Link analysis of the topics and Issues that may affect the ACOE SYNOD

By NEC-SE on May 24, 2015 • ( 2 Comments )

On 17 May, 2015 His Grace Mar Sargis Yosip, bishop emeritus, now residing in Modesto, CA, delivered a sermon at the Mar Addai Parish of the Assyrian Church of the East in Turlock, CA. H.G. Mar Sargis touched on the selection from the gospel that was read that Sunday and then followed with a history and praise of the late Patriarch, His Holiness Mar Dinkha IV, whose forty day memorial was held on that day. During his sermon, he spoke of the coming Assyrian Church of the East (ACOE) synod that is currently planned to take place in Arbil Iraq the first week of June 2015. The Ankawa/Arbil area, Iraq comprises the current capital city area of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG).[1]

[1] Footage of mass and sermon was recorded by ANB (Assyrian National Broadcasting) Satellite. 17 May, 2015.

On 17 April 2015 a car bomb exploded outside of the US Consulate in Ankawa where a large number of Christian Assyrians reside. Currently there are an estimated 70,000 Assyrian Christian refugees that also live in Ankawa. An attack against them will be seen as an attack against the Church, forcing the newly elected Church leader to make a call on how to support the community.

Note: NEC-SE broke the news of the attack on the U.S. Consulate, in Ankawa Iraq, ten minutes before the first reports from Reuter were generated. The NEC-SE report was relayed during a live interview on the Chuck Morse show. http://nec-se.webbar312.net/2015/04/19/attack-on-u-s-consulate/.

As Mar Sargis Yosip continued with his memorial remembrance of Mar Dinkha IV, among the praises for the late Patriarch was the fact that His Holiness was an avid peacemaker. This led as a segue for Bishop Mar Sargis to mention that among the Holy Synod’s ACOE bishops there would also be a few bishops of the Ancient Church of the East (Old Calendar) present, invited by the former to help choose the ACOE’s next Patriarch.

This leads NEC-SE to inquire about the current power players in the Assyrian portion of the equation in the Near East region; who has a stake in what; and a brief history of the aforementioned parties.

Today’s press release states: “Meeting between the delegations of the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church for the achievement of a unified Church of the East. A cordial and fraternal meeting took place in Chicago, IL USA at the premises of St. Andrew’s Assyrian Church of the East on Friday, the 22nd of May 2015.”[2]

[2] http://news.assyrianchurch.org/2015/05/24/press-release/12297

Creating a breach point into the Assyrian Church

The Holy Apostolic and Catholic Assyrian Church of the East has held continuous apostolic succession since the times of Jesus the Messiah. It is the Church that is mentioned in 1 Peter 5:13 as the “Chosen Church of Babylon,” established by the Apostle Simon (Peter) and in territories further north, by Apostles Addai, Mari, Thomas, et al. However, due to political and territorial conflicts in the region, there have been splits within the Church.

One of the most recent of these schisms was in 1551 when Yuhanna Solaqa left the Church to be in communion with Rome. The followers of this sect were in later years called by the Roman Catholics as Chaldeans, not to be confused with the Chaldeans of antiquity, who invaded and established a dynasty in what is now southern Iraq.

The most recent schism occurred when in 1964, Metropolitan Toma Darmo, broke off to form a new Church called the Ancient Church of the East. The schism was based mainly on the fact that the Assyrian Church of the East still had a policy of hereditary succession (which was actually changed not long after) but the reason cited to the public was the late Patriarch Mar Eshai Shimun’s reforms which included a shift in the Church calendar, bringing the dates in line with Western Christianity.[3]–[4]

[3] Giwargis Bet Benyamin d’ Asheeta. “Reshanoota d’ Atourayeh d’ doora d’ Isri” (Assyrians’ Leadership in the 20th Century). In Syriac. Chicago : 1987, pp. 125-134

[4] Dr. Mar Aprem (George Mooken). “The Assyrians in Iraq : A Travelogue.” Trichur , India : M. T. B. C. Technical Training Center , 1990, p. 42.”

After the successful breach; Delegitimizing the Credibility and the Capability of the Assyrian Church

Roughly about a decade ago, the Assyrian Church of the East entered into litigation against a bishop, which it had defrocked, named Bawai Soro. Through the release of various documents, records, and bank statements, it was discovered that the former bishop was in a three-way agreement with the late patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church, Mar Emmanuel Deli, and Mr. Younadam Kanna, the elected representative of Iraqi Christians in the Parliament of Iraq.[5]

[5] Admission given by Ashur B. Soro various times between the years of 2003-2007 in public speeches.

One of the documents released was known as the “G-Plan” in which a plan detailed how Soro and his followers would effectively use media and propaganda to deliver the Assyrian Church of the East to the Roman Catholic Church in total subjugation under the latter’s policy of Papal Supremacy[6]–[7]–[8]. The former bishop was found to have placed Church properties under his own name, taking out large amounts of debt to finance his own personal pleasures as well as fund his campaign to force the Church into phase three (i.e. acceptance of Papal Supremacy) of the talks that were originally initiated as a Common Christological Declaration between late Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV and late Pope John Paul II in 1994.[9]

[6] Pastoral Declaration of Five ACOE Reverends Studying in Rome. Patros, Toma, et al. Rome. 23 January, 2006.

[7] Ashur B. Soro. “Towards Full Communion.” 9 November, 2003, pp. 1-2.

[8] Sargon Dadesho Interview His Grace Mar Meelis Zaia On AssyriaSAT. 29 June, 2007. Transcript: http://www.betnahrain.org/bbs/index.pl/noframes/read/18737

[9] The Holy Synod of the Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East, et al. vs. Ashur B. Soro, Shimshon Antar, et al. Case No. 1-05-CV-054812. 2005-2007.

The aftermath of the two year court case of the diocese under former bishop Soro forced further investigation into the matters of the church and placed Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV in a position where he had to testify against one of his church leaders, further undermining his ability to be independent in church decision making and his ability to affect church internal issues. Additionally, it further undermined his political influence within the church. Spending the majority of his time in and out of court hearings also drained the monetary coffers of the Church and reduced its ability to positively affect and support the Assyrians in the region in their strategic plan of becoming an independent nation which does not have to rely on other networks and regional partners to support its efforts of becoming a global church.

The Common Variable

The common variable in many of these equations is Mr. Younadam Kanna. Mr. Kanna, who is currently still a member of the Iraqi Parliament and the Secretary General of the Assyrian Democratic Movement (ZOWAA) was once a member of the Assyrian Church of the East and has now aligned himself with the Chaldean Catholic Church.

Seeing how he may have failed to deliver the Assyrian Church to his newly converted Church using the “G-Plan” and thus, bolster the Chaldean Catholic footprint in the KRG, Mr. Kanna sought other ways to infiltrate the Church leadership. One of those ways was to co-opt the current leader of the Ancient Church of the East, Patriarch Addai II, and successor to Patriarch Toma Darmo.
“G-Plan’s ties to the Common Variable”

This brings us full circle. The link analysis, which leads to, the discovery of the “G-Plan” has again emerged in open source analysis. The link analysis shows the possible appearance that Mr. Kanna may now use the bishops under Mar Addai II to influence both the decision on the next Patriarch of the Assyrian Church of the East as well as the location of the Synod where this decision will take place.

These key decisions, impacting the lives of all of the remaining Assyrians in the region and the political ability of the Assyrian church to remain independent of Mr. Kanna’s monetary and political networks are tied to the political and military decisions which may also impact the release of the current Assyrian captives in Syria.

Financial and Military Component of the plan

Another method that it appears Mr. Kanna has employed is using his financial and military proxies in the Assyrian diaspora. One such proxy is Mr. David William Lazar, head of the American Mesopotamian Organization. Although the two organizations have been linked together from the first day they created one of their military organizations known as the Nineveh Protection Unit (NPU), they have used each other only when it affects their individual political needs.

Mr. Lazar recently went on his Facebook to announce that he had just wrapped up an important meeting at the White House[10]. It may be evident in state department notes that Mr. Lazar has requested funds for the Assyrians to use for their military needs in Syria. However, what has not been made public is the fact that these funds come with preconditions. One of those includes committing Assyrian forces to a battle in Syria against the Syrian Government after their fighting against ISIS is completed. These battles will be waged in areas, which the Assyrians have no stake in and which will lead to their defeat.

Currently, the Assyrians who are not captured in Syria by ISIL forces have sought possible protection under the Bashar Al Assad military forces in the city of Al-Shaddady Syria. Any actions by Assyrian military and political/religious leadership to tie them to this money will lead to the loss of this protection. Mr. Lazar may be attempting to bolster the legitimacy of the AMO and Kanna’s Assyrian Democratic Movement by making it seem as if they are the true representatives of the Assyrians simply because they were able to procure funds. What is not mentioned is that those funds are not intended to help Assyrians in their homeland in northern Iraq given how Foreign Military Sales work in support of state elements in the region.

Pressure is also being put on the Assyrian Church of the East to commit itself to a Synod meeting in Arbil, under the KRG. It is being done under the guise that Assyrian political leadership can protect the Church leadership when the reality is that the Assyrian Church is walking into a political trap from which it may not recover.

The third Arch Duke Ferdinand Scenario

WWI started with the political killing of Arch Duke Ferdinand. It was a perfect scenario established to ensure that the nationalistic flames of the nations were fanned to achieve individual political needs in Europe.
In 1918 Mar Benyamin was warned about his meeting with the Kurdish Assassin Simko.

The assassination of Mar Benyamin and more than 150 of the best Assyrian fighters within his security element and peace delegation led to the split of the Assyrian forces and forced the utter collapse of the Assyrian people’s independence in the region.

Given the political complexities of the current Operational Environment in Iraq and Syria, it is our hope that the Church of the East is able to make the right decisions for the nation given the holy providence it is guided by when it comes to its selection of the future leader of the Assyrian Church of the East. With that said the security of the Assyrian delegation traveling to Ankawa/Arbil area in Iraq this week is in the hands of the KRG and the Iraqi government security assets. Any harm brought to the Church leadership will be theirs to claim.

Finally, any political difficulties, which may arise from the Church losing its independent standings within the region, are tied to the various variables which have always intended to infiltrate and control the Church and its soldiers for their local, political, and financial benefits.

NEC-SE 24 MAY 2015

Post-Publishing Note: Below is the link to a Zinda Magazine article referencing the infamous “G8” meeting. This meeting is where 8 of our “leaders” agreed on the name “Assyrian” in December of 2002. Just a month later Younadam Kanna betrayed us by using the term “ChaldoAssyrian” and later “Messihi.” The question is what happened in just one short month? This shows there was planning much earlier on and coincides with the same years (2002-2003) that Soro began his media campaign of elements of the G Plan (specifically the use of the term ChaldoAssyrian), which he later admitted publicly as being a plan he, Bishop Jammo of San Diego, Patriarch Delly, and Kanna had orchestrated.

http://zindamagazine.com/html/archives/2002/12.16.02/index.php