Microsoft gave NSA access to Outlook emails, Skype audio/video

Microsoft has collaborated closely with US intelligence services to allow users' communications to be intercepted, including helping the National Security Agency to circumvent the company's own encryption, according to top-secret documents obtained by the Guardian.

The files provided by Edward Snowden illustrate the scale of co-operation between Silicon Valley and the intelligence agencies over the last three years. They also shed new light on the workings of the top-secret Prism program, which was disclosed by the Guardian and the Washington Post last month.

The documents show that:

• Microsoft helped the NSA to circumvent its encryption to address concerns that the agency would be unable to intercept web chats on the new Outlook.com portal;

• The agency already had pre-encryption stage access to email on Outlook.com, including Hotmail;

• The company worked with the FBI this year to allow the NSA easier access via Prism to its cloud storage service SkyDrive, which now has more than 250 million users worldwide;

• Microsoft also worked with the FBI's Data Intercept Unit to "understand" potential issues with a feature in Outlook.com that allows users to create email aliases;

• In July last year, nine months after Microsoft bought Skype, the NSAboasted that a new capability had tripled the amount of Skype video calls being collected through Prism;

• Material collected through Prism is routinely shared with the FBI andCIA, with one NSA document describing the program as a "team sport".

The latest NSA revelations further expose the tensions between Silicon Valley and the Obama administration. All the major tech firms are lobbying the government to allow them to disclose more fully the extent and nature of their co-operation with the NSA to meet their customers'privacy concerns. Privately, tech executives are at pains to distance themselves from claims of collaboration and teamwork given by the NSA documents, and insist the process is driven by legal compulsion.

In a statement, Microsoft said: "When we upgrade or update products we aren't absolved from the need to comply with existing or future lawful demands." The company reiterated its argument that it provides customer data "only in response to government demands and we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers".

In June, the Guardian revealed that the NSA claimed to have "direct access" through the Prism program to the systems of many majorinternet companies, including Microsoft, Skype, Apple, Google, Facebook and Yahoo.

Blanket orders from the secret surveillance court allow these communications to be collected without an individual warrant if the NSAoperative has a 51% belief that the target is not a US citizen and is not on US soil at the time. Targeting US citizens does require an individual warrant, but the NSA is able to collect Americans' communications without a warrant if the target is a foreign national located overseas.

Since Prism's existence became public, Microsoft and the other companies listed on the NSA documents as providers have denied all knowledge of the program and insisted that the intelligence agencies do not have back doors into their systems.

Microsoft's latest marketing campaign, launched in April, emphasizes its commitment to privacy with the slogan: "Your privacy is our priority."

Similarly, Skype's privacy policy states: "Skype is committed to respecting your privacy and the confidentiality of your personal data, traffic data and communications content."

But internal NSA newsletters, marked top secret, suggest the co-operation between the intelligence community and the companies is deep and ongoing.

The latest documents come from the NSA's Special Source Operations (SSO) division, described by Snowden as the "crown jewel" of the agency. It is responsible for all programs aimed at US communications systems through corporate partnerships such as Prism.

The files show that the NSA became concerned about the interception of encrypted chats on Microsoft's Outlook.com portal from the moment the company began testing the service in July last year.

Within five months, the documents explain, Microsoft and the FBI had come up with a solution that allowed the NSA to circumvent encryption on Outlook.com chats

A newsletter entry dated 26 December 2012 states: "MS [Microsoft], working with the FBI, developed a surveillance capability to deal" with the issue. "These solutions were successfully tested and went live 12 Dec 2012."

Two months later, in February this year, Microsoft officially launched the Outlook.com portal.

Another newsletter entry stated that NSA already had pre-encryption access to Outlook email. "For Prism collection against Hotmail, Live, and Outlook.com emails will be unaffected because Prism collects this data prior to encryption."

Microsoft's co-operation was not limited to Outlook.com. An entry dated 8 April 2013 describes how the company worked "for many months" with the FBI – which acts as the liaison between the intelligence agencies and Silicon Valley on Prism – to allow Prism access without separate authorization to its cloud storage service SkyDrive.

The document describes how this access "means that analysts will no longer have to make a special request to SSO for this – a process step that many analysts may not have known about".

The NSA explained that "this new capability will result in a much more complete and timely collection response". It continued: "This success is the result of the FBI working for many months with Microsoft to get this tasking and collection solution established."

A separate entry identified another area for collaboration. "The FBI Data Intercept Technology Unit (DITU) team is working with Microsoft to understand an additional feature in Outlook.com which allows users to create email aliases, which may affect our tasking processes."

The NSA has devoted substantial efforts in the last two years to work with Microsoft to ensure increased access to Skype, which has an estimated 663 million global users.

One document boasts that Prism monitoring of Skype video production has roughly tripled since a new capability was added on 14 July 2012. "The audio portions of these sessions have been processed correctly all along, but without the accompanying video. Now, analysts will have the complete 'picture'," it says.

Eight months before being bought by Microsoft, Skype joined the Prismprogram in February 2011.

According to the NSA documents, work had begun on smoothly integrating Skype into Prism in November 2010, but it was not until 4 February 2011 that the company was served with a directive to comply signed by the attorney general.

The NSA was able to start tasking Skype communications the following day, and collection began on 6 February. "Feedback indicated that a collected Skype call was very clear and the metadata looked complete," the document stated, praising the co-operation between NSA teams and the FBI. "Collaborative teamwork was the key to the successful addition of another provider to the Prism system."

ACLU technology expert Chris Soghoian said the revelations would surprise many Skype users. "In the past, Skype made affirmative promises to users about their inability to perform wiretaps," he said. "It's hard to square Microsoft's secret collaboration with the NSA with its high-profile efforts to compete on privacy with Google."

The information the NSA collects from Prism is routinely shared with both the FBI and CIA. A 3 August 2012 newsletter describes how the NSA has recently expanded sharing with the other two agencies.

The NSA, the entry reveals, has even automated the sharing of aspects of Prism, using software that "enables our partners to see which selectors [search terms] the National Security Agency has tasked to Prism".

The document continues: "The FBI and CIA then can request a copy ofPrism collection of any selector…" As a result, the author notes: "these two activities underscore the point that Prism is a team sport!"

In its statement to the Guardian, Microsoft said:


We have clear principles which guide the response across our entire company to government demands for customer information for both law enforcement and national security issues. First, we take our commitments to our customers and to compliance with applicable law very seriously, so we provide customer data only in response to legal processes.

Second, our compliance team examines all demands very closely, and we reject them if we believe they aren't valid. Third, we only ever comply with orders about specific accounts or identifiers, and we would not respond to the kind of blanket orders discussed in the press over the past few weeks, as the volumes documented in our most recent disclosure clearly illustrate.

Finally when we upgrade or update products legal obligations may in some circumstances require that we maintain the ability to provide information in response to a law enforcement or national security request. There are aspects of this debate that we wish we were able to discuss more freely. That's why we've argued for additional transparency that would help everyone understand and debate these important issues.

In a joint statement, Shawn Turner, spokesman for the director of National Intelligence, and Judith Emmel, spokeswoman for the NSA, said:

The articles describe court-ordered surveillance – and a US company's efforts to comply with these legally mandated requirements. The US operates its programs under a strict oversight regime, with careful monitoring by the courts, Congress and the Director of National Intelligence. Not all countries have equivalent oversight requirements to protect civil liberties and privacy.

They added: "In practice, US companies put energy, focus and commitment into consistently protecting the privacy of their customers around the world, while meeting their obligations under the laws of the US and other countries in which they operate."

• This article was amended on 11 July 2013 to reflect information from Microsoft that it did not make any changes to Skype to allow Prismcollection on or around July 2012.

The Guardian

Israel test-fires new rocket propulsion system

Israel on Friday morning test-fired a rocket propulsion system at the Palmachim air force base south of Tel Aviv. According to a laconic Defense Ministry announcement, “The launch was part of a test that was planned by the defense establishment in advance, and it was carried out as planned.”

Details of the system that was tested weren’t forthcoming.

Israel has been developing a host of missile systems, many of them defensive, and some — at least according to foreign reports — offensive.

In early June, a military official said Israel was speeding up its development of the Arrow 3 long-range missile interception system.

The Arrow 3 would be able to target incoming nuclear or conventional missiles at a higher altitude than its shorter-ranged predecessor, the Arrow 2, said Col. Aviram Hasson, who heads the project.

“We’re thinking mostly about the nuclear threat,” he said, in a thinly veiled reference to Iran’s renegade nuclear program. The Arrow 3′s high-altitude capability makes it an ideal counter to nuclear missiles and to minimize the threat of fallout.

Hasson described Israel’s four-layered missile defense strategy: Iron Dome, protecting against smaller, short-range threats (up to 70 kilometers); David’s Sling, covering mid-range threats (70-200 kilometers); Arrow 2, for long-range attacks; and Arrow 3, for incoming missiles from up to 2,500 kilometers away.

The shorter-range systems are mostly meant to counter attacks from the Gaza Strip, Lebanon and Syria.

In November Israel conducted its first successful interception of a target missile by the new David’s Sling missile defense system, which is expected to come online in 2014.

On the offensive end, Israel has reportedly also been testing the Jericho 3, an intercontinental ballistic missile said to have a range of over 10,000 kilometers.

Times of Israel

Spread of DNA databases sparks ethical concerns

LONDON (AP) - You can ditch your computer and leave your cellphone at home, but you can't escape your DNA.

It belongs uniquely to you - and, increasingly, to the authorities.

Countries around the world are collecting genetic material from millions of citizens in the name of fighting crime and terrorism - and, according to critics, heading into uncharted ethical terrain.

Leaders include the United States - where the Supreme Court recently backed the collection of DNA swabs from suspects on arrest - and Britain, where police held samples of almost 7 million people, more than 10 percent of the population, until a court-ordered about-face saw the incineration of a chunk of the database.

The expanding trove of DNA in official hands has alarmed privacy campaigners, and some scientists. Recent leaks about U.S. surveillance programs by former NSA systems analyst Edward Snowden have made people realize their online information and electronic communications may not be as secure as they thought. Could the same be true of the information we hold within our genes? DNA samples that can help solve robberies and murders could also, in theory, be used to track down our relatives, scan us for susceptibility to disease, or monitor our movements.

Earlier this year Yaniv Erlich, who runs a lab at MIT's Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, published a paper in the journal Science describing how he was able to identify individuals, and their families, from anonymous DNA data in a research project. All it took was a computer algorithm, a genetic genealogy website and searches of publicly available Internet records.

"It was a very weird feeling - a 'wow' feeling," Erlich told The Associated Press. "I had to take a walk outside just to think about this process."

Erlich says DNA databases have enormous positive power, both for fighting crime and in scientific research. But, he said, "our work shows there are privacy limitations."

Ethical qualms have done little to stop the growth of genetic databases around the world.

The international police agency Interpol listed 54 nations with national police DNA databases in 2009, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany and China. Brazil and India have since announced plans to join the club, and the United Arab Emirates intends to build the world's first database of an entire national population.

The biggest database is in the United States - the FBI's Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS, which holds information on more than 11 million people suspected of or convicted of crimes.

It is set to grow following a May Supreme Court ruling that upheld the right of police forces to take DNA swabs without a warrant from people who are arrested, not just those who are convicted. (Policies on DNA collection vary by state; more than half of the states and the federal government currently take DNA swabs after arrests.)

The court's justices were divided about implications for individuals' rights. Justice Anthony Kennedy, for the five-judge majority, called the taking of DNA a legitimate and reasonable police booking procedure akin to fingerprinting.

But dissenting Justice Antonin Scalia argued that it marked a major change in police powers. "Because of today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason," he said.

A similar note of caution has been struck by Alec Jeffreys, the British geneticist whose 1984 discovery of DNA fingerprinting revolutionized criminal investigations. He has warned that "mission creep" could see authorities use DNA to accumulate information on people's racial origins, medical history and psychological profile.

Erlich agreed that scenario was possible, if not likely.

"If it's not regulated and the police can do whatever they want ... they can use your DNA to infer things about your health, your ancestry, whether your kids are your kids," he said.

Police forces have already tracked down criminals through the DNA of their innocent relatives, a practice that is both a goldmine for investigators and, according to skeptics, an ethical minefield. Charles Tumosa, a clinical assistant professor in forensic studies at the University of Baltimore who is wary of the potential for genetic surveillance, says relatives of suspects could be identified through DNA and leaned on for information about their family members.

And yet familial DNA searches have helped solve terrible crimes. In Britain, a sex attacker known as the "shoe rapist" was caught after 20 years through DNA from his sister, who was in the database due to a drunken-driving arrest. In Kansas in 2005, police identified Dennis Rader as a serial killer known as "BTK" through his daughter's DNA obtained, without her knowledge, from a pap smear in her medical records.

"There's got to be a debate," said Tumosa. "Nobody has talked this out.

"At what point do you say, enough is enough? Do we want to have a society where 5 percent of the crime is unsolved, or do we want to have a society where 100 percent of the crime is solved" but privacy is compromised. "What's the trade-off?"

Both supporters and critics of DNA databases point to Britain, where until recently, police could take the DNA of anyone 10 or older arrested for even the most minor offense - and keep it forever, even if the suspect was later acquitted or released without charge.

Police say the database has helped solve thousands of crimes, including murders and rapes. On the other side of the coin are hundreds of thousands of innocent people, including children, who feel shamed and tainted by inclusion on a database of criminal suspects - a status some legal experts say undermines the presumption of innocence.

"A lot of British people were very shocked to find themselves or their children ending up on the database for minor alleged offenses such as throwing a snowball at a car," said Helen Wallace, director of the privacy group GeneWatch, which campaigns for restrictions on collection of DNA and other personal information.

After a long legal battle - waged in part by a youth who was arrested at 11 on suspicion of attempted robbery and had his DNA retained despite being acquitted - the European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2008 that Britain's "blanket and indiscriminate" storage of DNA violated the right to a private life.

The U.K. was forced to trim its huge database. Under a law passed last year known as the Protection of Freedoms Act, the government is destroying the DNA profiles - strings of numbers derived from DNA samples that are used to identify individuals - of a million people who were arrested for minor offenses but not convicted. People acquitted of serious crimes have their DNA profiles kept for up to five years.

Britain also has incinerated more than 6 million physical DNA samples - mostly swabs of saliva - taken from suspects. Samples, which could previously be kept indefinitely, must now be destroyed after six months.

Destroying the samples is seen as key to limiting DNA databases to crime-fighting rather than snooping, because it means stored DNA cannot be used to trace relatives or susceptibility to disease.

The U.K. government says the curbs have restored a sense of proportion to Britain's database, but some aspects of the country's genetic monitoring remain murky.

The U.K. DNA ethics watchdog has expressed concerns about a secret counterterrorism database, which, according to the Metropolitan Police Authority, contains "DNA obtained through searches, crime scenes and arrests in relation to counterterrorism" - including samples from people stopped and questioned at ports and borders, even if they are not arrested.

The Home Office, which oversees police and the DNA database, said there was a "robust regulatory framework" for the counterterrorism database. But it would not disclose how large it is, who has access to it or whether the information is shared with other countries.

Some authorities on DNA say fears of genetic intrusion are misplaced.

Chris Asplen, a former assistant U.S. attorney who now heads the Global Alliance for Rapid DNA Testing, argues that DNA is not dramatically different from other information the authorities already hold about millions of people, such as fingerprints, social security numbers or automobile registrations.

But he does see avenues for abuse.

"There is an argument to be made that because that biological sample exists, the government could go back and do other things with it that are not authorized by the law," he said. "It's a constant tension between government and people, particularly when technology is applied."


Myway

Bernanke Melts The Dollar And Stock Markets Rise!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why Does the Government Need Guillotines?

When retired FBI agent, the now deceased Ted Gunderson, reportedly told a gathering of militia members that the federal government had set up 1,000 internment camps across the country, I had no trouble believing his statement because there is ample documentation to support his statement (e.g.REX 84, Operation Garden Plot and now the NDAA). However, when Gunderson reported that the federal government was storing over 500,000 caskets outside of Atlanta, I also knew he was accurate on this point because Sherrie Wilcox found the evidence in the adjacent photo. However, when I heard that Gunderson was accusing the government of storing 30,000 guillotines, I thought he had lost his mind.

Why Would the Government Want to Store Guillotines?

Gunderson told various patriot groups that the guillotines were being stored for the day that the government declares martial law and moves in to round up and execute American dissenters. Gunderson prophetically told patriot groups that the federal government was going to keep track of all of us. The last statement has indeed proven accurate given the recent Snowden/NSA scandal.

Can somebody please explain to me why the government would need to order 30,000 guillotines? For what legitimate purpose could these tools of execution be utilized?

Off With Their Heads

The guillotine was invented by a Frenchman named Dr. Guillotine. The guillotine reached the height of its popularity when it was mainly used in the French Revolution to eliminate any potential opposition from people with “dangerous ideas.” 

The guillotine has never been used inside of the United States. The United States has executed people by firing squad, hanging, the electric chair and lethal injection. The US has never executed a convicted criminal through the use of the guillotine.

Given these facts, then why in God’s good name would this government import 30,000 guillotines as Gunderson claimed? Oh, I know that some of the sheep are now looking up from the ground and have just said “there aren’t are any guillotines in the United States.”  Then please tell me, sheep of America, why did Representative Doug Teper, of the Georgia Legislative Assembly (Democrat) introduced a bill which will supplant the method of execution, the electric chair, with the guillotine?

Organ Harvesting?

Doug Teper (D)

Have you ever heard the allegations which accuse some doctors, primarily in China, of killing patients in order to sell their organs on the black market? After you read the following paragraphs, you may conclude that those rumors are true. When Representative Teper was asked about his motivation to exclusively use the guillotine to execute death row inmates, he said, it would allow for death-row inmates as organ donors. The very spooky Teper further reasoned that the “Blade makes a clean cut and leaves vital organs intact.”  I will be happy to let this statement speak for itself. Below is a draft of the legislation.

HB 1274 – Death penalty; guillotine provisions

SECTION 1.

  1- 8  The General Assembly finds that while prisoners condemned to
  1- 9  death may wish to donate one or more of their organs for
  1-10  transplant, any such desire is thwarted by the fact that
  1-11  electrocution makes all such organs unsuitable for
  1-12  transplant. The intent of the General Assembly in enacting
  1-13  this legislation is to provide for a method of execution
  1-14  which is compatible with the donation of organs by a
  1-15  condemned prisoner.

                         SECTION 2.

  1-16  Article 2 of Chapter 10 of Title 17 of the Official Code of
  1-17  Georgia Annotated, relating to the death penalty generally,
  1-18  is amended by striking in its entirety Code Section
  1-19  17-10-38, relating to death sentences generally, and
  1-20  inserting in lieu thereof the following:

  1-21    “17-10-38. (Index)

  1-22    (a) All persons who have been convicted of a capital
  1-23    offense and have had imposed upon them a sentence of death
  1-24    shall, at the election of the condemned, suffer such
  1-25    punishment either by electrocution or by guillotine.  If
  1-26    the condemned fails to make an election by the thirtieth
  1-27    day preceding the date scheduled for execution, punishment
  1-28    shall be by electrocution.

  1-29    (b) In all cases in which the defendant is sentenced to be
  1-30    electrocuted executed, it shall be the duty of the trial
  1-31    judge in passing sentence to direct that the defendant be
                                 -1- (Index)

                                                  LC 21 3643

  2- 1    delivered to the Department of Corrections for
  2- 2    electrocution execution at a state correctional
  2- 3    institution designated by the department.”

                         SECTION 3.

  2- 4  Said article is further amended by striking in its entirety
  2- 5  Code Section 17-10-44, relating to death chamber apparatus
  2- 6  and related matters, and inserting in lieu thereof the
  2- 7  following:

  2- 8    “17-10-44. (Index)

  2- 9    The Department of Corrections shall provide a death
  2-10    chamber and all necessary apparatus, machinery, and
  2-11    appliances for inflicting the penalty of death by
  2-12    electrocution or by guillotine.”

Where would the proposed Georgia Legislature guillotines have come from unless Gunderson was correct in that 15,000 are being stored in Montana and 15,000 are being stored in Georgia?

An Efficient Killing Machine

Has anyone bothered to do the math? A single guillotine reportedly can chop off the heads of about 100 people per hour. In one hour, the federal government has the capacity to execute as many as three million people. In one ten hour day, 30 million people could be executed by way of the guillotine.

Other Alphabet Soup Agents Speak Out

Annie DeRiso and Bill Pawelec

Ted Gunderson is not the only former alphabet soup agent  to tell all about guillotines. The late Bill Pawelec, ex-CIA, was a close friend of mine and eventually became the significant other of the News Director for The Common Sense Show, Annie DeRiso. Pawelec told both Annie and I on several occasions that guillotines were being stored on several military bases. The late A.C. Griffith, ex-NSA, said the same on more than one occasion on my talk show. In light of these confirmations from known and from public sources, as well as the proposed legislation of Rep. Teper to introduce the use of guillotines on American soil, I believe that there is no question that the story is true.

Implications

  We already know that the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 2.2 billion rounds of ammunition to go with their purchase of  2700 armored personnel carriers. Do you realize that this is enough ammo to fight  a war for about seven years and that there are enough DHS personnel carriers to allocate over 50 per state? Can you imagine if they were concentrated in their distribution patterns? This would be the equivalent of an invading army as DHS goes from house to house and seizes dissidents by the millions and America will soon have their own version of the French Revolution

Since this story broke, I have asked the question why guillotines? I have talked to several of my off-the-record sources and the consensus is frightening.  Everyone that I have spoken to agrees that the guillotine is highly efficient.  Most everyone I have talked with stated that organ harvesting will indeed be even a bigger business and the guillotine is the most efficient killing machine to that end. Some of my sources stated that the next phase of the transhumanism experiments and developments requires a severed human head to facilitate the mixing of humans and animals into one sentient being. Further, futuristic DARPA robots will have human heads after the initial purge and subsequent executions (see photo below).  This makes sense because after the head is severed, the eyes blink and signs of life continue for up to a minute. This would allow a team to “freeze”and to preserve the head for whatever purpose. And just as frightening, I was told that some of Satanic rituals require severed human heads and we know the global elite, in large part, are indeed Satanists.

Can you tell the real person from the DARPA produced robot? Will human looking robots replace interim human slaves?

I can understand people being skeptical about the guillotines because my first reaction was to reject the notion under my personal veil of cognitive dissonance. Yet, the emerging facts speak for themselves.

Although I did not know Gunderson personally, I did know Bill Pawelec as a close friend and I was well acquainted with Griffith. And even if Pawelec and Griffith were jointly mistaken on this issue, how would one explain away Teper’s efforts to introduce the guillotine into the Georgia justice system?

The end game implications are frightening. When we add the topic of guillotines to what we already know about 2.2 billion rounds of DHS ammo and 2700 armored DHS personnel carriers, why should this be so hard to believe? How can take the fact that DHS has armed to the teeth against Americans and are planning to murder us in horrific ways as anything but a declaration of war?

Be prepared to be shocked as you watch the following chilling report on the possession and intent of the military with regard to the use of guillotines.

The 64 million dollar question is who is the government planning to use these guillotines on? Perhaps the following scripture from Revelations speaks to this point.

And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.”Revelation 20:4

Are We Next?

The common sense Show

Muslims and Jews agree on coming end times

A Turkish television show featured prominent Muslim and Jewish leaders agreeing on the coming end times and declaring an expectation to live in “love, peace, friendship, brotherhood, good faith, kindness.”

The program, from Turkish A9 Television, featured several Muslim leaders and two officials from the Sanhedrin, the traditional seat of Jewish justice.

The Muslim participants are Oktar Babuna and Adnan Oktar, both prominent Islamic personalities. The Jews are Rabbi Yeshayahu Hollander, a member of the Sanhedrin and an associate justice on the Jerusalem Court for Issues of Bnei Noah, and Rabbi Ben Abrahamson, a historian and consultant at Jerusalem’s Rabbinical Court on matters regarding Islam.

The discussion, broadcast Nov. 21, focused on the Jewish Tanakh’s description of the end times, what the Quran states and the possibility that the religions’ expected messiahs – the Mahdi for Muslims and King Messiah for the Jews – are one and the same.

The Sanhedrin calls itself a special court for matters concerning the nation. It explains that while the Israeli government is secular, the Sanhedrin is part of the “historical government of the Jewish people.”

The panel members mark the prophecies concerning the coming end times.

Said Babuna: “The wars and violence coming to an end in the time of the King Messiah. Rabbi Hollander has read the quotes about peace from the Torah. ‘I will take away the chariots … and the battle bow will be broken. … He [King Messiah] will proclaim peace to the nations.’ Zechariah Chapter 9:10.

“So here in these quotes it is said that the armaments will be stopped. Explain it to us a little bit, interpret it for us,” said Adnan Oktar.

“Armaments will be stopped, all weapons will be taken out of use, inshaAllah. And the King Messiah, Hazrat Mahdi (pbuh) will bring peace to the nations. Peace will come to the whole world,” said Babuna.

“So in the end times there will be no more tanks, cannon balls or rifles. That is good,” Adnan Oktar said. “So it says that there will be no more military maneuvers. There will be no more wars. That is good.

“That is the promise of Allah,” Oktar said, “there will be peace in the world.”

However, two key experts on Islam and the Middle East told WND there are concerns raised by the content of the interview.

Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim Brotherhood activist who now is a Christian researching Islam, told WND the encounter “has prophetic significance. ”

“Turkey is leading Israel into making a peace treaty, which Isaiah calls ‘a covenant with death’ (Isaiah 28:15) which will happen in Egypt (Isaiah 30:1-2),” he said. “Soon Turkey is likely to confirm the Camp David Accord, which is the main concern for Israel and its neighbor Egypt and if this happens, then we need to be looking upwards, for our redemption draweth nigh.

“The Muslim world is awaiting an Islamic Messiah who will make a covenant (Ba’ya) for seven years. If in doubt, this interview will tell you that this Mahdi will come from a non-Arab region and will enter Jerusalem and make a covenant with the sons of Aaron (the Jews) as has always been stated by Adnan Oktar,” he said.

Shoebat commented further:

Whoever imagined that before Jesus’ second coming that Israel must be reestablished with its religious legal institution, the Sanhedrin, the very agency that put him on trial before a Jewish Council. Recently, the Sanhedrin, still, chose someone else besides its rightful Messiah, and have even embraced the Islamic idea, that Messiah could be the Islamic Mahdi.

On A9 TV with the Turkish influential Muslim Adnan Oktar, an ardent agent of the Turkish Islamist regime had Yeshayahu Hollander a leading justice of the Sanhedrin. During the interview, the legal justice, Hollander, quoted verses that pertain to the Millennium Kingdom of Messiah while deliberately ignoring what comes before; the Antichrist and the Tribulation Period.

The selective verses given by Hollander were completely and purposefully taken out of context. Hollander gave reconciliatory verses from Scripture as to create a peace treaty between Turkey and Israel. During the interview, Hollander of the Sanhedrin started the program by quoting Zechariah 9:10 ‘The battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the nations.’

No other verses from Zechariah 9 were given. The prudent will begin to realize that Israel’s main enemy is mentioned within the context of Zechariah 9:13 the Lord declares, ‘I will rouse your sons, O Zion, against your sons, O Yavan.’ In this passage, Israel is seen fighting against Ionia or Yavan, which is simply a province that was located on the west coast of modern Turkey, the very nation the Sanhedrin visited to embrace the idea of Mahdi as Messiah.

This is crucial, because the clear context of this battle is the return of Christ: ‘Then Jehovah will appear over them’ and fight on their behalf. So in the end times, at the time when Jesus returns, the Jews (Zion) will be engaged in a war with Turkey (Yavan) and then peace will reign.

Oktar in the interview comforts the Sanhedrin promising that the government of Turkey will establish peace between Turkey, Israel, Egypt and the Palestinians.

Mustafa Aykol, a Turkish newspaper columnist and frequent Erdogan defender, said his Justice and Development Party, known by its Turkish initials, AKP, is a model for Islamist parties in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. In a new book, ‘Islam Without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty,’ Aykol told Reuters that there can be liberalism within Islam and challenges the authoritarian interpretations of Iran, Saudi Arabia and militant groups.

Today, we see Egypt falling as we have stated years ago and a current civil war is on its way.

So why is the Sanhedrin desperate to make peace with Turkey? Aykol adds: ‘Israel cannot afford to lose Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan at the same time. The U.S. should be much more active in trying to reconcile Ankara and Tel Aviv. Once this is achieved, the next step should be to re-launch the Syrian-Israeli dialogue under Turkish mediation.’

Turkey is the hope of Israel, even if they have to accept Mahdi.

He explains most people know about the idea of a reign of peace during the end times.

But that peace, according to the Bible, is not based on God and will not last.

Another expert, Joel Richardson, author of “The Islamic Antichrist,” “Islam and the End Times,” and “The Mideast Beast,” recently was part of an A9 TV conversation with Adnan Oktar in which Oktar described the God of the Bible and Allah of the Quran as “the same God.”

“We both love the same prophets, we both believe in the same hereafter, we both believe in heaven and hell, we both believe in the same destiny,” he said. “Consequently, there are many aspects that we have an alliance about.”

He also said: “King Messiah has been anticipated for about four thousand years. The time has come. The founding of the state of Israel is a portent of it anyway. The founding of the state of Israel is the portent of the appearance of the King Messiah. There is an intense inclination toward religion among Jews and that also is a portent of the appearance of King Messiah.”

Oktar said the “Mahdi” will be “active in the world in alliance with Christians and put away the atheist, materialist system.”

Richardson explained as a Christian he doesn’t believe in alliances with Muslims.

“But what I do believe in is building friendships,” he said.

He told WND that the religious leaders are well-intentioned but in error.

He said, for example, the idea that the Allah of the Muslims is the same as God of the Bible is false.

“The God of the Bible is revealed in his character, the fact he’s a father. Throughout the Tanakh, God revealed is a God who draws near, hears, sees us, appears through the vessel of the angel of the Lord, wrestles with Jacob,” he said. “The god of the Quran is a purely transcendent being that never reveals himself, doesn’t relate to his followers in a loving way … calls them his slaves.”

He said it’s important that faithful Christians not start making covenants with non-Christians.

“It’s essential that Muslims recognize the fact they they need to reject the false prophet Muhammad and become followers of Jesus, the true historical Jesus of the Bible, not the false Jesus of the Quran,” he said.

While Oktar contends the Islamic Mahdi and the Messiah are one and the same, Richardson has argued in his writings that the Mahdi actually is the one known as the Antichrist.

Oktar expressed high hopes for mankind during the end times.

“We will embrace each other, we will become brothers. In the time of our prophet, Muslims married Jewish women, they ate each other’s food, they have done trade; they were living as brothers, as friends. The same days will come again. According to our belief the Mahdi that will appear will rule over the Jews with the original of the Torah, he will rule over the Christians with the original of the Gospel and he will rule over Muslims with the Quran. Love, peace, friendship, brotherhood, good faith, kindness will envelop all around.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/watch-muslims-jews-agree-on-coming-end-times/#pGjwkZpDSYwcmXYG.99