World is not Sending Mixed Messages on Iran

The running story concerning Iran, as the media has portrayed it, has claimed that the United Nations and the World are sending mixed messages to Iran. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reality is that with even the slightest observations one can break down with rather great accuracy what the policy and related message of each country and organization when it comes to Iran and their nuclear program. The interesting part that might be what fuels the mixed message theory is that these messages and definitions of the Iranian nuclear program run the complete gamut from they are on the cusp of testing a nuclear weapon to they are simply doing research in order to build their own nuclear power plants and desalinization plants. So, why don’t we simply run down a few of the major players and see where they line up on this potentially vital subject of the times.

 

We will start with the United Nations and related organizations. First up, a look at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA has changed their summation on Iran when they changed Director General from Mohamed ElBaradei who was from Egypt to Yukiya Amano who is Japanese. Under Mr. ElBaradei the IAEA was more the protecting guardian of the Iranian nuclear program with a see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil attitude which was reflected in their reports which always minimized all observations, tended to omit or explain away any perceived difficulties, and generally gave Iran cover for their nuclear program by avoiding any reference to a weapons portion to the program, let alone weapons being the main objective for Iran. The IAEA reports changed drastically as soon as Mr. Amano took over and reported that Iran was closer to a nuclear weapon than many had thought and reported great difficulties and a complete lack of cooperation by Iran towards proper inspections. The IAEA was as close as anybody would come to providing a mixed message but theirs was more of a change of leadership altering their objective from concealing the truth of the Iranian nuclear program to one of shining the light of day on the Iranian operations as much as was possible and relating any difficulties and obstructions made by Iran to thwart inspections and hiding their true intents.

 

Next is the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) which has met numerous times discussing the Iranian nuclear program and has now placed a fourth set of sanctions on Iran in attempts to end the Iranian enrichment of uranium. The UNSC is, at its most basic level, simply the reflection of the policies of the five permanent members who hold overriding vetoes. As far as the UNSC is concerned, the only true measure is whether or not the five permanent members are in agreement or not. Since, almost by definition, if the United States and sometimes Great Britain or France takes one side of any contentious issue, then either Russia or China, if not both, will take the opposite side. This near guaranteed dichotomy has guaranteed that any sanction placed on Iran due to their nuclear program have been prevented such that any imposition of sanctions which the United States, Great Britain, or France supported were opposed by both Russia and China. Since the UNSC eventually does take action, even if it is of minimal effect, when the majority of the members take a strong stand on any subject and such was the case on the Iranian nuclear question, eventually sanctions were forthcoming. Despite the demands for action, the resultant sanctions from the UNSC were watered down sufficiently by Russian and Chinese reluctance to allow any strong sanctions with real bite that it took four sets of sanctions and many, many months before finally some sanctions of worth were approved. Even then, it took further sanctions by agreement of countries which the United States and its allies could persuade to join in the efforts. So, the UNSC has sent the message to Iran that they will be restricted from taking quick and decisive action and thus Iran will be able to continue with their nuclear program relatively unhindered and can expect that no military actions will be permitted due to the Russian and Chinese vetoes protecting them. So much for the United Nations Security Council taking any strong or effective stance concerning the Iranian nuclear program or other activities.

 

The last body of the United Nations which could conceivably, in theory, have any say concerning the Iranian nuclear program is the General Assembly. The general makeup of the General Assembly makes it a virtual lock that nothing will even be discussed, let alone any actions being initiated or taken. The message from the United Nations General Assembly concerning anything on Iran is most likely to warn Israel and threaten to take Israel before the International Court at The Hague or other sanctioning actions should they even speak too harshly concerning Iran. Even with the Sunni Muslim countries nervous and concerned with the possibility if Iran becoming a nuclear weaponized nation, they still are unlikely to allow any serious actions against Iran as they would rather continue the status-quo which allows for endless sanctions and denunciation upon the United States and/or Israel and the rest of the world basically free to do as they please.

 

The United States, European countries and the European Union (EU) can be covered as a multifaceted unified entity for the sake of simplicity. The governments and the EU will take steps to join the United States in placing sanctions on Iran. What has been somewhat surprising has been that many European countries have actually taken the initiative to implement many planned sanctions before the United States has adopted them, with the United States choosing to delay implementing sanctions as much as allowed. The EU has even taken the lead and initiated some sanctions on their own before receiving or inviting the United States approval and enactment. In some ways, it appears that the Europeans are taking the initiative when President Obama appears to be apprehensive of acting without United Nations approval. In some way this is reminiscent of President Obama leading from behind as he claimed was his role in Libya. The point where neither the Europeans nor the United States appear ready to take the plunge is the use of a military strike to bring the Iranian nuclear program crashing to a halt. The one item of complete and unflinching agreement between the United States and the Europeans is that the sanctions must be given a full chance to work their magic. They are so ardent on this that one might conclude their all in attitude to the sanctions and assurances that they will have the desired result is due to a paralyzing aversion to the use of any military action and this is where the Israelis enter the picture.

 

Some claim that the impetus behind the Israeli sense of urgency is due to the threats Iran voices nearly constantly calling to wipe the cancerous Zionist entity off the map. Israeli intelligence agencies have claimed that Iran is further down the path to achieving weapons status than is claimed by the Europeans, United States or anybody else in the world. Israel has actually not threatened to take military actions against the Iranian nuclear program in the immediate future though they have given signals favoring more imminent action than the rest of the nations of the world feel are necessary. The Israelis are on the vanguard stressing the urgency for ratcheting up sanctions by a significant degree where Iran would no longer have the ability to continue to perform necessary day-to-day necessities, let alone continue their nuclear program. What has been consistent has been the response from the rest of the world to the Israeli sense of urgency and call for patience and allowing the sanctions to take their desired effect. Such a call is probably easier to take when you are not target number one on the Iranian list, but the Israelis have told the rest of the world a cold truth that Iran will not stop with Israel, and that Israel being the first country on the Iranian stated intentions is not a chiseled in stone certainty. There is a distinct possibility that Israel may not be the top of the Iranian list as Iran has been sinking huge outlays towards developing missiles with far greater range including multiple stage systems which would allow the delivery of payloads even into the United States. Predictions exist which claim that the Iranians will have ballistic missiles capable of reaching either coast of the United States before the end of the decade. If the sole or main target the Iranians desired to target was Israel, they have missiles in their current arsenal which have that capability with ample payloads. Those who believe that the only country which need fear Iran is Israel are walking down the same path of those in the past who felt that only Czechoslovakia needed fear Germany in the run-up to World War II. Let us not repeat the same errors which led to the last world-wide conflagration.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

A Question for the Catholic Hierarchy

The idea that the Catholic Church in particular and religious people and institutions in general have come under direct assault by institutions within and outside governments by Secular Humanists throughout the public sphere is not an illusion but a truism. There have been those, including Glenn Beck, who have claimed that we all need to back the Catholic Church in this fight as this assault needs to be halted before it spreads on to the religious generally. I agree with the urgency to stand against threats to religious freedoms especially in the relatively few countries where it exists as a universal and guaranteed governing principle, as they are in truth a small minority. Where I stand in support of religious freedoms and will oppose any and all attempts to squelch the vitality and lifeblood of freedoms for religious observances and practices, I do have one simple question, or is it a request, to ask of the Catholic Church which I would like to announce and share on this space.

 

I will begin by offering thanks to the Catholic Church for their liberalization and reset of their relationship with the Jewish people. In an edict issued from the Vatican during the Second Vatican Council, which met from 1962 through 1965, the Catholic Church changed its definitions of relations and definition of Judaism from Replacement Theology to a friendlier acceptance along with forgiveness of what had been defined as cultural and actual guilt and sins for endless centuries. There have been claims of backsliding on this decision, especially when it comes to matters concerning Israel. My challenge to the Catholic Church is whether they will support Israel in their struggle for survival against the forces which aim to erase Judaism, not only from the face of the Earth, but from all of history as well. One would expect the Catholic Church to have stood with Israel and the Jewish People against those forces who have declared war against all religions other than their own which eventually will include the Catholic Church. These forces include the Islamists and the Secular Humanists which have formed an informal alliance, each intending to discard the other when they are no longer useful or necessary. One of these two is grossly underestimating the power of the other and it really does not matter for Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Mormon or other religious groups who will all have been marginalized or destroyed by that time. Will the Catholic Church recognize their need to ally with the Jewish People and with Israel or will they continue to be lukewarm fair-weather-friends picking and choosing when to smile and when to cast aspersions when the mood and subject suits their ends.

 

I fully understand the Catholic Church is in an unenviable position when it comes to the Islam-Israel conflict as many Catholics live within the Muslim World and the Catholic Church believes supporting Israel will cause great harms to befall their members living within the influences of Islam. I have a little piece of news for the Catholic Church, if the Muslims and Islamic forces which make up the radical Islamist forces win out, after they rid themselves of Israel the Catholics are very likely next on their target list. Feeding this alligator the Jews will serve only to whet its appetite for a continued feeding frenzy feasting upon the World’s Christians. If you have doubts about this, remember Spain from the period of the early 700s until 1492 when King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella initiated the Spanish Inquisition after the war to liberate Spain from Islam to rid themselves of the Islamic Moorish remnants, oh, and of their Jewish population as well. Ask those who have studied the history of Vienna which was twice barely saved from the relentless spread of Islam. Search your modern World map and find Constantinople, a once great Christian city which is now named Istanbul and once held a grand monument called the Hagia Sophia which was transformed into a Mosque and all of the beautiful mosaics were plastered over as their subject was an insult to Allah and his Prophet. Do you really need prompting to remember your own early history of the last two times Islam turned to their goal of World conquest, the same style of conquest that many feel they have rediscovered with their third attempt is currently beginning.

 

We are on the cusp of two World movements which are both making their push for dominance. As mentioned earlier in this article, one is Islam and the other is State promoting and deifying Secular Humanism. Both of these forces are antithetical to Catholics just as much as they abhor Judaism. Both influences will spell the end for all Catholics just as they will Jews and those of many other religions as well. Plain and simple, putting this in the most basic terms I am able, both of these ideologies detest Catholicism almost equally as they do Judaism and the difference will not matter if in the end either one is allowed to become dominant. This is a war of civilizations and of ideologies. Trust when I say that Catholics and Jews have more in common with each other than with either of these destructive forces which are now ascendant. Christians and Jews will be stronger together than separate, let alone in opposition. So, I ask the Catholic Church, where do you stand in this critical time and day, with the Jews and Israel or on the sidelines or with those who wish the end of the Jews and Israel, and do not pretend there is a difference. Should Israel fall and half of the World’s Jews face extinction, rest assured the rest will wither and die the slow death of assimilation. Israel and the Jewish faith are one and the same for all intents and purposes. Choose carefully, our Father watches.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Abbas Promise That New Government Will Honor Past Agreements is Useless

AFP reported, citing the Palestinian Authority-based WAFA quoting Mahmoud Abbas as having said, “The next government will remain committed to the obligations and agreements signed by the Palestine Liberation Organization.” This was a reference to the obligations and agreements resultant from the 1993 Oslo Accords signed between Israel and the PLO which he was implying that the inclusion of Hamas into the PLO would not change the status-quo. My reaction to this bald face lie was a slow rolling of my eyes while groaning out a painful exclaim of, “Right!” in my head. My reaction was confirmed when it was reported that Abbas’ comments drew an angry reaction from Hamas, whose spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri was quoted as having said they “violate” the agreements between Abbas and Mashaal. All I need say is that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

 

This song and dance is very familiar to those who have watched the death spiral which has plagued every previous attempt between Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah organization and the Gaza based Hamas and related other terror groups usually featuring Islamic Jihad when they attempt to cobble together a mutual agreement to reunite the groups which had a messy divorce known as the Battle for Gaza in June of 2007 and known as the Wakseh among Palestinians, which means collapse, humiliation, and ruin. What usually follow are days or a couple of weeks of recriminations and finger-pointing leading to the eventual collapse of any signed agreement. What I believe are the real reasons behind this repetitive occurrence is the simple fact that should Fatah and Hamas recombine as either the PLO or as the Palestinian Authority, then many countries, most notably the United States and some of the Europeans or even the European Union, would cut off their aid monies as they have rules against giving funds to any terrorist organizations and all of them list Hamas and Islamic Jihad among those terrorist entities. Since the Palestinian Authority, PLO and Fatah are all completely dependent upon foreign donations to run their corruption plagued excuse for governance, they cannot risk allowing Hamas and the other groups back within the fold. By making these style statements despite their agreements with Hamas against these positions, Fatah, the Palestinian Authority and, in particular, Mahmoud Abbas are able to back out of these agreements without losing face and thus retain foreign funds. Like so many things in this world, it is all about the money.

 

What always is left out of these discussions is the little truth that there really is no difference between the actual positions of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah or the Palestinian Authority when it comes to what they believe vis-à-vis Israel. Both sides are working for the same end, the complete and total destruction of the State of Israel as a Jewish State. All of their Charters still have language in them which call for the end of Israel and the Jewish presence in the Middle East. The major difference is that the PLO, Palestinian Authority and Fatah have signed agreements which gave promises to alter their charters to align with the two-state solution and the right of the Jews to exist and live within their own state in the Middle East. All of these groups at one time or another have met and in front of Western observers voted to make said changes to their charters and to hold the necessary meetings to rewrite these parts of their charters and ratify them afterwards. The only problem has been in the follow through, or should I say the complete and intentional lack of follow through. No committees have been assigned let alone assembled and no changes have ever been offered. The votes were all nice little shows put on for the benefit of the Western observers so they would have something to show as progress so as to continue to fund these terror institutions which are inimical to peace.

 

So, once again we are facing the same old story. Hamas and Fatah kiss and make-up. They agree in brotherly fashion that they are both working for the total destruction of Israel and the submission or end of the Jews in Israel. They sign treaties and possibly even shoot holes of celebration in the ceiling, or maybe not, I cannot vouch for the gunplay. Then Fatah, or at least Mahmoud Abbas, wakes up the next morning suffering from an imminent pull of funding by the West hangover. Abbas then makes statements to appease his money supply to keep his kleptocracy fully funded. Hamas immediately gets all wound up and angrily demands that Abbas rescind his statements and stick to their agreement or else. Usually these agreements are made and signed by the political arm of Hamas and the weaponized terror arm of Hamas are the ones who blow a gasket. The differences between these two factions are easily determined. The political arm are those not in Gaza and currently seeking a new home, as their base in Syria has gotten a tad uncomfortable, while the terror arm is found exclusively in Gaza. Needless to say, the two rarely interact and, in truth, there is no difference between them, just the political arm is willing to claim falsehoods for acceptance and the terror arm is a little less refined. Viva la difference! So, now we sit back and watch the carefully choreographed kabuki theater Palestinian style and patiently await yet another collapse of a reunification of the PLO and Palestinian leadership and along with it, absolutely any chance for those elections that are years behind schedule to once again become unnecessary. Abbas remains President, Fayyad keeps his job as Prime Minister, Hamas keeps Gaza, and the waste of funds continues to pour into the coffers of the Palestinian Authority where it will enrich the lives of some elite and particular Palestinians.

 

Beyond the Cusp