jewish state has become the proverbial elephant in the room during peace negotiations.
Netanyahu further warned, “Now we will see if those same international actors, who until now have solely put pressure on Israel, will make clear to the Palestinian Authority what exactly will happen to the Palestinians if there will not be an agreement. Because, unless the Palestinians understand they will pay a price for the failure of peace talks, they will prefer not to continue the talks."
The prime minister’s comments followed a warning from US Secretary of State John Kerry that Israel faces the risk of losing its legal status and of additional embargoes should the current situation continue without a breakthrough in the so-called peace process. Netanyahu pledged that outside pressures will not force him to take chances with the safety and security of the citizens of the nation of Israel.
Minister of Economics Naftali Bennett took exception to Kerry’s threat of boycotts against Israel. He responded, "The Jewish people are stronger than the threats. We won't give in to scare tactics. They're trying to crush our spirit, but we'll win. How? By telling the truth over and over again.”
Bennett scorned statements by Palestinian Authority negotiator Saeb Erekat who declared that the Palestinians had resided in the region longer than the Jews. Said Bennett, “The Land of Israel has been the inheritance of the Jewish People for 3,800 years. In the same Bible that all Muslims and Christians – and of course Jews – believe, it says G-d gave the Land to the Jewish Nation. This is written in Hebrew and addressed to the Jews. Israel was the Jewish homeland thousands of years before there were Palestinians.”
In 2005, a movement of divestment, sanctions and boycotts against the Jewish state was launched. The BDS group had called for international economic pressure against Israel. The targets included such widely known brands as Pampers, Victoria's Secret, Volvo, Intel, Israeli hummus, Motorola, Hewlett-Packard, Starbucks, McDonald's, and SodaStream, among others.
SodaStream spokesperson and actress Scarlett Johansson revealed in a Huffington Post blog interview that she is "proud of the...quality of their product and work environment." She touted the West Bank factory where Palestinians and Israelis work side-by-side.
While Johansson’s comments were ridiculed by some, they were supported by an unsolicited and comparable reaction from some of the Palestinians employed at the plant.
One young man from the Palestinian village of Jaba confirmed: "I'm happy. We're like family. We have fun. We are Jews and Muslims here. We are here peacefully. We have no problems. Everyone is complaining about settlements here and everywhere, but SodaStream is different.''
Those employed related that their take-home pay is approximately $1,200 per month. This is a princely sum compared to what they would take home in wages from comparable jobs within the Palestinian Authority territory. SodaStream also provides benefits to its workers in the form of medical insurance and a pension plan. Although pressured to resign from her representation of SodaStream, Ms. Johansson resigned from the organization applying that pressure—Oxfam, the non-profit and anti-poverty human rights organization that has operated in the West Bank for years on behalf of the Palestinians.
Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat backed Mr. Netanyahu while speaking at the 11th Jerusalem Conference. He reiterated that “for more than four billion people in the world, [Jerusalem] is the center of the world, for all the tribes and all the sectors." According to the mayor, he appreciates the prime minister’s desire to stand firm against attempts to divide the Holy City.
Dr. Michael Evans is a #1 New York Times bestselling author. His latest fiction book, Born Again: 1948 is available at

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Conspiracy to Divide Jerusalem

by: Michael D. Evans
Conspiracy to Divide JerusalemPresident Barack Obama has officially presented his Middle East peace plan through Secretary of State John Kerry to my long-time friend Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It links the United States of America to a demonic magic show of smoke and mirrors.
The peace plan calls for East Jerusalem, part of the capital city of the State of Israel and the home of Christianity, to become the Islamic capital for a Palestinian state. The payment for this is the promise that the Palestinian Authority will acknowledge Israel’s right of survival as a Jewish state. This is without question the theater of the absurd and a festival of hypocrisy.
On December 11, 1988, I confronted Yasser Arafat when he promised to denounce terrorism. I held up a copy of the PLO Covenant during a meeting of his executive committee and said, “If you denounce terrorism, denounce this document that calls for the destruction of the Jewish state.”
Arafat began to scream, “Shut up, shut up, shut up. What must I do to make you shut up?” I didn't shut up for him, and I will not do so for President Barach Obama. Through the years, I’ve confronted U.S. leaders over Jerusalem—from Ronald Reagan’s National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane to George H. W. Bush’s Secretary of State James Baker at the Madrid Peace Conference.
In Zechariah 12, the prophet declared, “I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.” The battle for Jerusalem has gone on for more than 6,000 years—since the day Abraham pitched his tent on Mount Zion and made a covenant with God. Islamic dictators control over 13 million square kilometers in the Middle East and Israel controls a little over 20,000. The Islamic world wants Palestine as its twenty-second state, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
Prime Minister Menachem Begin to whom I served as an advisor told me that when he went to Camp David in 1978 to make peace with Egypt, President Carter advised him that the United States did not recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Begin answered, “Whether you recognize Jerusalem or don’t recognize Jerusalem, it is the capital of the State of Israel.”
The spiritual attachment of the Jewish people to Jerusalem goes back to the beginning of time. Throughout history, when the Jews were driven from the land, wherever they found themselves in exile, they faced toward Jerusalem when praying. They proclaimed, “Next year in Jerusalem.”
Jerusalem is a small city. It does not stand along a great river as does London, Paris or Rome. It boasts of no port, no major industry, and no known mineral wealth. The city doesn’t stand on a major thoroughfare connected to the rest of the world. Why, then, is Jerusalem the navel of the earth—the shaft that propels the world ever forward? No other city in the world has been ravished and destroyed and invaded as has the city of Jerusalem.
Indeed, Jerusalem belongs to God. The prophets declared that Jerusalem is the only city on earth where God wrote His name. It is the city where heaven and earth met, and will meet again. It is the only city for which we are commanded to pray. Six empires have conquered and occupied Jerusalem. God told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless thee, and curse him who curses thee.”
One prediction has held true throughout history for all nations that have come against the Jewish people: Empires such as the British and Roman Empire are no more. The greatest curse of all will come upon the nation that comes against Jerusalem.
The Holy City is the home of the Temple site—ground zero for spiritual warfare. Like the Great Whore of Babylon, principalities and powers roar across the earth attempting to seduce the nations. Jerusalem is still the apple of God’s eye, His diadem, His firstborn, His chosen, His beloved, the jewel in His crown.
In Joel 3:16, God declares: ‘The Lord will roar from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem; the earth and the heavens will tremble. But the Lord will be a refuge for His people, a stronghold for the people of Israel.”
Dr. Michael Evans is a #1 New York Times bestselling author. His latest fiction book, Born Again: 1948 is available at