Since Israel is THE key to the timing of the next phase of the planned World War III to produce Antichrist, we looked with great interest on two major events which seem to indicate that the planned withdrawal from the West Bank may begin sooner rather than later.

NEWS BRIEF: "Israel 'has to withdraw further' : Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert", BBC News, 24 January 2006

"Israel will have to withdraw from further parts of the West Bank, acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said. In his first policy speech as interim leader, he said the main challenge ahead was to shape Israel's borders for good to ensure a Jewish majority. It could not continue to control parts with a Palestinian majority, but would keep its main settlements ... Mr Olmert is also acting as chair of Kadima, a party formed by PM Ariel Sharon before he suffered a stroke. The party intends to run in Israeli general elections on 28 March on a platform of withdrawal from occupied territory."

These statements are surprising only because observers believed that the new Kadima Party -- founded by Sharon -- would have to move slowly if it ever hoped to attain its goal of withdrawal from the West Bank. The theory was that Olmert was no Ariel Sharon -- he did not have the war history which made Sharon a hero in Israel, he did not have the political contacts which elevated Sharon so powerfully, and he did not have Sharon's charisma.

Therefore, Conventional Wisdom held that Olmert could act in no other capacity than as Acting Prime Minister. He simply could not force an early unilateral withdrawal. Sharon's new Kadima Party, which is totally committed to withdrawal, would have to wait until the March 28 election to even hope to begin withdrawal -- and even then they could begin withdrawal only if they won an unusually strong mandate from the voters.

Given all this Conventional Wisdom, it is very surprising that Olmert spoke so boldly one day before the Palestinian election on January 25. As you can see, Olmert is staking out an extremely strong and confident position, the same position Sharon had taken. Olmert said Israel would "shape Israel's borders for good to ensure a Jewish majority", which means pulling out all Jewish settlers from territories where Palestinians predominate. Olmert said further that, while Israel would no longer control sections "with a Palestinian majority", it would retain its main settlements in the West Bank.

This latter statement reflects Sharon's thinking that Israel could not expect to forcibly withdraw 240,000 settlers, but could conceivably withdraw 80,000. Let us review this story from August, last year.

NEWS BRIEF: "Israel likely to keep 180,000 settlers-Sharon aide", Reuters AlertNet News, August 5, 2005

"JERUSALEM, Aug 4 (Reuters) - Israel expects at least 180,000 of the current 240,000 settlers in the occupied West Bank will be able to stay in their homes with approval from the United States, an aide to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said ... Senior adviser Dov Weisglass made the remarks two weeks ahead of Israel's evacuation of 9,000 settlers from the Gaza Strip and a corner of the West Bank in a plan Israel bills as 'disengagement' from conflict with the Palestinians ... 'Altogether, we talk about 180,000 settlers of a total population of 240,000. So this is of course a significant step forward in this matter', Weisglass said in a conference broadcast on Israeli radio."

This article then enunciates exactly which towns and cities would be kept.

"He (Weisglass) said that Washington backed Israel keeping major settlement blocs as 'an integral part of the state of Israel. It means the entire area of greater Jerusalem, the city of Maale Adumim, the settlements in the Gush Etzion area and the bloc of settlements around Ariel'."

These towns and cities would be tightly tied to Israel's security network, and the 180,000 settlers living in this area would be allowed to remain. This means that Israel has to withdraw "only" 80,000 settlers, still almost 10 times the number withdrawn from The Gaza Strip in August. However, lessons learned from that withdrawal should prove to be priceless as Israel withdraws from the West Bank. These cities and towns mentioned above are close enough to Jerusalem proper that military security provided for the capitol city could simply be extended.

Now, let us return to the current BBC News article for more important revelations from Acting Prime Minister Olmert.

"Mr Olmert told a conference at Herzliya that Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and part of the West Bank last year was a turning point ... Mr Olmert said that Israel would keep security zones, the main settlement blocs, and places important to the Jewish people, such as Jerusalem. 'There can be no Jewish state without Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty', he said."

In other words, The Gaza Strip operation set a precedent for withdrawal which will now make it easier for the Israeli government to forcibly withdraw from the West Bank.